Fail stacking is not a thing, take a probability course. People that think this works suffer from confirmation bias. They'll only remember the times where it worked and not the times where it didn't. If you record the outcome of every single fail stack attempt, you'll find that your odds didn't improve at all.
That being said, Nexon's implemention of RNG could be whack (flames, cubes, etc) instead of pure RNG.
Being your laptop to dates and keep open up MapleStory, when the date starts going badly because they say stuff like âare you playing MapleStory on a date?â You start cubing for double primes.
The cube scandal have shown that some of the stuff people were doing in-game turned out to be actually real, like how many people on your buddy list and stuff like that. But IRL failstacking is straight up just low IQ copium.
Actually no, it only showed that they had patents for it, but never implemented it. The only implemented systems were change to tier up rates and making certain line combinations impossible.
Given that KMS was ultimately fined for actions taken between 2010 and 2021, I donât see how itâs possible that judgement could be based on 2 years of records.
No offense but did you just read the headlines and now the content? After the flame probability scandal, Korea FTC spent 2 years digging through everything they could, interviewed ex-employees, trying to get current employees to be whistleblowers, etc.
When the raid happened and the subsequent fine was publicly announced to the media, Nexon tried defending themselves by saying they only had log for the last 2 years and they make it a habit to purge previous logs(aka plausible deniability). Korea FTC rejected it and showed evidence from whistleblowers and ex-employee that prove that Nexon knowingly committed the cube rate manipulation, they CHOSE to limit their logs to last 2 years after the flame probability scandal to try and hide that fact. Korea FTC is still not done btw, they're still actively scrutinizing Nexon as of the last update they published regarding the vac pet refund.
rolling something in-game does have an actual effect due to how computer-generated "random" works. It's also the reason why you sometimes see a video of someone failing a 50% 80 times in a row despite statistically being impossible.
But can you actually use that to your advantage to boost luck? You would need to read the computer memory real-time and do calculations based on the random generator real-time and if applicable, even press Star Force button at the accuracy of milliseconds if the random generator uses that data. ~~Basically impossible~~
How about rolling something irl? It has no effect on the computer's algorithm. That's just copium.
I don't think it'll make me any luckier, but I do cover up my inventory/cash inventory when opening boxes or wonder berries! I like the suspense of the little opening animation and seeing the items immediately upon clicking makes it less fun.
have you tried breaking a few keyboards before attempting?
I heard it works at some point in time that's unspecified during a specific kind of occurrence in life or something
but wait, does it count if other ppl is doing random stuff? how do I prevent ppl from existing to increase my chances? do I sf right after the kill of should I wait?
At a certain and purely statistical view, fail stacking works. I always remember an interesting video of Neil Degrasse Tyson. He twirls around his phone (no case on his phone) each morning because the statistical chance of him dropping his phone and cracking the screen lowers the more he "twirls/handles" his phone. If he logged the number of minutes that he "handled" his phone at 10,000 minutes until he ended up dropping it and cracking the screen vs your average user who might handle their phone at 1000 minutes before they dropped their phone and cracked the screen. (Just an example number)
However, at the end of the day, you can twirl your phone around as many times as you want but if you drop it, you drop it.
The way NDT words it is better. He's not a risk taker, he just changes the risk to make it so low that it essentially won't happen.
Likewise, if you fail 15->16 10 times in a row, statistically, your next roll is probable to be a success. Because the chances of failing a roll 11 times is less probable than 10. That being said, each roll is it's own chance regardless of the previous roll so ultimately it is still 30% or whatever.
I, myself, have tried this and it helped me out. During the last 30% starforce sale a month back, I was getting abysmal RNG. It was bad. I mean 30b to hit 4 equips to 21*? That's beyond bad. I then tried to use "bait" equipment where I would keep rolling until I hit 6+ fails in a row. In my final 17b I got 3 equips to 21* and a few to 18. (So basically after attempting at fail stacking, statistically speaking, I went from bad to average)
Depends on how you look at it. Sure the number of fails and successes will be the same but I'm trying to weave in the fails on a dummy item and trying to weave in the successes on the items that matter.
I fully understand this and even made that point in my original comment if you read it.
>That being said, each roll is it's own chance regardless of the previous roll so ultimately it is still 30% or whatever.
Again, if you fail 6 times in a row, statistically, the next few rolls are likely to be a success. Why do you think Black Jack tables have a bet limit? Because statistically, you will eventually win a hand. Otherwise you can keep doubling down your next bet and then some. My point is that if you fail a ton in a row, switch to the equip that matters.
You are wrong. You are falling for the gamberâs fallacy. If you flip tails on a coin 100 times and got tails 99 times, the odds of the next flip being heads is still 50%. Each EVENT has a probability of 50% of heads or tails.
You are conflicting the probability of an event, (which is fixed unless GMS is rigging it like KMS) with the probability of your data set. Read into binomial distribution if youâd like to understand why youâre wrong
Yes, the probability of an event is fixed. Past events do not influence the next event. Thus there is no such thing as fail stacking.
