RNG or what ??

[popps]

I have a fishing order which asks, among others, for 20 Spiney Lobsters.

I did not have any and so, I went on to fish them.

After fishing up some 1.199 of crabs/lobsters, I noticed (with the exception of Dungeoness Crabs) that among the 12 named crabs/lobsters the ones I got the least were the ones I actually were asked from the order (and that I needed the most.......)

Just a RNG coincidence ?

I found it really odd that among 12 types I fished, that exactly the one I needed the most is the one I fished up the least.....

How can the RNG be so precise as to exactly pinpoint what I need the most and spawn it the least ???

Or do I need, perhaps, to conclude that maybe there is a connection between what the fishing order says and what the RNG does ??

Type			Amount	Percentage
Crab			317	26,44%
Lobster			367	30,61%
Crusty Lobster		47	3,92%
Fred Lobster		46	3,84%
Hummer Lobster		38	3,17%
Rock Lobster		42	3,50%
Shovel-Nose Lobster	56	4,67%
[b]Spiney Lobster		29	2,42%[/b]
Apple Crab		46	3,84%
Blue Crab		42	3,50%
Dungeoness Crab		31	2,59%
King Crab		46	3,84%
Rock Crab		48	4,00%
Snow Crab		44	3,67%

Total			1,199	100%

P.S. By the way, when posting up a table format, how can I put in tabs so that I can align the numbers nicely for an easier reading ?

 

[RavenWinterHawk]

This is a joke right?
Yes its random.
And the RNG is not sentient.

Geez oh man. Why not find someon that also fishes? and trade or buy them.

 

[RavenWinterHawk]

And on serious note if you are serious.

YOUR SAMPLE IS TO SMALL for the RNG.

Try and fish up about 10000 crabs and lobsters and youll have a working sample.

 

[Gowron]

Yes, I find that it is more likely that I am going to fish up other stuff than what I am trying to fill. However, it stocks me up for when I get that fishing quest that has the other types on it. Also, while I'm fishing, I usually get a number of MiBs. I see it as a fair trade.

By the way, do you ever enjoy just playing the game?

 

[RavenWinterHawk]

Yes, I find that it is more likely that I am going to fish up other stuff than what I am trying to fill. However, it stocks me up for when I get that fishing quest that has the other types on it. Also, while I'm fishing, I usually get a number of MiBs. I see it as a fair trade.

By the way, do you ever enjoy just playing the game?

Well Said.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

By the way, do you ever enjoy just playing the game?

lmfao. Can't you tell he enjoys playing every minute as each passing minute gives him something to post about on Stratics? He seems to enjoy that a ton, so in turn has to enjoy the time it took him to find this "problem".

 

[Lady Storm]

This has been covered on the fishing forum.

 

[Babble]

Looks ok to me
Seems like Crabs and Lobsters are common so if you throw them out you are pretty well even with all the others.

 

[popps]

Yes, I find that it is more likely that I am going to fish up other stuff than what I am trying to fill. However, it stocks me up for when I get that fishing quest that has the other types on it. Also, while I'm fishing, I usually get a number of MiBs. I see it as a fair trade.

By the way, do you ever enjoy just playing the game?

I do not see it as an issue of enjoying or not the game but rather, an issue of making reason, logical reason why something happens.....

Regardless whether one may or not enjoy fishing, I do not find it ackward that one might want to find a logical reason as in regards to why the RNG might make it harder to get what the order asks for, rather than something else........

Coincindence ? Bad lack ? Something else ? Who knows, just trying to find some logic here.....

And I do not see nothing wrong in trying to understand why something happens.

Sure, the sample may not be sufficiently large but nonetheless, it is at least odd that of 12 different options which the RNG could pick as being the hardest to spawn for me, it went picking right exactly the one that my order was asking for..... Perhaps a coincindence, I do not know, but an odd one nonetheless, IMHO.

Besides, I am not the only fisherman posting about this "feeling", I have read about such feelings from other fellow fishermen so, I do not feel I am alone.

Sure, there is work arounds for everything including trading what fish, crabs or lobsters one might need but this has nothing to do with trying to understand why the RNG "seems" to oddily make it harder to spawn precisely the one type one needs from the order ongoing.......

