
metadata
The RNG is either Terrible or the math is being lied about. I have a 25% pierce armor and I only do it once in a combat after 15 turns. Something is wrong with the RNG. And yes, I know it is 25% per turn the whole adage it has been heads three times in a row what is the time the coin will be heads on the fourth flip. Is still 50 percent but come on probability here.



metadata
The RNG mechanics used in flash games are all notorious for being heavily stacked to the side of enemies. I’ve literally had double the chance to activate effects, but only get the effect once for every five times the enemy activates their effect. the worst part of the last example is it is one of the better ones.
RNG is always the most broken boss of any game. No matter what, you always lose against RNG.



metadata
I have 38% pierce armor and tried at least 20 times a quest. Never a single time the pierce armor skill was activated on the first attack from the archer. There is obviously something wrong with that.
> *Originally posted by **[Excele](/forums/32497/topics/617249?page=1#posts10321358):***
>
> The RNG mechanics used in flash games are all notorious for being heavily stacked to the side of enemies. I’ve literally had double the chance to activate effects, but only get the effect once for every five times the enemy activates their effect. the worst part of the last example is it is one of the better ones.
>
> RNG is always the most broken boss of any game. No matter what, you always lose against RNG.
This doesn’t make any sense. Random means random, 25% means 25%, if it’s not, it’s just lying. RNG for flash is the same as every other programming language and provides a great approximation for such situations.



metadata
@BlackLoter: What I mean is that RNG in flash games is famous for shafting the player. And I didn’t say they all used the same mechanic. There is an ‘s’ there for a reason. And they are all using flash to make these games, so there is little they can do other than set percentage variables in the actionscript.
With your own account, you gave weight to my statement of RNG being terrible. The first half of your post conflicts with the second half of it.



metadata
> *Originally posted by **[Excele](/forums/32497/topics/617249?page=1#posts10322554):***
>
> @BlackLoter: What I mean is that RNG in flash games is famous for shafting the player. And I didn’t say they all used the same mechanic. There is an ‘s’ there for a reason. And they are all using flash to make these games, so there is little they can do other than set percentage variables in the actionscript.
>
> With your own account, you gave weight to my statement of RNG being terrible. The first half of your post conflicts with the second half of it.
It’s not a problem with RNG it’s a bug in game mechanics, maybe in the way the RNG is used.
Let me stretch this some more: if the chance for some event should be 20% and the real chance is 10%, it means the game is bugged, broken. Possibly the game is using the RNG in the wrong way, but this has nothing to do with flash RNG itself.
And there is no reason at all for the RNG being against players, since it can’t know what’s good and what’s bad for players. If it’s broken it will sometimes be in favor of players.
My suggestion is to play a little with RNGs and probability to get a grip on that



metadata
> *Originally posted by **[Wotansman](/forums/32497/topics/617249?page=1#posts10321057):***
>
> The RNG is either Terrible or the math is being lied about. I have a 25% pierce armor and I only do it once in a combat after 15 turns. Something is wrong with the RNG. And yes, I know it is 25% per turn the whole adage it has been heads three times in a row what is the time the coin will be heads on the fourth flip. Is still 50 percent but come on probability here.
Yes, I have to agree. On average, the real chances are way below what we are seeing in the hero descriptions.



metadata
u do know some mosters cannot be hit with eg rupture, right?
Else the average is pretty much right for me. I have 47% on rupture & hit it ~ 1/2 of the time in average. That doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen that you don’t use it 10 times in a row with a probability of 0.53^10
I somehow cannot believe that it works correctly for me, but doesn’t for you



metadata
rupture happen always when you do pierce damage. I does X% more damage than just pierce.