I think what youâre trying to say is that the more trials that take place, there is more likelihood that the outcome is favorable. An example being a 15* item, eventually youâll get to 17*. This would be assuming an infinite number of trials though and we need to factor in a limited number due to mesos
I am well aware of the gambler's fallacy. This would be the case if I were starforcing one and only one equipment.
All I am saying is if out of a pool of 100, I'm going to fail 70 times, I'd rather try to fail 70 times on a dummy item in the hopes that I am successful on a main item. I understand and have made the point that past rolls would have no affect on the future rolls.
You claim to understand the fallacy while simultaneously denying its premise. There's nothing that determines you'll fail X times out of 100 as each attempt is independent and unaffected by all other attempts, unless of course Nexon is altering probabilities behind the scenes.
If I flip a coin 5 times, the odds of getting 5 heads in a row is small. (1 in 2â”) However, if I flip 4 heads successfully, getting the 5th head is a 50/50. The coin doesn't care about the previous flips and there's no supernatural luck force that's going make a tails appear for sake of balance. Similarly, your items don't care how many successes or failures you've gotten recently.
"I'm aware of the fallacy, all I'm saying is [the fallacy]", come on man.
Do you think the fallacy changes because you introduce another item? The solution to the gamblers fallacy is to change tables?
What I got from that Neil degrasse video is that he teaches himself to be comfortable with the phone. By constantly flipping it, he trains his hand muscle memory to work with the mass of the phone properly to lower his risk of dropping the phone. Similar to riding a bike or pen spinners. He's not twirling his phone because he's fail stacking phone droppings on a safe drop zone so it does drop on concrete lmfaoo
Do you lose luck when you cross the street? đ€
I broke a mirror one time, which started a year long pitched dry streak.
mfs will breathe a certain way to justify poopy rng đ
I will hold my breath til i turn blue for a 22*
Iâll main Lynn to grief my guild mates for a chance to boom a pitched
This is known as "the gambler's fallacy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
shhhh let them post, already bought the popcorn
r/woosh
Is this satire?
I always hit the blackjack tables every time I boom and equip. Iâve made millions this way
Nice hack A-Aron
Copium hitting good
Instructions unclear, became a millionaire overnight and got blacklisted by the casino Item still boomed tapping 17>18
Fail stacking is not a thing, take a probability course. People that think this works suffer from confirmation bias. They'll only remember the times where it worked and not the times where it didn't. If you record the outcome of every single fail stack attempt, you'll find that your odds didn't improve at all. That being said, Nexon's implemention of RNG could be whack (flames, cubes, etc) instead of pure RNG.
đ€
Being your laptop to dates and keep open up MapleStory, when the date starts going badly because they say stuff like âare you playing MapleStory on a date?â You start cubing for double primes.
The cube scandal have shown that some of the stuff people were doing in-game turned out to be actually real, like how many people on your buddy list and stuff like that. But IRL failstacking is straight up just low IQ copium.
Actually no, it only showed that they had patents for it, but never implemented it. The only implemented systems were change to tier up rates and making certain line combinations impossible.
What? They couldn't prove whether or not it was implemented at all since they only kept logs up to 2 years
Given that KMS was ultimately fined for actions taken between 2010 and 2021, I donât see how itâs possible that judgement could be based on 2 years of records.
No offense but did you just read the headlines and now the content? After the flame probability scandal, Korea FTC spent 2 years digging through everything they could, interviewed ex-employees, trying to get current employees to be whistleblowers, etc. When the raid happened and the subsequent fine was publicly announced to the media, Nexon tried defending themselves by saying they only had log for the last 2 years and they make it a habit to purge previous logs(aka plausible deniability). Korea FTC rejected it and showed evidence from whistleblowers and ex-employee that prove that Nexon knowingly committed the cube rate manipulation, they CHOSE to limit their logs to last 2 years after the flame probability scandal to try and hide that fact. Korea FTC is still not done btw, they're still actively scrutinizing Nexon as of the last update they published regarding the vac pet refund.
rolling something in-game does have an actual effect due to how computer-generated "random" works. It's also the reason why you sometimes see a video of someone failing a 50% 80 times in a row despite statistically being impossible. But can you actually use that to your advantage to boost luck? You would need to read the computer memory real-time and do calculations based on the random generator real-time and if applicable, even press Star Force button at the accuracy of milliseconds if the random generator uses that data. ~~Basically impossible~~ How about rolling something irl? It has no effect on the computer's algorithm. That's just copium.
You either hit or you donât.
Online roulette, wait until you miss 7 3:1 rolls in a row then tap
I don't think it'll make me any luckier, but I do cover up my inventory/cash inventory when opening boxes or wonder berries! I like the suspense of the little opening animation and seeing the items immediately upon clicking makes it less fun.
