What does that have to do with anything? Scamming and lying and similar things are all part of normal EVE gameplay. CCP providing support to the tournament equivalent of professional wrestling because it’s good marketing for EVE is 100% legitimate.
They have ccp branding all over it, which is against EULA.
{citation needed}
Just another day in New Eden… Carry on
Based on past history of CCP, the student has finally surpassed the master. 
Hi, math degree here.
Here’s how I understand the process happened:
If this is the premise, then it is absolutely the case that the team with 2 entries ended up with an unfair advantage, and the reason for that is that the odds of draws #1-8 were not affected by the removal of draw #1, because the draws happened before the removal.
I made a quick model:
The trick is in calculating the total odds of being picked and not picked. For a team with only 1 entry, those odds are each 50% in a series of 8 draws. For a team with an extra ticket in the pool, the odds of being picked jump to 76.67%. Remember, eliminating a draw after all draws have been completed doesn’t affect the odds of those draws at the time they happened. The final draw, #9, was effectively an extra draw that boosted the odds of the teams with one entry each to above 50% (since there were 8 teams getting selected from a pool of 15).
Another way of looking at this is that even if the team with 2 entries was only selected once, or wasn’t selected at all, it was still playing with the odds stacked in its favor.
So this:
…is wrong, because the exclusion was made after the draw took place according to its initial odds; getting to this specific combination of results had its own probability element.
…is wrong, because it discounts all of the possible combinations of results, and deals only with this specific outcome in isolation. Had it not been picked a second time, or not even picked once, the team with 2 entries was still operating at an advantage because it had 2 entries in the pile on every draw, when all other teams had 1.
It does matter, because the issue isn’t not having even odds for all teams during picks #2-9 on an individual basis, but the odds of a team with 2 entries getting picked at least once during a series of picks, compared to teams with only 1 entry. The existence of pick #9 is also contingent upon the team with 2 entries being chosen twice.
So in this case, Merketmans is right. There’s just no way to make this fair aside from having a completely new drawing.
You’re making a mistake here because you’re treating pick 9 as removed, not pick 1. Pick 1 is removed, at which point the draw going forward is now fair. If you removed pick 9 instead of pick 1 it would in fact be an unfair draw.
Remember, eliminating a draw after all draws have been completed doesn’t affect the odds of those draws at the time they happened.
Exactly! Because pick #1 was removed the remaining 8 draws do not have their odds changed. And because those 8 draws were made from a pool containing one (and only one) of every alliance name their odds of success are completely independent of what happens with pick #1.
because it discounts all of the possible combinations of results
Correct, because other combinations don’t matter. Whether or not the people doing the draw intended it to work that way picks 2-8 were a random draw. There was a “fair” pool of 15 names and 8 names were picked at random. Other hypothetical combinations don’t matter, in the sequence of events that actually happened a fair draw occurred.
That would feel very unfair to those that were picked fairly.
Mathematically the solution is sound. Once the first ticket is removed, every alliance has an equal chance of being picked.
Or think of it this way:
If they realised their mistake before the draw they would have ‘picked’ the offending ticket out and discarded it. It is essentially the same action.
Your math seems to exclude that the offending ticket was the first one picked.
The hat was essentially re-set after the first pick.
I can’t be arsed to punch out the numbers but the theory behind it is this:
Odds of being picked given the 1st ticket is one of the duplicates.
That should check out.
Exactly. They didn’t know it at the time, but it was still reset. And a random draw does not require the person doing the drawing to be aware of their actions.
I gotta go with @Merin_Ryskin on this one. Sorry @Destiny_Corrupted. Since that ridiculously long alliance had the first ticket picked, it basically resetted the drawing to be fair from then on.
The lucky buggers! 
To be fair, there is an element of trust in believing them that they accepted the draw as-is because it is mathematically a random draw (and would have accepted it no matter what the results were), not because it contained a result they liked and they would have used the mistake as an excuse to re-draw if it hadn’t. But it was indisputably a random draw.
It seems the organisers made the error by putting the two tickets in because the name took up two lines, which I guess the person doing the ticket mistakenly took for another team.
However, as one of the tickets was drawn first and discarded. They then had only 1 ticket entered. As the mistake was with the organisers they can’t really punish the team.
What the organisers did was fair enough under the circumstances.
As for the banning from the channel, that I can’t say.
Picks #2-9, in isolation, are fine. After all, doing the contest over again would necessarily entail drawing 8 times out of a pool of 15 unique possibilities. The issue is that picks #2-9 didn’t happen in isolation. Pick #1 itself stirred the pot so to speak. What invalidated the first draw was the fact that that specific team was drawn again. Had it not been drawn, the initial draw would’ve been accepted, but would’ve still been invalid.
I get what you’re trying to say, and indeed on draws #2-9, all teams have a 53.33% chance of making it in. The problem is that with the initial setup, the entire experiment is polluted. Remember the butterfly effect? For example, we don’t know what kind of decision they would’ve made if one of the two picks wouldn’t have been the first pick. That’s why I ran the numbers, and provided the overarching odds of each team getting drawn in aggregate.
If I were in one of the teams that lost, I would absolutely demand that the experiment be redone.
They had eve and ccp logo’s behind them in the draw.
If you think this AT will be good for the game you are very wrong. A lot of people have a good reason to make sure it is now not like every other competitive experience in eve it is rigged.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