 

[Pinco]

the percentage are realistic...
today I fished for 1 hour only crab fishing and I got 600 stones of named crab/lobsters (plain ones gone thrashed). So 600/5 = 120 named crab/lobsters in 1 hour and the quest requirements are a bit higher for that spawn rate :|

Oh and by the way, I have no quest running, so is pure RNG

 

[RavenWinterHawk]

I do not see it as an issue of enjoying or not the game but rather, an issue of making reason, logical reason why something happens.....

Regardless whether one may or not enjoy fishing, I do not find it ackward that one might want to find a logical reason as in regards to why the RNG might make it harder to get what the order asks for, rather than something else........

Coincindence ? Bad lack ? Something else ? Who knows, just trying to find some logic here.....

And I do not see nothing wrong in trying to understand why something happens.

Sure, the sample may not be sufficiently large but nonetheless, it is at least odd that of 12 different options which the RNG could pick as being the hardest to spawn for me, it went picking right exactly the one that my order was asking for..... Perhaps a coincindence, I do not know, but an odd one nonetheless, IMHO.

Besides, I am not the only fisherman posting about this "feeling", I have read about such feelings from other fellow fishermen so, I do not feel I am alone.

Sure, there is work arounds for everything including trading what fish, crabs or lobsters one might need but this has nothing to do with trying to understand why the RNG "seems" to oddily make it harder to spawn precisely the one type one needs from the order ongoing.......

Your not trying to find logic here pops. If you were you would have stopped and RNG.

You just like to complain about nothing. I appreciate that freedom. Just stop fooling yourself on why you post.

 

[LordDrago]

RNG

Oh, and Popps doesn't play UO. Popps tolerates UO in order to play Stratics.

 

[anvira]

RNG

Oh, and Popps doesn't play UO. Popps tolerates UO in order to play Stratics.

FOGL....Oh man, tooo funny. My monitor just ate Pepsi.

Thanks for the laugh!

 

[Tanivar]

And on serious note if you are serious.

YOUR SAMPLE IS TO SMALL for the RNG.

Try and fish up about 10000 crabs and lobsters and youll have a working sample.

You'll find over the years that this reply occurs when someone doesn't like what the numbers show. If it agreed with their opinion, it would be easily sufficent to show accurate results plus or minus a very small tolerance.

Ah the games people play with Statistics.

 

[popps]

Your not trying to find logic here pops. If you were you would have stopped and RNG.

You just like to complain about nothing. I appreciate that freedom. Just stop fooling yourself on why you post.

Hmmm, something here is not adding up, IMHO........

Complaining, at least that I can think of, needs being convinced about something in the first place.

My post, has question marks. Question marks, usually, pertain to "questions" and questions, usually, are part of the domain of "researching" which is the journey to find answers to questions........

Before complaining one needs to find the answer to the hypothesis..........

 

[RavenWinterHawk]

Hmmm, something here is not adding up, IMHO........

Complaining, at least that I can think of, needs being convinced about something in the first place.

My post, has question marks. Question marks, usually, pertain to "questions" and questions, usually, are part of the domain of "researching" which is the journey to find answers to questions........

Before complaining one needs to find the answer to the hypothesis..........

No one needs to know what they are looking for.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Hmmm, something here is not adding up, IMHO........

Complaining, at least that I can think of, needs being convinced about something in the first place.

My post, has question marks. Question marks, usually, pertain to "questions" and questions, usually, are part of the domain of "researching" which is the journey to find answers to questions........

Before complaining one needs to find the answer to the hypothesis..........

You pose your complaints in the guise of questions. You may ask "questions" but really you are saying "wtf why cant I just have what I want when I want instead of xyz xyz xyz" Just a sample of what I read, not completely having to do with this post, but I guess I could use this post as an example if needed.

 

[RavenWinterHawk]

You pose your complaints in the guise of questions. You may ask "questions" but really you are saying "wtf why cant I just have what I want when I want instead of xyz xyz xyz" Just a sample of what I read, not completely having to do with this post, but I guess I could use this post as an example if needed.

good points
Popps just say your pissed that the one you need had to be the low roll.

Its okay to be honest.

 

[Slickjack]

Popps doesn't play UO, he plays Stratics.....


LMAO!!!!

That made my day!