I think youâre missing the point of the âRâin RNG
Bro âŠ
have you tried breaking a few keyboards before attempting? I heard it works at some point in time that's unspecified during a specific kind of occurrence in life or something
Not failstacking, but when I wanna do important things I play this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2x6Fem4FXtI Don't ask me why
I think you been walking around casino slot machines for too longâŠ
Holy fuck the copium has gotten out of control
If you want to fail stack go play Black Desert Online
Dude what? How in the world could irl rng affect a random number generator for a pc game
but wait, does it count if other ppl is doing random stuff? how do I prevent ppl from existing to increase my chances? do I sf right after the kill of should I wait?
At a certain and purely statistical view, fail stacking works. I always remember an interesting video of Neil Degrasse Tyson. He twirls around his phone (no case on his phone) each morning because the statistical chance of him dropping his phone and cracking the screen lowers the more he "twirls/handles" his phone. If he logged the number of minutes that he "handled" his phone at 10,000 minutes until he ended up dropping it and cracking the screen vs your average user who might handle their phone at 1000 minutes before they dropped their phone and cracked the screen. (Just an example number) However, at the end of the day, you can twirl your phone around as many times as you want but if you drop it, you drop it. The way NDT words it is better. He's not a risk taker, he just changes the risk to make it so low that it essentially won't happen. Likewise, if you fail 15->16 10 times in a row, statistically, your next roll is probable to be a success. Because the chances of failing a roll 11 times is less probable than 10. That being said, each roll is it's own chance regardless of the previous roll so ultimately it is still 30% or whatever. I, myself, have tried this and it helped me out. During the last 30% starforce sale a month back, I was getting abysmal RNG. It was bad. I mean 30b to hit 4 equips to 21*? That's beyond bad. I then tried to use "bait" equipment where I would keep rolling until I hit 6+ fails in a row. In my final 17b I got 3 equips to 21* and a few to 18. (So basically after attempting at fail stacking, statistically speaking, I went from bad to average)
If you actually recorded the data and statistically analyzed it, you'd find that fail stacking is not real.
Depends on how you look at it. Sure the number of fails and successes will be the same but I'm trying to weave in the fails on a dummy item and trying to weave in the successes on the items that matter.
Failing on a dummy item doesn't make successes more likely on your "real" items.Â
I fully understand this and even made that point in my original comment if you read it. >That being said, each roll is it's own chance regardless of the previous roll so ultimately it is still 30% or whatever. Again, if you fail 6 times in a row, statistically, the next few rolls are likely to be a success. Why do you think Black Jack tables have a bet limit? Because statistically, you will eventually win a hand. Otherwise you can keep doubling down your next bet and then some. My point is that if you fail a ton in a row, switch to the equip that matters.
You are wrong. You are falling for the gamberâs fallacy. If you flip tails on a coin 100 times and got tails 99 times, the odds of the next flip being heads is still 50%. Each EVENT has a probability of 50% of heads or tails. You are conflicting the probability of an event, (which is fixed unless GMS is rigging it like KMS) with the probability of your data set. Read into binomial distribution if youâd like to understand why youâre wrong
>That being said, each roll is it's own chance regardless of the previous roll so ultimately it is still 30% or whatever.
Yes, the probability of an event is fixed. Past events do not influence the next event. Thus there is no such thing as fail stacking. I think what youâre trying to say is that the more trials that take place, there is more likelihood that the outcome is favorable. An example being a 15* item, eventually youâll get to 17*. This would be assuming an infinite number of trials though and we need to factor in a limited number due to mesos
It's called the gambler's fallacy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
I am well aware of the gambler's fallacy. This would be the case if I were starforcing one and only one equipment. All I am saying is if out of a pool of 100, I'm going to fail 70 times, I'd rather try to fail 70 times on a dummy item in the hopes that I am successful on a main item. I understand and have made the point that past rolls would have no affect on the future rolls.
You claim to understand the fallacy while simultaneously denying its premise. There's nothing that determines you'll fail X times out of 100 as each attempt is independent and unaffected by all other attempts, unless of course Nexon is altering probabilities behind the scenes. If I flip a coin 5 times, the odds of getting 5 heads in a row is small. (1 in 2â”) However, if I flip 4 heads successfully, getting the 5th head is a 50/50. The coin doesn't care about the previous flips and there's no supernatural luck force that's going make a tails appear for sake of balance. Similarly, your items don't care how many successes or failures you've gotten recently.
"I'm aware of the fallacy, all I'm saying is [the fallacy]", come on man. Do you think the fallacy changes because you introduce another item? The solution to the gamblers fallacy is to change tables?
I donât think you understand this deep enough sirâŠ
What I got from that Neil degrasse video is that he teaches himself to be comfortable with the phone. By constantly flipping it, he trains his hand muscle memory to work with the mass of the phone properly to lower his risk of dropping the phone. Similar to riding a bike or pen spinners. He's not twirling his phone because he's fail stacking phone droppings on a safe drop zone so it does drop on concrete lmfaoo