PSU: Recorded Test of Set in Order.

[Zoamel_Gustav]

Item Distribution Test #1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQlPZgmt_WY

Thanks to Siertes for recording this. We tested PSU's "Set to Order" option.

Siertes and I were in a 2 person locked group. Unsafe Passage C with rares were set to finder and normal items were set in order.

First item dropped was a dimate. Second item dropped was an acenaline. Third item dropped was wenceline.

I picked up the acenaline, which went to me. If drops were already predetermined, then by process of elimination, the dimate can never go to me and must go to Siertes.

Next I picked up the wenceline, which went to Siertes.

Finally I picked up the dimate, which went to me. It did not already belong to Siertes. The dimate and the acenaline were the first and second items dropped and they both went to me.

This proves that the owner of an item is not determined the moment it drops. This test shows that an item's ownership is determined the moment that item is picked up.

Item Distribution Test #2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSwL92R23k4

Thanks again to Siertes for recording this.

Siertes and I were in a two person locked group. Unsafe Passage C with rares were set to finder and normal items were set in order. The order in which the items drop doesn't matter, as proven already.

First item picked up was a megi-photon. This went to Siertes. Process of elimination means the second item picked up in this first set must go to me.

Second item picked up was 11 meseta. This went to me.

Third item picked up was a ray-photon. This went to Sierte, not me. The ray-photon can't be the second item in the first set.

The first non-meseta item and the second non-meseta item picked up both went to Sierte. This means they were not in the same set. The 11 meseta drop must be the second item in the first set. This proves that meseta is not sorted separately from nonmeseta items.

Item Distribution Test #3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3P0pLaPt9c

Thanks again to Siertes for recording this.

Siertes and I were in a two person locked group. Sleeping Warriors S2 with rares were set in order and normal items were set in order. The order in which the items drop doesn't matter, as proven already.

First item picked up was a ban-photon. This went to Siertes. Process of elimination means the second item picked up in this first set must go to me.

Second item picked up was kerseline. This went to Siertes. The kerseline can't be the second item in the first set. The first item picked up and the second item picked up both went to Siertes. This means they were not in the same set.

The first normal item and the first rare item picked up both went to Siertes. This proves that rares are not sorted with non rare items. The distributer keeps separate track of rares and normals if both are set in order.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Zoamel_Gustav on 2007-07-18 08:39 ]</font>

[Corran1]

i think pre-determination only happens on rares, but cant say for sure.

[Para]

Interesting because when i tested it... for the rares.. I intentionally skipped one which was supposed to go to me. We continued to grab rares with myself down 1 rare and when I went back to grab it, that rare I skipped went to myself.

[Niloklives]

We're still investigating this? it's determined when they're picked up. x.X I thought everyone knew that.

heck I don't have video but i've made parties where we all skipped NPC rares and just got "the good stuff." everything was evenly distributed and no one was skipped...ever.

truth

[Kion]

On 2007-07-10 14:31, NIloklives wrote:
We're still investigating this? it's completely broken so don't fuss about it

truth.


Fixed.

[SolomonGrundy]

I think the only reason peale get confused is when the order resets after you go through a complete loop

For example, it a 3 person party: A, B, C

the order for the first set of items is A, B, C.

however, once 3 items are found, the order resets. it *could* be C, B, A, which makes it look like 'C' got back to back rares.

Also, there is some concern over larger meseta drops, and how the game treats them.

Finally, there is the question of what happens when you inventory is full (don't laugh, I've seen this happen). I don't think any indication is given (no 'skip' message).

[Sekani]

On 2007-07-10 15:37, Kion wrote:
On 2007-07-10 14:31, NIloklives wrote:
We're still investigating this? it's completely broken so don't fuss about it

truth.


Fixed.


Cry more.

On 2007-07-10 15:52, SolomonGrundy wrote:
I think the only reason peale get confused is when the order resets after you go through a complete loop

For example, it a 3 person party: A, B, C

the order for the first set of items is A, B, C.

however, once 3 items are found, the order resets. it *could* be C, B, A, which makes it look like 'C' got back to back rares.

Also, there is some concern over larger meseta drops, and how the game treats them.

Finally, there is the question of what happens when you inventory is full (don't laugh, I've seen this happen). I don't think any indication is given (no 'skip' message).


The order itself is random, and I can't be bothered to figure out the fine print on things like what happens when someone joins, someone leaves, the leader changes, my mom has 2-star luck, the dog ate Luvia's homework, etc. All I know is that at the end of the run, everyone has the same amount (give or take one) of 7+ star items.

Also, as far as anyone knows, meseta is treated as a normal item, and you do see a skip message when your inventory is full. If there is for some reason no skip message on rare items, that I couldn't tell you.