Nearly 10,000 posts and I'd bet I could post a "table" of how many were complaints and WE'D have a "question":

Why would someone with so many complaints, issues, and problems with a game STILL play said game????

Well said, Popps simply plays stratics.

 

[Shamus Turlough]

OK that is enough. The man asked a question, and proceeded to get trolled the rest of the thread. Either answer the question, or move along. The "troll popps" bandwagon is about to get impounded.

To answer one of your questions popps, to post something in table format, use the code tags: [ code ] and [ / code ] without spaces.

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

 

[Harlequin]

LOL

To poops, this has been noticed by other users too. It seems that once you accept an order, the rate of you fishing up the required types are somehow reduced.

Not sure if it's a bug or if the devs do it intentionally to encourage interaction between players. Haven't been following up.

Some players have adapted to this by fishing up 20 of each type before accepting an order.

Might not be the answer you are looking for, but it's a workaround until the devs checks/make changes.

 

[Basara]

I have to agree with Harlequin and popps...

Most of the evidence is currently ancedotal, but there's enough ancedotal evidence to see a pattern that deserves a more rigorous test.

When I had 3 Spiney Lobster quests, I got 2-3 of every other named type for every Spiney.

Now that I'm working on Rock Crabs (and this is the only active quest at the moment), and needing only 5 of them to complete a 15-count slot on a 5-parter, I have only caught 3 Rock Crabs. In that same time, I've caught 8 Apple, 7 Blue, 6 Dungeness, 5 King, and 7 Snow - 3 types of which I had been at sitting at 0 of, prior to last night's pots. I got similar amounts of the Lobsters, and amazingly, the Spineys which had been my previous bugbear, were seemingly the most common lobster drop lasting, starting IMMEDIATELY after turning in my last quest with Spineys with 2 Spineys from the first string of pots, and not going more than 10 minutes without getting another (note that I set my pots for 2-4 minutes, waiting until I have more bobs than traps to pull them in).

 

[popps]

Hmmm, something here is not adding up, IMHO........

Complaining, at least that I can think of, needs being convinced about something in the first place.

My post, has question marks. Question marks, usually, pertain to "questions" and questions, usually, are part of the domain of "researching" which is the journey to find answers to questions........

Before complaining one needs to find the answer to the hypothesis..........

You pose your complaints in the guise of questions. You may ask "questions" but really you are saying "wtf why cant I just have what I want when I want instead of xyz xyz xyz" Just a sample of what I read, not completely having to do with this post, but I guess I could use this post as an example if needed.[/QUOTE]


Really ?

Why it cannot be that one might be looking to make reason out of something they notice happening in the game, simply ?

I read posts from players saying that they experienced fishing up the least what orders were asking them for, I noticed posts from players suggesting, as a work around, to first do extensive fishing and then, ask for orders to avoid this. I thought to run a test to get my personal experience on this and the findings got me thinking as to the logical reasoning.

Nothing more and nothing less.

"If" this is happening, I find it odd that the RNG might "pin point" precisely what a player might need the most because of an order to spawn it the least, and the coincidence, especially if players experience it as a recurrent one, got me quite surprised.

Can I be surprised over something that I find odd ?

 

[Babble]

test it 10 times. If it is a programming error it will occur every time, else it is just luck.

 

[popps]

Popps just say your pissed that the one you need had to be the low roll.

Its okay to be honest.

The funny thing is, that I am not pissed at all....

I just gathered information from other fishermen, run my numbers and found something odd, inexplicable to me.

Yes, I know that the RNG is random, but out of 12 named crabs/lobsters that players may need how come players often lament that precisely the one they need the most because of an asking order is the one spawning the least ?

This has nothing to do with me being upset (because I am not), I trade for what I need for my orders and so I am not touched by the scarcity of spawns. Hence, I can hardly be annoyed by it.

This has only to do with trying to find a logic in this that does not liquidate the issue fastly and simply "because it is the RNG randomness".

Maybe it is, I do not know, I just find it odd that this supposed randomness out of 12 possible candidates often picks the one needed the most to make it spawn the least.

A coincidence ? Possible.......but I find it an odd coincidence, nonetheless............

 

[popps]

OK that is enough. The man asked a question, and proceeded to get trolled the rest of the thread. Either answer the question, or move along. The "troll popps" bandwagon is about to get impounded.