metadata
confirmation bias at its finest



metadata
> *Originally posted by **[tundegruy](/forums/32497/topics/617249?page=1#posts10328562):***
>
> rupture happen always when you do pierce damage. I does X% more damage than just pierce.
yes, I thought that was omplied and clear… but you cannot do pierce dmg against all monsters



metadata
E100860 realy XD if your logic is sound i’d hit every time with that skil (its over 100%) but its not XD, and i do have to agree having 25 % on pierce would mean 1 in 4 atc’s and its more like 1 in 10… thats the problem, not rupture XD



metadata
I think you might need to repeat some probability / stochastic classes or smth. No, you wouldn’t and prob rupture = prob pierce …
I am at close to 1Sx ressources and I am still at less than 50% prob for rupture and (0.53^10 \< 0.53 in case that wasn’t clear to you). And no, I wasn’t talking about the % dmg increase of rupture, but it’s probability, but if that was not clear from the context then….
You should count it once over 1000 hits on monsters that can actually be hit by rupture (or pierce for you) instead of guessing based on the last 10 hits.



metadata
rupture is always working (100%) when doing pierce execpt for monster with iron skin (the only one i have seen so far is guardian at lvl 41)



metadata
Those 100% you mention here are called the conditional probability. And there are a few more monsters that can resist it.
P(piercerupture) = P(rupturepierce) = 100% in this case so that discussion is pretty pointless.



metadata
Those of you saying the probability of pierce is below expected, feel free to track your data and show us the hard statistics. If it’s out of whack, knowing the real numbers might be helpful in fixing the bug



metadata
> *Originally posted by **[spaz102](/forums/32497/topics/617249?page=1#posts10329281):***
>
> Those of you saying the probability of pierce is below expected, feel free to track your data and show us the hard statistics. If it’s out of whack, knowing the real numbers might be helpful in fixing the bug
aye, doubt its out of whack tho, at 36% i keep getting it 23 hits in a row then some hits in a row without, its just down to luck and bad luck but some tend to favor conspiracy theories, it may be true that something is wrong, but seems okay to me :)



metadata
> *Originally posted by **[e100860](/forums/32497/topics/617249?page=1#posts10328391):***
>
> u do know some mosters cannot be hit with eg rupture, right?
> Else the average is pretty much right for me. I have 47% on rupture & hit it ~ 1/2 of the time in average. That doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen that you don’t use it 10 times in a row with a probability of 0.53^10
> I somehow cannot believe that it works correctly for me, but doesn’t for you
Then have that info actually be visible. Not having that shown means that people will think it’s the chance being lower than it allegedly is because they have no awareness of the monster immunity to it.
And the percentage of rupture is not the chance for it to happen; it’s the additional damage you deal when pierce happens.



metadata
I cannot tell if you are being real or trolling. So I am not gonna post after this point.
It’s true you have to find out yourself that there are monsters that are immune against pierce, but it gets obvious pretty fast and where is the fun in having everything served on a platter without trying out smth in advance. “cannot be hit” was meant to be equal to “is immune to”. To my knowledge there is no monster that lowers the probability. If that’s what you meant I appologise.
Again when talking about the percentage that rupture is going the happen then this is the same as the probability that it is going to happen which furthermore is the same as the probability that pierce is going to happen. In the same way the probability that you deal critical dmg is the same as the probability of dealing a critical hit…. is that so hard. That has nothing to do with the percentage of additional dmg a critical hit deals either and is still a probability that can be given in percentages.
Eg the percentage additional dmg for rupture is ~550% for me, but the percentage of hits that end up dealing rupture dmg is 47%. From the context it should be just as clear which percentage I talked about as that I was not talking about the probability of uterine rupture.
To check if the OP was right I have even been counting it for a while now using comp vision (you only have to consider 2 pixels, so it’s easily done on the ressource maps). Out of 1466 times rupture occured 679 times which is completely within the margin of error.



metadata
I am being real. And if yours is how RNG in this game works then mine is broken as all shit because with a 20% chance I’d gotten a real rate way closer to a half of that on a bit over a thousand hits (to be precise, it is 122/1068, on the same monster so clearly it wasn’t immune). I do admit that this still is a statistical possibility, but it’s really not fun when you have pure RNG with no mitigation that sometimes doesn’t work at all and you are supposed to figure it out for yourself, not when said RNG gives you wonky results even normally.
I do agree that there is something fun with not being given all the info normally. However, once the monsters start basically onehitkilling you every time unless you use the protection spell, figuring stuff for yourself becomes just a bit too tedious in certain cases.



metadata
A log with details and rng results would certainly help and take away any doubts