[Niloklives]

I've never NOT seen a skip message. it's just it only says "skip" to the one who it skips

also the order can be anything but as grundy pointed out it CAN end up as

"A B C C B A" But even then it will comtinute as that the entire time:

A B C C B A A B C C B A

in that instance, everyone is getting a total of 4 rares, but the order in which they're allocated seems a bit skewed.

A someone who has successfully "counted" rares, just to see if it could be done, I can safely say, order does not predistribute rares

[MT7218]

On 2007-07-10 17:11, Sekani wrote:

The order itself is random, and I can't be bothered to figure out the fine print on things like what happens when someone joins, someone leaves...



I believe I have an answer to how that works. Simply put, the order resets when someone joins/leaves mid-mission.

Example:
Three person group, open game, the starting order is A B C. Player A gets his first item, then player D joins game before player B gets his/her item. Instead of the current item order of A B C, it is now D A C B, regardless if player B was next in line for an item from the first order. The order of items is reshuffled and reset the instant player D came in.

To simplify:
Current order: A B C
Next player in line for item: B
Player D joins
Order is reshuffled and reset
End setup after the player joins: D A C B

Same thing when someone leaves. It's reshuffled and reset.

Simplified:
Current order: A B C D
Next player in line for item: D
Player C leaves
Order is reshuffled and redelt
End setup after the player is gone: D B A

So when there is a party where people are constantly joining and leaving, the order of items keeps getting reset and reshuffled. This is why it's possible for one person to get 4 items when items are set to order.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: MT7218 on 2007-07-10 18:26 ]</font>

[Niloklives]

actually...as far as I know it works THIS way:

the order is in this example

A B C D E F (repeat)

the current players are : C D E

An item is picked up and since neither A nor B is in game, it skips directly to C

Someone joins and is labled A. the next item is picked up, but since A and B were skipped on a technicality...A will have to wait til their next turn...So it goes to D

E, mad they didn't get a rare yet leaves. and at the same time a new player joins. they are labled F

Another rare is picked up. E left so it goes to F and the next rare goes to A now that it's cycled through all the numbers. the arder remains A B C D E F. but who is actually which within that order is determined in an odd maner.

[Siertes]

Oh boy, wonder if I'm going to get recruited to do a video on what happens when players join or leave :/

[Niloklives]

run away while you can

[PALRAPPYS]

The set in order system is completely screwed.

I believe I've managed to obtain 2 rares in a row once (at the beginning w/ 4 people after no other rares dropped yet). But I'm NOT CERTAIN! http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/anime2.gif Just what I think happened... cuz I got a kubara wood then a puyoment aura...

[Niloklives]

it's been speculated that order changes every floor, but I've never found any evidence to point to this.

in any case, I was saying before that the order is set when the mission starts, and then it assigns values to each player. the order can be a little more complicated than the examples givven so far as I've seen as well..we were just giving simple ones to the sake of examples.


I feel that the real irrefutable evidence regarding order is that it can be that not enough rares drop for everyone to get even one. if rares were preset, why would it not generate at least a single rare for each person? furthermore there are instances when people join late and get a rare but the ones that were there from the beginning don't again...if rares were preset, we weould not see instances like this. anyway...I'd need to hear exactly what heppened to be able to tell you what happened in that instance pal rappy...but my guess is the order was just an odd one.

[amtalx]

Seems like we are back at square one...

[Kion]

which is why i said it's broken; don't worry about it. just play and if you great rares then yay!

[Ffuzzy-Logik]

Order is the best system, and anyone who thinks otherwise simply doesn't understand how it works, or is greedy and doesn't want to admit it.


Items only count when picked up. We've known this since January (or earlier).
The order only resets when either A) the old order finishes, or B) the mission ends. Nothing else, nothing, resets the order.

[amtalx]

I agree that SIO is better than random, but I have yet to see ANYONE'S theory on SIO to be 100% true. Until someone decides to disassemble the disc, all the theories will remain exactly that...theories.

[Starrz]

POSW is clueless as to how this works. http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif

[Hrith]

I can't believe that over nine months after, some people still don't know how Order works, and list it as a "mysterious" thing full of "theories".

I -- and many other people -- have known how Order works for over eight months, we have posted about it on the official boards over eight months ago, but no, n00bs and other people too stupid to understand how Order works still babble about how they think it works... it's sad.

It's high time you listened to the people who know their shit, really.

Random is for greedy people, that I agree with.

[amtalx]

On 2007-07-11 05:13, Hrith wrote:

I -- and many other people -- have known how Order works for over eight months, we have posted about it on the official boards over eight months ago...



link?

[JAFO22000]

How is random for greedy people?

[chibiLegolas]

Well, what REALLY gets me is when ppl claim they understand SIO 100% and STILL skip rares in game. Plus, scream, curse, boot, etc. the person who does pick up "junk" rares.