To answer one of your questions popps, to post something in table format, use the code tags: [ code ] and [ / code ] without spaces.

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

Thanks, I tried editing the original post to enter tha TABs (look at the first data as I edited it), but I tried [1]value[/code] or [code1]value[/code] but the tab did not work, I do not get a tab inserted before the value and so I am unable to nicely align all values in a table easier to read.

What is the correct writing I need to do ?

 

[Babble]

It is not THAT bad.
Highest you got of one of the rare is 4,67% and the lowest 2,42%

There is not THAT much difference and can easily be within the margin of error.

 

[popps]

It is not THAT bad.
Highest you got of one of the rare is 4,67% and the lowest 2,42%

There is not THAT much difference and can easily be within the margin of error.

I understand that but still, I find it odd that the coincidence happens to be that the one spawning the least, out of 12 possible candidates, is the one the player is needing the most because of an asking, pending order.

And, that this "feeling" has been reported by several fishermen, mind you.........

 

[Babble]

Randomness sucks sometimes

 

[popps]

LOL

To poops, this has been noticed by other users too. It seems that once you accept an order, the rate of you fishing up the required types are somehow reduced.

Not sure if it's a bug or if the devs do it intentionally to encourage interaction between players. Haven't been following up.

Some players have adapted to this by fishing up 20 of each type before accepting an order.

Might not be the answer you are looking for, but it's a workaround until the devs checks/make changes.

Well, that would be a logical explaination that I could accept.

That is, the fishing quests system been coded so as to force players to interact with each other to trade for what they need to complete their orders.

All I am trying to find here, is understand why something odd I (and others) noticed and the logic behind it.

Personally, if this was a feature (not a bug) and was done to have players be forced into interacting with each other to trade their respective catches, I would actually favour it and not be against this choice as I find it a good thing in a multiplayer game that players have to interact with each other.

I am just trying to understand "if" this is happening for real and "why".

Is this too much to ask ?

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

I understand that but still, I find it odd that the coincidence happens to be that the one spawning the least, out of 12 possible candidates, is the one the player is needing the most because of an asking, pending order.

And, that this "feeling" has been reported by several fishermen, mind you.........

To answer your first post directly to me first, it is because of your track record. On top of that you are not looking for logic as the logic is implied. You are allowed to be surprised, but considering almost every other one of your posts...My reply to you was the most likely answer to what was going on.

To respond to this quoted section. Correct me if I am wrong but both of the other fishers in this thread said the entire order was less likely to be got, while you claim only the one you need the most of.

As someone else posted, show proof of it happening 10 times. 10 times is a decent amount to test with considering the amount of fish you will fish up, if it is a coding error it can not happen 9/10 but 10/10. Anything less than 10/10 means it is simply up to the rng and you draw bad luck.

 

[popps]

(note that I set my pots for 2-4 minutes, waiting until I have more bobs than traps to pull them in).

I am curious about your mention of "setting your pots for 2-4 minutes".....

Is that some macro possible with the Enhanced client (I play with the classic client) ?

That is, when laying down a trap is it possible to put up a timer macro that pulls it out of the water, automatically, at a set timing ?

 

[popps]

I understand that but still, I find it odd that the coincidence happens to be that the one spawning the least, out of 12 possible candidates, is the one the player is needing the most because of an asking, pending order.

And, that this "feeling" has been reported by several fishermen, mind you.........

To answer your first post directly to me first, it is because of your track record. On top of that you are not looking for logic as the logic is implied. You are allowed to be surprised, but considering almost every other one of your posts...My reply to you was the most likely answer to what was going on.

To respond to this quoted section. Correct me if I am wrong but both of the other fishers in this thread said the entire order was less likely to be got, while you claim only the one you need the most of.

As someone else posted, show proof of it happening 10 times. 10 times is a decent amount to test with considering the amount of fish you will fish up, if it is a coding error it can not happen 9/10 but 10/10. Anything less than 10/10 means it is simply up to the rng and you draw bad luck.[/QUOTE]


Well, since Basara just posted about his experience with Rock Crabs where he experienced a finding similar to mine, I guess we already have 2/10 mentioned.

