# Let's do some Math - The RNG Bias

There are so many complaints about the rng on this forum and some clear misunderstandings about statistics and chance, that i thought i just should do some math.

Let’s start with the answer to the question: “What are the chances the enemy Mono/Indo dodges 8 times in a row???”
The probability is 50%, therefore 8 times in row happens (1/2)^8 = 0.0039 = about 0.4% of the time. So 4 times out a 1000 (not one-in-a-million).

How many fights do you fight per day? How often you come up against Mono/Indo? How Many Players are on this forum?
Let’s say you do 10 fights a day, with 60% of the time you come up against either Mono or Indo who uses Evasive. Then, if there are 1000 players active on this forum, there will be about 6000 fights a day which someone could complain about here. Therefore there should be about 24 cases each day for all forum members together where a Mono/Indo dodges 8 times. If only 4% of players actually complain about this happening on the forum there is a complaint every day.

(I heard some arguments, that the math is wrong if the chance is 50% but this statistic is not fullfilled every fight. If this statistic would be enforced every fight then if a Mono dodges 4 times in a row i would know the next 4 times it won’t. Which of course doesn’t make any sense. It is important to realise, that even if it dodged 10 times in a row, the chance for it to happen the next time is still 50%)

And until now i only talked about dodges. Let’s now add Stuns and crits.

4 crits in a row for Indo? Each one is 20%, therefore 0.2^4 = 0.0016 = 0.16% so just about one third of the 8 dodges in a row, so 10 instances for the people on this forum everyday.
3 Stuns in a row for Trago? 0.75^3 equals about 42%. In 4 out of 10 games this will happen if Trago actually is able to use his stun 3 times. Which of course gets more and more likely the more often he stuns.

And for my last argument: Why don’t we hear about cases where Mono didn’t dodge for 8 consecutive times he used evasive? Because he is dead. After about 3 attacks in a row actually hitting a Mono (which is just one actual use of evasive) any Mono should be dead.

You see, what we see here on this forum is massivly biased. What do you complain about here? Of course only the bad stuff that happens. Nobody complains about his 4 crits in a row. Therefore, if one just reads about all the “unlikly” stuff happening on this forum, one could come to the conclusion this games rng is seriously broken. I say, this is just (normal) human bias.

8 Likes

rng bias is that an oxymoron…

i didnt read the whole post but i will. the last paragraph states that mimus should be dead after 3 hits naturally… depends on the dino. if immune and it breaks through the cloak then maybe. but mimus has a cool kit that can easily take down 1 to two dinos without cloak.

also you are applying the literal figure of 50% to a string of fights. when its really just a 50/50 in EACH fight which could be 0 , 50 or 100% chance that it works.

in one fight it could work 100% for the life of the bird. this does not get strung into the next fight or any prior fight etc…

We all are biased to overrate our bad experiences. Losing due to bad luck, it triggers a bigger emotional response, hence the higher chance to remember it.

Also, check out the recent Metahub’s article about RNG.

That was just an “about 3 hits”. Could also be 4, could also be 2. That was just to demonstrate, that of course no one can tell the story of his Mono not dodging 8 times. He wouldn’t survive to the 8th time.

And for the rest: you really should just read the whole post before and if you want to give a response.
For my whole argument ist of course only makes sense to talk about any given strings of attacks/dodges in a row.

I don’t remember my stats class well but I don’t think you can multiply chances of something happen if they are independent if each other. I think the total for dodging 50 percent 8 times is just 50 percent for each time.

Yes of course. I make this argument too. But for any given string of 8 attacks, the chance that a Mono dodges is stil 0.4% (also because the individual chance are independent of another). If you take a 1000 strings of 8 attacks the Mono will fully dodge in about 4 of them. Of course if it already dodged times and the 8th time comes up it is again a 50:50.

The chance that in any given string of 8 attacks the Mono dodges exatly the 6th time and not one of the others is 0.4% too. That doesn’t mean if the Mono didn’t dodge 5 times it will do so the next time. I just talk about a statistic over given strings of 8 attacks.

im trying to find your point but cant… sorry. how about you make a compilation of videos where this streak of 8 has happened to you consecutively.

That never happened to me. My point is, that on this forum everyday there are many complaints of Mono dodging a “high” amount of times in a row. I wanted to give an overview for the actual probabilities of this happening.

and no its still not .4 % if the evasive is applied twice. its not a consecutive string its two executions.

If you toss a coin 8 times, what are the chances that the coin lands on head everytime? For every single event it is 50% of course, but if you try this out a 1000 times (as in: 1000x 8 consecutive throws) this will happen about 4 times.

two different things… you have to consider lots of tangibles when it comes to tossing a coin aswell. human vs code is different. the code sees the second execution of evasive mode. thus maybe it starts chances up as new or not who knows. but in no way can you do it 1000 times in one match so your argument doesnt apply. im sure if it was a never ending match where nobody dies, you may see your numbers being closer but even then, the human coin toss would not apply.

Also: 4 times it will happen that it lands on tail 8 times in a row. 4 times it will happen that exactly the 6th throw is head and the other 7 are tail.

Why? (10 characters)

It’s a 50% chance a Mono dodges an attack if it used evasive. It’s a 50% chance a coin lands on heads if you throw it.

edited above^^

@Pateradactyl… I think you need to brush up on your statistics, bro! The analysis, from a statistical point of view, is flawless!

1 Like

examples or it never happened…