SIO only truly works when there's enough to cycle through for everyone. YET ppl STILL insist on skipping rares.
>_>
Are you gonna go back to pick up the "junk rares after the mission to be fair for those who technically missed out? (since they go to "someone" in order, rather than limbo) I doubt it...

Don't blame PPL for picking up the "junk" rares. Blame the SIO random placement in the list!
The computer says it was your time to get a Kerseline. Deal with it.

[Zoamel_Gustav]

[I seem to be unable to delete this post]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Zoamel_Gustav on 2007-07-11 10:02 ]</font>

[Zoamel_Gustav]

Hello everyone,

I'm looking for 6 or more volunteers for further recorded tests. Please post or PM me if interested. No test run will take longer then 5 minutes, but multiple runs may be needed. The purpose of the first test was to prove that the order in which items drop is not as relevant as the order in which they are picked up. This will make further testing much easier.

The following can now easily be proved or disproved using differant versions of my first test:

Is meseta, or anything, sorted seperately from items?
Are normal items sorted seperately from rare items?
What, if anything, causes the order to reset?
Are "large" meseta drops "rare"?
Do full inventories get skipped?

I want to again thank Siertes for helping me with the first test. I hope he will be willing to help again later. I very much appreciate any help anyone is willing to give. All my tests are freely repeatable and you may post recorded tests of your own here. I'm willing to hear and test theories, but please try to be objective. I ask that people please refrain from posting opinions for each sorting system.

Thank you for your time.

[Hrith]

On 2007-07-11 06:04, amtalx wrote:
link?I'm not going to look for months old topics on forums like the official ones, you do that: http://boards2.sega.com/psu_board/search.php?sid=71373f60dededa430c0469538fb8c41f

On 2007-07-11 08:33, JAFO22000 wrote:
How is random for greedy people?Because Random is by no means a fair system, a person could get four drops in a row (I've seen up to six).

On 2007-07-11 09:18, chibiLegolas wrote:
Well, what REALLY gets me is when ppl claim they understand SIO 100% and STILL skip rares in game. Plus, scream, curse, boot, etc. the person who does pick up "junk" rares.I never did that, unless I was joking about getting only Kerseline while other get Junaline or better, but I don't feel cheated; because that Order is fair does not mean it's unaffected by luck (I don't mean in-game luck).

The only thing that could be more fair than Order would be to put A grade items (7 to 9 stars) on a different Order altogether than S grade items (10 to 12 stars).

Apart from that, Order works really well, and if people whine to me about getting junk in Order, I just boot them (when I'm not playing with friends, I'm always the leader, that way I never suffer n00bs).

[Niloklives]

if you really think that kerseline dropped and it had to go to your friend because it dropped for them, you're ignorant. end of story

[JAFO22000]

On 2007-07-11 11:18, Hrith wrote:
Random is by no means a fair system, a person could get four drops in a row (I've seen up to six).


So because it's not a "fair" (your word) system, it's for greedy people? I have seen people get four drops in a row on random, but have also seen people get no drops at all. If anything, "Give Finder" is for the greedy. Random is just a way to ensure that everyone has an equal chance at every rare.

For example: If there are 6 people in a party with rares set to "In Order" and 6 rares drop, it's true that every person will receive a rare. BUT, once the first rare is given, the person who received said rare does NOT have a chance at the next 5 rares which drop. This leads people to stop picking up Kubara Wood (which is useful people!) and other common rares (oxymoron!). It also lead people to quit out of UO runs when they received a rare right before getting to the jaos, etc.

Same example as above, but with rares set to "Random"...Yes, there is a chance that one person may get all 6 rares, but at least everyone had an equal chance at each rare AT ALL TIMES!

In conclusion, I don't find Random nor do I find In Order to be "bad". I believe them both to be fair systems in their own rights. I usually run missions with normal items set to "In Order" and rares set to "Random". I don't find this to be greedy, but I do find it to be the best way to run missions. I still don't see how a greedy person would put rares on Random, as there is a chance that they will get absolutely nothing. If anything, set to In Order should be considered more "greedy" than Random, as you know that you will (possibly) receive a rare each and every run. Random is more of a gamble!

[Tykwa]

Anyone think that rarity could be an issue?

Lets say, 2 person party
this is if 1st person picks up everything
mono 1st person picks up he gets it,
mono 1st person picks up, 2nd gets it
dimate 1st p picks up, he gets it
dimate 1st person picks up 2nd gets it
trimate 1st person picks up he gets it
dimate 1st person picks up he gets it
monomate 1st person picks up, he gets it
trimate 1st person 2nd get


not a good example, but see what im talking about?