Perhaps we can have more fishermen posting their respective experiences and thus reach that 10/10 ?

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Well, since Basara just posted about his experience with Rock Crabs where he experienced a finding similar to mine, I guess we already have 2/10 mentioned.

Perhaps we can have more fishermen posting their respective experiences and thus reach that 10/10 ?

Of course. I am not saying its not possibly simply trying to help you to reach the answer to your title question. Coding will always make the same mistake if it is a code error, but if its rng then there will be at least 1 outcast.

 

[Nimuaq]

Thanks for sharing the results! I havent read Basara's post but I hope this is just a coincidence because if its not Murphy, then its plain evil! I dont see a reason for such a system where the fish you need is caught the least -if its not for encouraging trading fish between fishers-. If a pattern is seen over and over again, I think Mark should post if a system of that sort is on right now.

In the light of your results, I also think having uncommon crabs or lobster for roughly 50% of the time is really not that bad. I thought the ratio would be far lower.

 

[Basara]

I am curious about your mention of "setting your pots for 2-4 minutes".....

Is that some macro possible with the Enhanced client (I play with the classic client) ?

That is, when laying down a trap is it possible to put up a timer macro that pulls it out of the water, automatically, at a set timing ?

Nah, I just lay out 5-8 traps, then hit a 6-cast fishing (with pole) macro 2-4 times, waiting for the number of *bob*s to outnumber the number of traps set out. Then, I go pull the traps, as soon as the last fishing macro I triggered ends.

Since it appears that the Fishing resources for the resource squares are different for pole and trap fishing (comparable to how mining does not deplete trees for logging, or lumberjack doesn't deplete ore), being able to do both types of fishing at the same time gets a lot more done than just sitting and watching the traps.

 

[Tanivar]

Anyone consider the fishing quest gamecode just weights the odds according to what fishing quests you have?

Anything on your quest lists only turns up if a smaller range of numbers gets hit by the RNG. Usually it could be something like a RNG result of 17-20 gets you a snowy crab. If it's on your quest lists, the number range the RNG has to hit becomes something like 17-18, halving your chance of getting a snowy crab.

The odds are definitely more than halved, but it clearly happens. I stopped doing quests and now just fish to build up a stock so that when I do start doing quests again, I don't have to put up with the change in odds and put more time into fishing.

 

[Basara]

Thanks for sharing the results! I havent read Basara's post but I hope this is just a coincidence because if its not Murphy, then its plain evil! I dont see a reason for such a system where the fish you need is caught the least -if its not for encouraging trading fish between fishers-. If a pattern is seen over and over again, I think Mark should post if a system of that sort is on right now.

In the light of your results, I also think having uncommon crabs or lobster for roughly 50% of the time is really not that bad. I thought the ratio would be far lower.

What I SUSPECT (no proof) is that someone coded what they thought would be a bonus to catch fish you have a quest for, only to accidentally put it as a penalty.

After all, one of the dev comments seems to indicate they thought crabs and lobsters were double (not half) value for rewards, which would the result of a simple accidental substitution of a "/" for an intended "*", while keying in the number/operator part of an equation with a keypad (that, or they made the assumption it was *2 instead of /2, when reformulating the quest chart, resulting in the broken PS rewards). This could be a similar issue.

Just to add another couple examples,

The Smith Large BODs distribution was broken for 6+ years from a missing parenthesis that wasn't discovered until fall 2007...

and last Year's Turkeys went from being unbardable, to being insanely easy to bard, because the creator, when adjusting the Barding Difficulty, put in 120 instead of 1200 (and since the coding of monsters works as skill setting on Test Center, that made the Turkeys 12.0 Difficulty instead of the intended 120.0 - and they were left that way).

 

[Harlequin]

What I SUSPECT (no proof) is that someone coded what they thought would be a bonus to catch fish you have a quest for, only to accidentally put it as a penalty.

After all, one of the dev comments seems to indicate they thought crabs and lobsters were double (not half) value for rewards, which would the result of a simple accidental substitution of a "/" for an intended "*", while keying in the number/operator part of an equation with a keypad (that, or they made the assumption it was *2 instead of /2, when reformulating the quest chart, resulting in the broken PS rewards). This could be a similar issue.

