I see all these people complaining about RNG, but then shifting over to other complaints like the magnitude of the benefit. Makes me wonder…
I have provided 3 jet cans. In 1 is a very valuable BPO, the other two have slaver cans. You first have to pick can 1, 2 or 3. Once you pick a can I pop a can that does not have the BPO. Do you switch or stick with your original jet can?
in this particular example (zeugma analyzer) supply won’t reach demand no matter how many players will run those sites. Sites drops 3 materials while one module need 300. So how many sites explorer should do to manufacture one module? One twich would repair all of it, reduced manufacture cost. Check the price history. Trend is obvious.
oh look, we get rng in the next expansion, players already shifted their opinions. CCP will make money on idiots again, while in the same time ruin the last game they get money from.
We do know so far that you will be able to buy say a 100 stack of filaments from an explorer/market, park yourself in your favorite secure Player NS system, and run a pocket every ~15mins, all day and night till your fingers bleed.
Those 100 L1 filaments will generate your stock of L2-5 filaments to run subesquently.
Okay and? What is the implication?
I wasnt making any implications.
Do you have some?
The perceived focus switch was because CCP changed their mind. First (at Fanfest) they announced good rolls to be rare like in officer rare, and the odds are stacked against you, making the gambling issue the main point.
Now Rise said, good rolls will be common and Abyssal mods affordable for the masses. This alleviates the gambling point a bit, but creates more severe issues for the EvE economy and balance.
I switch, because this doubles my chance of winning.
CCP cant seem to get their story straight.
Changes are being made on the fly.
Many have been shocked just how half-baked this has been. Very simple, basic concerns seem not to have been even peripherally considered and worked through.
This raises concerns for us as to how much thought has gone into this, and how much of that has been a result of rubber-stamping of “vested interests”.
Teckos said “dont worry, CCP can nerf it later”.
In this case, Id say better to start it nerfed, and CCP can buff it later.
We dont want mutated T2 modules to kill the DED/LP module market.
Player NS though, does, as its win/win for them.
They cant directly control the DED/LP module market, thus they want to replace it with homegrown T2 modules + mutation.
Delve in particular must be drooling a waterfall just waiting to start mutating their surplus T2 stock that they cant sell, to side-step and defunct the DED/LP module market.
Okay so you have nothing else.
Correct. But then…
There is alot of room in here. What is “common”? 5%, 10%, 50%? Seems it might depend on the results.
And what is with this fascination with gambling? When I do invention I am “gambling”. When someone here runs a sight they are “gambling”. Nobody cared when players “gambled” and supplied the market with DED/officer mods. Now there is a new form of “gambling” and everyone loses their ■■■■.
I suspect it has nothing to do with gambling and everything to do with vested interests.
Nothing more than is there.
Do you see implications there?
You ignored that question.
No, invention is not gambling in the classic sense, because you don’t risk something. Your outcome is guaranteed. Whereas if you have to risk an expensive module, or risk an upfront unknown amount of ISK to maybe get something worth. That is gambling, because you can’t just sit and roll until you get your desired outcome, as you get broke long before if you are unlucky.
Clearly you do not do invention. Of course I risk something. I risk the datacores and the value of 1 run on the T1 BPC.
Gambling is still gambling if you gamble with $1 or $5,000,000. Gambling is when you risk something of value on a probabilistic event.
Recently I’ve had a streak of bad luck and gotten some really bad “rolls” and the actual T2 BPCs I got were less than the expected even though I used a relatively large number of datacores (i.e. I threw ISK at it to get more rolls…you know that central limit theorem thingy).
Seriously, you guys keep banging on RNG. Wrong end of the stick. It is the magnitude of the enhancements that are troubling…FFS.
If you give datacores and T1 BPC a value in an invention process where the “win” chances are 50-90% with the right decryptor, you are really a very poor guy. I’m sorry for you.
The input is just so cheap, and the chances so high, you can realize the mathematical average outcome with a small number of “rolls”. It’s just calculated input costs. Now try this with a classic lottery winning the higher ranks …
So you can’t respond with a cogent and rational argument so you come up with this nonsense. Okay so you are out of ammo too now.
The definition of gambling does not depend on the value of the gamble, just that something of value is being gambled on.
But go ahead, since you have nothing left in this thread, have the last insult.
Perhaps block Mutaplasmids from being useable on T2 modules.
Holy… people really like grabbing onto current events and try applying it to everything around them anymore. Just because rng is involved doesn’t make it gambling. Chance is how you add a small amount of uncertainty to make something interesting and make people want to run the same content repeatedly for something better.
Gambling specifically requires an exchange of something of real value (currency in most cases) on both ends. That is why most countries right now are only targeting some games like PUBG which make this 2 way transaction possible. Meanwhile games like hearthstone, league of legends, etc are under the radar for now until more countries recognize the value in assets - which is a slippery slope to say the least. While they undoubtedly use a chance based system, they are not gambling by definition. You may as well go after every MMO in existence for not always dropping that sword/armor/upgrade with the same X currency every time you killed that mob rather than having a chance to drop if you want to continue on with such a loose definition of the word.
Personally I draw the line at you pay the company directly or indirectly (coins) for an item which then gives you a random influential reward (something that impacts game play) which cannot be otherwise reasonably obtained. Again a slippery slope because we’d rely on the ESRB or government itself to set the standard of what’s reasonable. But far more reasonable than “if it uses RNG it’s gambling.”
TL ; DR - While RNG may not be fun if applied poorly, it servers a purpose in the gaming world. So keep in mind just because something involves RNG that does not make it gambling nor predatory.
Exactly this. 
when I run a DED site I don’t gamble because I didn’t bet anything (I don’t lose anything when the roll for loot fail). When you do invention you are gambling because when you fail you will lose what you bet (materials). When ppl will roll for mutated mods they are gambling because they will take a bet with better or worse results. 3 examples of rng, but they are not the same in case of gambling.
There is a big lawsuit in the state of Washington against Casion apps and the simplified TLDR is: The Chips players use to be able to play do have an intrinsic Value, so it’s gambling. It needs to be seen how that ends, but it’s not as simple as to say “it’s not gambling”.
In a game which you can only play with ISK, using said isk on random results might just be gambling.
Imho, it’s hair splitting at it’s best. I really, REALLY dislike RNG without protection cause RNG without some sort of bad luck protection is simply unfair. Not because the results are uncertain, but more because RNG favors some few people with good luck and handicaps some few players with bad luck.
RNG will always be a gift to a few people, while being a huge F-U for the unlucky ones. Sure, the big majority just get’s what’s expected, but still - the unprohibited outliners are what makes RNG a huge unfair pile of stinking garbage.
Inb4: “Opportunity cost” blah blah
“The time I spent at the casino, I could have been at my job!”