[Niloklives]

no...rarity is not a factor. 7* and up iall the same as far as order is concerned 6* and below is all the same as well

[SolomonGrundy]

I think SIO needs a third setting for S rank items. so you could set that to 'random'

other than that, my ony bitch about Set in order is that chicosite has an unnatural affinity for me, while nanoresin has an aversion. HIlarity ensues.

[Zoamel_Gustav]

The purpose of this thread is fact finding. Please do not post about what is fair, better, bad, greedy, etc. This is not about how much "should" be know either. This is about providing proof. I'm asking each poster here if they would be willing to help create proof for the claims.

I've already prepared test to prove or disprove differant theories. I just need 6 people, one of which must be able to record the tests. All I'm asking for is a small amount of time and cooperation.

If I can't be there myself, I can explain to you the tests and you can post the results here.

[Ffuzzy-Logik]

On 2007-07-11 11:36, JAFO22000 wrote:
On 2007-07-11 11:18, Hrith wrote:
Random is by no means a fair system, a person could get four drops in a row (I've seen up to six).


So because it's not a "fair" (your word) system, it's for greedy people? I have seen people get four drops in a row on random, but have also seen people get no drops at all. If anything, "Give Finder" is for the greedy. Random is just a way to ensure that everyone has an equal chance at every rare.

For example: If there are 6 people in a party with rares set to "In Order" and 6 rares drop, it's true that every person will receive a rare. BUT, once the first rare is given, the person who received said rare does NOT have a chance at the next 5 rares which drop. This leads people to stop picking up Kubara Wood (which is useful people!) and other common rares (oxymoron!). It also lead people to quit out of UO runs when they received a rare right before getting to the jaos, etc.

So let's look at this a minute. People leave Order parties when they have already received their rare and know that they can't get the next five.

If that isn't the very definition of greed, I don't know what is.



Give Finder: Greedy people.
Set Random: Greedy people who don't want to admit they're greedy, or people too ignorant to understand how Order works.
Set in Order: Sensible people.

[Niloklives]

the people who DO understand order...some of them actually DO count rares and try to make sure they get the good ones. they'll pick up kerseline til they see their turn is coming up and skip over anything they don't want after picking up say 5 kerelines in a row. then they pick up their rare and start the process over again. when people do that I set the rares to random so they can't do that. most people i play with only pick up stuff they might want and it works out pretty well...in those cases i set it to order since I know people aren't going to try to curb the distribution

[Ffuzzy-Logik]

On 2007-07-11 21:24, NIloklives wrote:
the people who DO understand order...some of them actually DO count rares and try to make sure they get the good ones. they'll pick up kerseline til they see their turn is coming up and skip over anything they don't want after picking up say 5 kerelines in a row. then they pick up their rare and start the process over again. when people do that I set the rares to random so they can't do that. most people i play with only pick up stuff they might want and it works out pretty well...in those cases i set it to order since I know people aren't going to try to curb the distribution

keeping track of the order is extremely difficult to do (especially as it cycles through several times), and the order itself is randomly determined, so it is highly unlikely that any manipulation by skipping rares will affect the system in your favor.


Besides, the only thing anyone should ever skip is shit like [B] Scape Doll and [B] Gourmet Caek.

[drizzle]

On 2007-07-11 11:18, Hrith wrote:
The only thing that could be more fair than Order would be to put A grade items (7 to 9 stars) on a different Order altogether than S grade items (10 to 12 stars).

So you're saying that Set in Order has a flaw that Random doesn't? http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_razz.gif

[danny_o]

Man, I wish an ST technician would just come out and dispel all rumors or inconsistencies about this game.

Are they truly demented and lurk on this very thread, mocking and laughing at our frustration and drama? I think so.

[JAFO22000]

On 2007-07-11 21:16, Ffuzzy-Logik wrote

So let's look at this a minute. People leave Order parties when they have already received their rare and know that they can't get the next five.

[b]If that isn't the very definition of greed, I don't know what is.



Give Finder: Greedy people.
Set Random: Greedy people who don't want to admit they're greedy, or people too ignorant to understand how Order works.
Set in Order: Sensible people.



So, you go on to define greed as people leaving an In Order party, yet state that In Order is not for greedy people? I stated that I felt Order was a good system, as good as random. Please, please, please EXPLAIN how setting rares to random makes you "greedy"??? Please...Explain.

[amtalx]

On 2007-07-11 11:18, Hrith wrote:
On 2007-07-11 06:04, amtalx wrote:
link?I'm not going to look for months old topics on forums like the official ones, you do that: http://boards2.sega.com/psu_board/search.php?sid=71373f60dededa430c0469538fb8c41f


Or you could just lay it down for us peons to understand right here. Please use small words.

[Zoamel_Gustav]

Second test completed. First post edited. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSwL92R23k4

I believe this proves that meseta is not sorted separately from nonmeseta items. This will make the next tests much easier if I can ever find 4 more people to help. Thanks again to Siertes for recording this. I ask again that people not discuss "greed" here. If you want to, you can create your own topic on that subject or just pm each other.