Just to add another couple examples,

The Smith Large BODs distribution was broken for 6+ years from a missing parenthesis that wasn't discovered until fall 2007...

and last Year's Turkeys went from being unbardable, to being insanely easy to bard, because the creator, when adjusting the Barding Difficulty, put in 120 instead of 1200 (and since the coding of monsters works as skill setting on Test Center, that made the Turkeys 12.0 Difficulty instead of the intended 120.0 - and they were left that way).

Yes, I suspect the same thing. The intention could be a -50% chance to fish up other non-required fish, but during coding, instead ended up as +50% chance. So you end up with less of the ones you need. Not hard to do.

No way for us to verify unless a dev checks and let us know.

 

[Nimuaq]

The Smith Large BODs distribution was broken for 6+ years from a missing parenthesis that wasn't discovered until fall 2007...

I'm out of words. I think that should be put on top of the bug report page.

 

[Harlequin]

Well, that would be a logical explaination that I could accept.

That is, the fishing quests system been coded so as to force players to interact with each other to trade for what they need to complete their orders.

I think I just realized 1 reason why people react badly to your posts. Free lesson on using positive language (yeah I had to google to see if there really is a term called "positive language") -

Notice that I used "to encourage interaction" instead of "to force interaction". You subconsciously changed it to "force" when referring to it.

You've got to think positive! If you start out negatively, it tends to get conveyed to what you say or write.

All I am trying to find here, is understand why something odd I (and others) noticed and the logic behind it.

Personally, if this was a feature (not a bug) and was done to have players be forced into interacting with each other to trade their respective catches, I would actually favour it and not be against this choice as I find it a good thing in a multiplayer game that players have to interact with each other.

It's a feature!

I am just trying to understand "if" this is happening for real and "why".

Is this too much to ask ?

It's definitely not too much to ask at all. I'm curious by nature and would love to find out as well.

The thing is, if that's your intention, based on what you already know, just be forthright about it.

*****
I've noticed that whenever I have an order, the chances me fishing up the fish I require seem to be reduced. I have read other posters noticing the same thing.

Is it possible that this may not be simply an RNG issue? It's really odd that the RNG consistently rewards me with less of the fish that I need. Could there be a bug?

I have not recorded my previous experiences, however, here's the results of my latest fishing order:

Type			Amount	Percentage
Crab			317	26,44%
Lobster			367	30,61%
Crusty Lobster		47	3,92%
Fred Lobster		46	3,84%
Hummer Lobster		38	3,17%
Rock Lobster		42	3,50%
Shovel-Nose Lobster	56	4,67%
Spiney Lobster		29	2,42%
Apple Crab		46	3,84%
Blue Crab		42	3,50%
Dungeoness Crab		31	2,59%
King Crab		46	3,84%
Rock Crab		48	4,00%
Snow Crab		44	3,67%

Total			1,199	100%

*****


It's not perfect, but hopefully that sounds a bit better. I have also wrapped your statistics up with the code tags. Simply quote my post to see how the tags are applied (you don't have to reply, quoting will reveal the tags).

Also, there's one other thing that I tell my guys when they email users - avoid using multiple question/exclamation marks. It's redundant and can be considered rude.


Know what I mean?


Know what I mean???


Know what I mean!?


Know what I mean!!???


/ends rambling and sticks his nose back to where it belongs

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Grrr Harlequin, way to much of a post for me to quote lol. I don't think anyone assumed his request was unreasonable, it's just that the majority of what he posts is simple rants and raves about nonsense. I mean I need to know "everything" I mean goes sort of being just curiousness but more of an obsession almost. Once I assume he is in fact simply looking to see if he has bad luck or not I gave him the best method (short of a Dev stepping in and going "oh look here forgot a semi colon"). Anyhow I know your post was not to me, but still does not feel right that it is just his negative wording but his negativity in general towards most everything he posts about, In fact I can not even think of a post where he was not be cynical or complaining. (Sorry popps don't mean to sound like I am attacking you just stating why I responded how I did and how I feel most people respond the way they do, of course anyone can correct me but I still will have the same explanation for myself.)

