Stunning ratio way off


#1

Hi all,

I get increasingly more frustrated with the stunning ratio in game that simply does not match my experience during Arena battles. Since I was really annoyed I kept track of my 75% change stun attempts during my arena battles for just over a week, here are the results:

Stegoceratops: 34/83 = 40.9%

Ouranosaurus: 22/56 = 39.2%

As you can see these ratios from a fairly decent sample are way out of line with approximately 35 %.

Is it possible there is some kind of bug in the code, resulting in lower stun ratio then displayed?

Ironically, in one of my last games I faced an afk player with a Sinoceratops that stunned me 6 times on a row with 20% stun chance. The chance of that happening is 0.000064%.

Are you guys also experiencing an unlikely low number of stuns from high stun ratio moves and a higher then expected number of stuns from low stun ratio moves?


#2

i don’t trust any percentage in this game. i’ve taken 3 straight critical hits from dinos with a 5% critical rate mutiple times. i’ve been stunned 5 times in a row by stegoceratops, etc. Show me the code. I guarantee it’s not what the cards say it is.


#3

I’m all for devs checking stuns. In my case I think they are too high. If we ask they might check.

But they’ll be an argument with maths and the feedback will get ignored. Everytime.


#4

Excellent article to read:
https://learn.problemgambling.ca/probability-odds-random-chance

Of particular note are the sections “Independence of Events” and “Law of Averages, and the Law of Large Numbers”.

A basic assumption in probability theory is that each event is independent of all other events. That is, previous draws have no influence on the next draw. A popular catch phrase is “the dice have no memory.” A die or roulette ball cannot look back and determine that it is due for a 6 or some other number. How could a coin decide to turn up a head after 20 tails? Each event is independent and therefore the player can never predict what will come up next. If a fair coin was flipped 5 times and came up heads 5 times in a row, the next flip could be either heads or tails. The fact that heads have come up 5 times in a row has no influence on the next flip. It is wise not to treat something that is very very unlikely as if it were impossible (see Turner, 1998). In fact, if a coin is truly random, it must be possible for heads to come up 1 million times in a row. Such an event is extraordinarily unlikely, p = 1/21,000,000, but possible. Even then, the next flip is just as likely to be heads as it is tails. Nonetheless, many people believe that a coin corrects itself; if heads comes up too often, they think tails is due.

Part of the explanation for the persistent belief among those who gamble that there are patterns in chance, may stem from a misunderstanding of two related “laws” of statistics: the law of averages and the law of large numbers. The first is an informal folk theory of statistics; the second is a statistical law. These laws can be summarized as follows:

Law of Averages: Things average out over time.

Law of Large Numbers: As the sample size increases the average of the actual outcomes will more closely approximate the mathematical probability.

The law of large numbers is a useful way to understand betting outcomes. A coin on average will come up heads 50% of the time. It could nonetheless come up heads 100% of the time or 0% of the time. In a short trial, heads may easily come up on every flip. The larger the number of flips, however, the closer the percentage will be to 50%.


#6

Can i ask why these post get hidden without reason? Im little bit confused…


#7

The only thing I can think of is the ending of your post… even though you self edited it.

I think people posting numbers is good, and if they keep tracking they can keep updating the numbers and get larger and larger pools of data.


#8

Your post was flagged by the community. Please see your messages.

View hidden content.

Why?!


#9

I don’t know, I didn’t flag it, I didn’t see anything wrong with it, I even liked it. :man_shrugging:


#10

pretty sure this is what they are relying on and hiding behind. as long as something is or isn’t possible, they can make it happen or not happen whenever they want. literally no difference between 1% and 99% in this game.


#11

I don’t think there’s anything to hide behind. I’m sure the code says to choose randomly between 1-4 with “1=success, 2=success, 3=success, 4=fail”, it’s has 75% chance to stun. Each time is a new instance not bias to any choices before or after.


#12

The game is fixed… end of story


#13

Your post was hidden because you “swore” I’m assuming…


#14

This is just so stupid, hope some1 give me answer.


#15

I do think the numbers are off, but I don’t think that how many you tracked is a large enough sample size. I think Stegoceratops has MUCH higher chance of stun than what you’re showing. I recently got 5 stuns in a row which is so stupid. The regular stun should be 10% not 25%. I also think Ouranosaurus has higher stun chance than is represented.


#16

im going to guess it has something similar to EA sports games with “equalizers” and DDA (dynamic difficulty adjustment) so when you are lower levels than your opponent they raise your probabilities and lower the opponents to even it out, unfortunately.


#17

That was my first thought too but have observed the same issue in the opposite direction as well.


#18

Yeah, my 33% stun wont work, BUT MY FRIGGIN’ 5% CRIT WILL!


#19

Something along these lines could be possible. I had a winning streak of 8 games followed by a losing streak of 9 games in which pretty much every stun attempt failed.

It might be they have some kind of algorithm that levels the playing field so that the ideal 50% winrate in the Arena can be reached.


#20

The crit ratio for some dinos seems too a bit off to. I guess I’ll start writing it down to make sure it’s just not comfirmation bias.


#21

that’d be very interesting. It’s just infuriating when stegocera gets 2 stuns in a row off his base move which only has 10% chance, from my experience in the game it seems to be closer to 25-33%. The critical hits are really stupid, they occur much more often than the stats suggest. 5% means it should only happen roughly 1 in 20 hits, its much more.