Here is a sample test I want to try:
Test: What, if anything, causes the order to reset?

Step 1: Set up test.
Create a locked six person group, set the distributer, begin recording and generate as many drops as needed without picking up any items. When ready, pick up five items and take note of who doesn't get an item. Process of elimination means that person must recieve the sixth picked up item in this set.

Step 2: Introduce variable.
Do something which is believed to have an effect on the item distribution.

Step 3: Execute test.
Pick up sixth item.

Step 4: Check results.
If the item in step 3 goes to the wrong person, then this proves the distributer was changed by the actions in step 2. If it goes to the right person, this run is inconclusive because if reset there is still a one in six chance of the right person getting that item.
If test is inconclusive, abort and restart the test from step 1. The chances of that happening twice in a row are 1/36. The chances of that happening three times is 1/216. If it happens three times in a row, then the chance that step 2 effected the item distribution is less than half a percent. You can be over 99.5% sure that step 2 generates no effect.

[Hrith]

On 2007-07-12 00:03, drizzle wrote:
So you're saying that Set in Order has a flaw that Random doesn't? http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_razz.gifWhy, yes, but Random has over 9000 flaws that Order does not, so it wins >=/

[Niloklives]

On 2007-07-11 21:39, Ffuzzy-Logik wrote:
On 2007-07-11 21:24, NIloklives wrote:
the people who DO understand order...some of them actually DO count rares and try to make sure they get the good ones. they'll pick up kerseline til they see their turn is coming up and skip over anything they don't want after picking up say 5 kerelines in a row. then they pick up their rare and start the process over again. when people do that I set the rares to random so they can't do that. most people i play with only pick up stuff they might want and it works out pretty well...in those cases i set it to order since I know people aren't going to try to curb the distribution

keeping track of the order is extremely difficult to do (especially as it cycles through several times), and the order itself is randomly determined, so it is highly unlikely that any manipulation by skipping rares will affect the system in your favor.


Besides, the only thing anyone should ever skip is shit like [B] Scape Doll and [B] Gourmet Caek.



Seeing as how I've successfully done it, it's not not as though it can't be done. but my point was that if they think they'll get it, they don;t pick it up if they don't want it...but if they're relatively certain it will go to someone else they'll pick up absolutely anything.

[Sekani]

I'm also interested in how people figure Random is for greedy people. It's not like any one member gets a special advantage over the others.

[JAFO22000]

On 2007-07-13 06:45, Sekani wrote:
I'm also interested in how people figure Random is for greedy people. It's not like any one member gets a special advantage over the others.



Don't bother Sekani. I've asked numerous times for this to be explained to me, only to be ignored. Just like the "random has 9000 flaws" comment a few posts above. No proof, just propaganda. I've asked Hrith and Ffuzzy to explain their stance regarding random and have gotten nothing in return.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JAFO22000 on 2007-07-13 07:55 ]</font>

[Zoamel_Gustav]

Would four or more people here be willing to volunteers for further recorded tests? Also I figured out a way to test if large meseta drops are considered rare or normal. However this would be longer than the 5 minute tests I've been doing so far, but only requires one run. I'm posting these sample tests so that people with more time than myself can try to record them.

Test: Are "large" meseta drops "rare"?

Step 1:

Create a locked two person group with rares set to order and normal to give finder. Players start with no meseta. Begin recording and start Lab Recovery S2 (or any quest with large meseta drops). Finish without picking up any items. When ready, pick up one rare, which goes to player A. Process of elimination means player B must get the next rare item picked up.

Step 2:

Player A now picks up every meseta drop. All Normal drops will go to player A (the finder). A rare drop, if any, will go to Player B.

Step 3:

If Player B recieves any meseta, then that meseta drop must have been considered a "rare item" by the destributer. If Player B recieves no meseta, then none of the meseta drops were considered a "rare item".

[Ffuzzy-Logik]

On 2007-07-13 07:54, JAFO22000 wrote:
Don't bother Sekani. I've asked numerous times for this to be explained to me, only to be ignored. Just like the "random has 9000 flaws" comment a few posts above. No proof, just propaganda. I've asked Hrith and Ffuzzy to explain their stance regarding random and have gotten nothing in return.


It's so painfully simple, it shouldn't need to be explained.

With Random it is possible to get every rare, and it is at the very least very likely that certain party members will get a disproportional number of rares.

With Order, each player is guaranteed to get exactly 1/6 of the rares, no more, no less. There is no chance that you will ever get more than 1/6 of the rares on Order, ever.

Quality of rares is not an issue. You got a Kerseline and the next guy got a Psycho Wand board? Too fucking bad; it's still more fair than Random where the other guy got both rares.