 

[Harlequin]

Grrr Harlequin, way to much of a post for me to quote lol. I don't think anyone assumed his request was unreasonable, it's just that the majority of what he posts is simple rants and raves about nonsense. I mean I need to know "everything" I mean goes sort of being just curiousness but more of an obsession almost. Once I assume he is in fact simply looking to see if he has bad luck or not I gave him the best method (short of a Dev stepping in and going "oh look here forgot a semi colon"). Anyhow I know your post was not to me, but still does not feel right that it is just his negative wording but his negativity in general towards most everything he posts about, In fact I can not even think of a post where he was not be cynical or complaining. (Sorry popps don't mean to sound like I am attacking you just stating why I responded how I did and how I feel most people respond the way they do, of course anyone can correct me but I still will have the same explanation for myself.)

I just used a lot of paragraphing to make it look longer than it is, bwahahaha!


Actually, believe it or not, Poops have been helping others with advice.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

I just used a lot of paragraphing to make it look longer than it is, bwahahaha!


Actually, believe it or not, Poops have been helping others with advice.

I was away for about 4 months? Maybe even longer, Baby was born 4 months ago and only recently had time to get back on. So I can believe anything, but can only speak from experience and witness. (Guess its been more than 4 months seeing as how I was MIA before the baby was born but still a period of time I had not planned on being away for. Life, as it were, happens.)

Edit: Just realized all the mistakes I made in my post prior to this one, hopefully everyone got the idea though. Might be time for bed been up for far to long.

 

[Harlequin]

I was away for about 4 months? Maybe even longer, Baby was born 4 months ago and only recently had time to get back on. So I can believe anything, but can only speak from experience and witness. (Guess its been more than 4 months seeing as how I was MIA before the baby was born but still a period of time I had not planned on being away for. Life, as it were, happens.)

Edit: Just realized all the mistakes I made in my post prior to this one, hopefully everyone got the idea though. Might be time for bed been up for far to long.

Congrats on your new bundle of joy!

Speaking of making mistakes, I didn't notice yours, but I did realize that I said "users" instead of "players", occupational hazard


As to sleep, that reminds me, you used to sleep very little even before. Good thing you had training to prep you for the baby eh?

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Congrats on your new bundle of joy!

Speaking of making mistakes, I didn't notice yours, but I did realize that I said "users" instead of "players", occupational hazard


As to sleep, that reminds me, you used to sleep very little even before. Good thing you had training to prep you for the baby eh?

Haha yes. Still do not take my own advice when it comes to sleeping. And thank you he is pretty awesome, has to get some shots today though not to much fun there.

 

[RavenWinterHawk]

The funny thing is, that I am not pissed at all....

I just gathered information from other fishermen, run my numbers and found something odd, inexplicable to me.

Yes, I know that the RNG is random, but out of 12 named crabs/lobsters that players may need how come players often lament that precisely the one they need the most because of an asking order is the one spawning the least ?

This has nothing to do with me being upset (because I am not), I trade for what I need for my orders and so I am not touched by the scarcity of spawns. Hence, I can hardly be annoyed by it.

This has only to do with trying to find a logic in this that does not liquidate the issue fastly and simply "because it is the RNG randomness".

Maybe it is, I do not know, I just find it odd that this supposed randomness out of 12 possible candidates often picks the one needed the most to make it spawn the least.

A coincidence ? Possible.......but I find it an odd coincidence, nonetheless............

Popps just fish with and save up. Its much easier to do that then grab an order.

Plus have a few runes to sellers and traders of fish.

Life is good.

 

[LordDrago]

Haha yes. Still do not take my own advice when it comes to sleeping. And thank you he is pretty awesome, has to get some shots today though not to much fun there.

After the shots, make him feel better and get him a UO account. Best to start him in early.

Congrats on the new fella

 

[Ralco]

Two things.

1. Let me see if I understand your post correctly. You think the DEVs deliberately coded fishing to make orders harder to complete. You think the DEVs are maliciously and directly hostile to the player base. You think the DEVs put in a game mechanic and then specifically coded that game mechanic to be hostile to the players attempting to enjoy it. You realize that your claims of their behavior is directly counter to them having jobs.

2. You don't understand probability. Perfect distribution would be _not_ random.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

After the shots, make him feel better and get him a UO account. Best to start him in early.

Congrats on the new fella

Forget that I sit him with me and show him, and let him work on my account instead haha.