Random is greedy because you can potentially get more rares that you could ever get in Order. This is obvious.

[Notos]

From my personl experience, random tends to select one or two people and give them most of the rare. I remember joining random party in lab s2 with random rare and I got about 60% of the rare in the first 5 runs or so then got almot nothing after that. Friends I used to play with also noticed this so we decided to use order instead of random.

[JAFO22000]

On 2007-07-13 11:02, Ffuzzy-Logik wrote


It's so painfully simple, it shouldn't need to be explained.

With Random it is possible to get every rare, and it is at the very least very likely that certain party members will get a disproportional number of rares.

With Order, each player is guaranteed to get exactly 1/6 of the rares, no more, no less. There is no chance that you will ever get more than 1/6 of the rares on Order, ever.

Quality of rares is not an issue. You got a Kerseline and the next guy got a Psycho Wand board? Too fucking bad; it's still more fair than Random where the other guy got both rares.


Random is greedy because you can potentially get more rares that you could ever get in Order. This is obvious.



But your argument holds no weight because there is a chance you get NOTHING AT ALL with random. Something is considered "greedy" because you can potentially get more rares? You aren't looking at the other side of the coin wherein you can potetially get LESS rares.

So by that argument, SIO is for the more greedy person, as it's a case of saying "I want to make sure I get everything that's coming to me.

Also, each player is not "guaranteed" 1/6 rares per run if 7 rares drop in a SIO game, one person gets 2/7 of the rares, while the rest get 1/7. HOW GREEDY AND UNFAIR IS THAT!!!!!

(again, I don't find SIO to be any better/worse/more fair than random. I just find it funny that people call others who have random games "greedy" when there is no proof of this. Yes, there is a potential that one or two people may get the majority of rares, but in the long run I would say that the rare distribution has been pretty equal).

[Ffuzzy-Logik]

On 2007-07-13 11:53, JAFO22000 wrote:

Something is considered "greedy" because you can potentially get more rares?
Uh, yeah, pretty much.

You might get less, sure, but you're just as likely to get more instead.


And sure, the number of rares that drop isn't always an exact multiple of the number of party members, that's obvious. The point still holds, though; 2/7 is still a lot better than 7/7 or 0/7, both of which might occur on Random, but could never occur on Order.

You still won't agree, so whatever.

[JAFO22000]

Yes, I guess we must agree to disagree on this point.

[Inazuma]

i prefer random because its the most fair. everyone has an equal chance at all the items. ordered is fine too, but sometimes i wonder if ppl are purposely not picking up certain items, or trying to work the system in their favor.

if anything, ordered has the potential to be abused by someone who is greedy, where random is fucking RANDOM. how anyone can think random is for greedy ppl is beyond me.

oh, and give finder is just stupid. anytime a rare drops, everyone stops what they are doing and races for it.

its really nice we have these item options though. pso was just a big red box race, got pretty annoying at times. doing bunpai w/ the jp in psobb was nice, but having it built into the game like psu saves a lot of time.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Inazuma on 2007-07-13 12:35 ]</font>

[Sekani]

On 2007-07-13 12:16, Ffuzzy-Logik wrote:
On 2007-07-13 11:53, JAFO22000 wrote:

Something is considered "greedy" because you can potentially get more rares?
Uh, yeah, pretty much.

You might get less, sure, but you're just as likely to get more instead.

That's definitely some fuzzy logic there.

Nothing's wrong with set in order, but I personally prefer random for rare hunts. At least this way I know that I won't get shafted if I happened to get the kerseline that dropped right before the lucky Go Vahra spawn.

[XenithFlare]

I've come out of multiple Random parties in which we've gotten 20ish rare drops, and only gotten one of them.

[drizzle]

All rares aren't equal, and really only greedy players care about getting at least as many Kerselines and Scape Doll boards as the other players on every run (so they can put it in their shop for 20k meseta).

When it comes to the REAL rares, the kind you won't usually see more than once per run, Random is the only good option. It can be very demotivating when you get to the boss knowing you'll have no chance at getting its rare drops. Well, unless you kick people right after the kill or something http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_razz.gif

[Ffuzzy-Logik]

I find it interesting to observe the fundamental differences in opinion here.


Personally, I cannot see how anyone who understands how Order works can honestly prefer Random. It absolutely does not make any sense to me.


"Demotivating" knowing you can't get the boss rare? That sounds like greed to me.



But it doesn't matter; I only ever play on Order/Order, so this is really not an issue for me.

[Zoamel_Gustav]

Does anyone have any questions regarding the first and second tests posted? Are there any other theories that anyone wants to help prove or disprove?

I'm gonna try maybe three more tests. I want to do more significant tests but, with only 2 people, I won't be able to preform them well yet. I would like to try them before the 3* luck for everyone expires. Is anyone else willing to help? @c Why do I get the feeling I'm being ignored?

[KoolAidPitcher]

I program computers, and I can explain how set in order works.

The computer automatically assigns all six player slots of the party a bracket of numbers from 0 - 999.

Red: 0 – 165
Green: 166 – 331
Blue: 332 – 497
Yellow: 498 – 663
Teal: 664 – 829
Pink: 830 – 995
Redraw: 996 – 999

After each slot is assigned a number bracket, the computer draws a number from a pseudorandom number algorithm. Each slot is eliminated after it is chosen by the computer until all the player slots have been drawn, where the computer starts again. If a party member is not present, or no one is in the slot, it is skipped.

In other words, when you pick up an item, it is like randomly drawing names out of a hat. Empty slots are still linked, so they can be drawn and eliminated just like player slots. THE COMPUTER RANDOMLY CREATES THE ORDER AS YOU PICK UP ITEMS. IT IS AD LIB.

Perhaps set in order should have been called “Even item distribution,” because that is all it is. There is no order to set in order.

Frequently asked questions:

I was playing on set in order, and someone got two items in a row. How is this?

It is likely that player was at the end of the last cycle of items and at the beginning of the first.

Do items link to you when they drop?

No. They are linked when you pick them up. If you want to prove this once and for all, you can create a mission with three players. Pick up the first two rares and skip the third. Repeat while keeping track of who is getting what. At the end of the mission, go back and pick up the rares you skipped.

Can someone screw me out of an item by manipulating set in order?

The short answer is no.

The long answer is as follows: Pseudorandom numbers are generated in the background using a complex mathematical equation (usually Vn + 1 = (279470273 x Vn) mod4294967291) (See wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_congruential_generator ). Because of the constantly changing nature of pseudorandom numbers, there is no guarantee that the player who got the previous item would have gotten the next item, had the previous item been skipped. That is simply how things turned out, and had the items been picked up by a different player, or at a different time by the same player (even a millisecond later), the player receiving the item could have been different.

If that is too hard to understand, I will try to create a few examples that explain how set in order works. All examples are assuming you’re in a six-person party.

-

First rare drops, you don’t get it. The chance that you get the next rare is 20%, unless a player is skipped or absent.

Second rare drops, you get it. The chance you will get the next four rares are all 0%, unless a player is skipped or absent.

-

Fifth rare drops, you don’t get it and have still not received a rare. The chance that you will get the next rare is 100%, unless you are skipped or absent, or were when a previous rare dropped.

Sixth rare drops, you get it. The chance that you will get the next rare is 16.6%.

In other words, you can manipulate set in order to improve your chances of getting the next rare, but nothing is absolute. Also, a player has a chance of screwing themselves in the process of trying to cheat another player out of a rare.

… I think I’ve said enough. Either you understand or you don’t by now. You can test these theories (I already have) using the methods I posted above.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: SavageNation on 2007-07-15 02:53 ]</font>

[Ffuzzy-Logik]

/applause

Thanks for that.

[SolomonGrundy]

Fuzzy, your logic is off, if you think set in order distributes rares equally. A) larger parties don't mean more rares in a particular run
B) In cases cases where there are 6 party members and 7-9 rares are found, some get 2, some get 1
C) doing runs multiple times magnifies this effect for lower rank (or lower luck), missions.

D) it *is* totally possible to manipulate the set in order system, to maximize your chance of getting something good.

- let's say you are in a game with 4 players. the first rare drops (kerseline), and you recieve it. now, kerseline is not bad, but it's not great either - let' say you were hoping for nanoresin. Ok, next rare drops, a scape doll board. Convention has it that those are left on the ground, but since you want nano resin, and KNOW you won't get it for at least 3 items, you pick it up, maximizing your chance to get the resin.

[Ffuzzy-Logik]

On 2007-07-15 11:19, SolomonGrundy wrote:
Fuzzy, your logic is off, if you think set in order distributes rares equally. A) larger parties don't mean more rares in a particular runAnd?
B) In cases cases where there are 6 party members and 7-9 rares are found, some get 2, some get 1Sure, it's likely that someone will get 2/7 compared to everyone else's 1/7, but that still beats the 0/7 or 7/7 on Random. With Order, it is impossible for any one person to get any more than one more rare per run than any other player. With Random, it's possible for any one player to get either all or no rares. It is clear which is more fair.

C) doing runs multiple times magnifies this effect for lower rank (or lower luck), missions. Yes. After 5 consecutive 0/7 runs on Random, you finally realize why Order is better. That's what you meant, right?

D) it *is* totally possible to manipulate the set in order system, to maximize your chance of getting something good.Sure, it is possible, but you're just as likely to screw yourself out of the rare anyway. Besides, who's to say you too won't end up with just another Kerseline?

- let's say you are in a game with 4 players. the first rare drops (kerseline), and you recieve it. now, kerseline is not bad, but it's not great either - let' say you were hoping for nanoresin. Ok, next rare drops, a scape doll board. Convention has it that those are left on the ground, but since you want nano resin, and KNOW you won't get it for at least 3 items, you pick it up, maximizing your chance to get the resin.A. How the hell do you know the resin will even drop? You don't. You'll just as likely get another Kerseline.
B. People that do that kind of shit are scum and do not play in my parties.

[Zoamel_Gustav]

I'm really am being ignored, aren't I? I've asked repeatedly that "fairness" not be the subject of debate here.
On 2007-07-15 02:42, SavageNation wrote:
Do items link to you when they drop?

No. They are linked when you pick them up. If you want to prove this once and for all, you can create a mission with three players. Pick up the first two rares and skip the third. Repeat while keeping track of who is getting what. At the end of the mission, go back and pick up the rares you skipped.

Didn't Item Distribution Test #1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQlPZgmt_WY) already prove this once and for all? If not, please explain why it didn't. Proving this was the whole point of the very first post. Also SavageNation's theory (along with anyone else's) can be proven or disproven once and for all if anyone were willing to try.

I'm gonna test what happens if I stop being objective and unbiased for a moment.

For order:

All the item distribution methods are global effects. None of them treat one particular person differently than the others. Anyone who joins a group is shown the distribution settings constantly, can check the setting at any time, and only a leader at the mission counter can change it mid mission. Any player is free to leave at any time and the leader is free to lock at any time. Starting, joining, staying or leaving a group is completely voluntary.

Example: Even in pick up groups, people can communicate. You cannot receive a rare without anyone seeing. You can ask what items can or can't be picked up. The game treats everyone equally. How the players treat each other is up to those players. If something is wrong, you can say so. By staying in a group, you imply that you agree to what that group is doing. If a person is abusing a system, it is not the fault of the system. Others have to allow it to happen.

For random:

A random number generator is completely unbias and, in any practical use, manipulatable. The /dice function does not favor any exact number despite what the actual results may be. Past results offer no precedent to future results. No matter what the previous result was, the chance of having /dice roll a number is still 1:6. Probability states that the odds any beneficial result to you is exactly that same as the odds of a beneficial result to someone else. If a person is "lucky", it is not the fault of the system. Being deemed "lucky" is an opinion by other people.

Example: A lottery ticket is a chance to win millions. That chance is only worth a few bucks. That is how much it's worth, which is how much people pay for the ticket. The winning ticket is not worth millions. The buyer paid a fair amount for a fair chance at a prize. It's not unfair that everyone else lost. The fact that the person won does not change the value of what he paid for and recieved. Everyone else bought the same product that the winner bought at the same cost. No one had a unfair advantage.

For finder:

Here's what I think what the "best" "fairest" "ungreedyest" way would be. Start a group with trusted friends. To each of them, fax a price guide listing the current market value of every item in the game. Have them sign it to prove they agree with how much each item is worth. Lock the group and run a preset number of runs. Agreed that only the leader can pick up items and set it to give finder. When the runs are done, total up the value of all the drops, divide by the number of people. Leader pays everyone that much, then everyone buys the items they want off of him at market value.

Sorry if that last part went to far. I don't mean anything I just said. Can we stop arguing fairness here? Please? I still need four volunteers for recordings.

[Zoamel_Gustav]

Third test completed. First post updated. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3P0pLaPt9c

This proves that rares are sorted separately from nonrare items. Thanks again to Siertes for recording this. The tests are explained in the first post.

Before the update on thursday, I want to record a final test. The following is a script for a final test, requiring seven people:

My hypothesis is that items are assigned to a player's color (red, blue, yellow, green, pink, aqua) and leaving or joining a group does not reset the order.

Me and 5 people form a six person locked group. Recorder waits outside counter and begins recording. No one will carry any healing items, meseta or synth mats. Unsafe Passage C with rares set to finder and normal items set in order. The order in which the items drop doesn't matter, as proven already. Meseta is a normal item, as proven already. Rares have no affect on normals, as proven already.

Pick up five normal items. Process of elimination means the next item picked up must go to the excluded player. Excluded player leaves and recorder joins group.

Pick up next normal item. My hypothesis is that the item must go to the newly joined player. If not, then my theory is disproven.

If it does, then my theory is inconclusive because there is still a 1:6 chance of that player getting that item if the order were reset. Repeat this test 3 more times. Odds of a 1:6 chance coincidence happening four times in a row is 1:216. I will be over 99.5% sure that the leaving player passed on his place in the order to the joining player.

If this is proven, I can write a proven explanation on exactly how set in order works.

[Fiohna]

Zoamel, you are amazing despite the constant bickering in this thread.