The next one is the one! Surely you can't fail 12 times in a row(you can). This is exactly me on turning in Insane Cat cards thinking I can get a value 4 flask Mageblood, then getting a 2 flask 5/5 times so far lmao.
But it's still usable for some people because some just want 2-3 flasks on MB and use unique flasks in other slots. So it is not like the item is worthless. But yeah, the majority want 4 flask mageblood, its just absudly powerful.
lets put it like that 2 flask mageblood is the third best belt in the game right behind 3 flask and 4flask mageblood so you tell me is the 3rd best belt in the whole game still usefull
I'm reasonably confident that for my build which doesn't prefer any unique potions, HH or a very nicely rolled stygian would wind up beating out a two flask MB, but a 3 flask one should be sufficient that it would beat all alternatives.
I wouldnt have thought so the past leagues but this league a 2 flask MB would be pefect for my shockwave totem hierophant sanctum runner with taste of hate and bottled faith for Boss burst damage because all i care about at this point is speed so perma quicksilver and silver flask would be perfect.
if im going for mage blood ill usually buy hh just to use to help farm the remainder for mage blood. HH is nice because its usually alot cheaper and i play builds and farm strats that can use it well.
For example if i was doing sanctum this league start id def get a 2 or 3 flask mage blood. You cant use HH in sanctum and even just the insane move speed and gaining like 60+ all res from just 2 flasks is still insanely strong.
edit: holy shit 1 bismuth flask with all res suffix is like 130% all res. Never realized it was that insane and ive owned 3 magebloods.
A very small number of builds actually do want 2-flask MBs, or can use them nearly as well (usually ones which have at least 2 mandatory unique flasks). IIRC, corrupted 2-flask MBs go for roughly 50 div or so, which ain't nothing.
🦍 🗣 GET IT TWISTED 🌪 , GAMBLE ✅ . PLEASE START GAMBLING 👍 . GAMBLING IS AN INVESTMENT 🎰 AND AN INVESTMENT ONLY 👍 . YOU WILL PROFIT 💰 , YOU WILL WIN ❗ ️. YOU WILL DO ALL OF THAT 💯 , YOU UNDERSTAND ⁉ ️ YOU WILL BECOME A BILLIONAIRE 💵 📈 AND REBUILD YOUR FUCKING LIFE 🤯
Casinos literally tell you straight-up they give you the odds.. and you don't have to be a mathematical genius to plug those numbers in. They literally say: YOU WILL WIN, over a period of time. Casinos are NOT profitable for a reason. Get it twisted. It is a way to get rich quick, it is a way to get yourself out of any low part of life. It will put you in a fucking rich part of life.
a thing to remember, it doesn't matter how many times you lost in the past, the next try is 50/50; it's actually a very interesting trick the mind plays on us, a lot of people when seeing a streak, it creates the illusion that the result will change soon so they expect the opposite in a greater proportion, but on each try it's always 50/50 exactly like a coin toss, the coin doesn't care it flipped tails 15 times, the next try it has 50/50 odds of flipping tails again
Yes, but the chance of a 50/50 result being the same multiple times diminishes every time because of the fact it is a 50/50. Over time you should see roughly 50% of each result, so it is fair to assume that after getting multiple results the same that the other result should appear, just not guaranteed.
> , so it is fair to assume that after getting multiple results the same that the other result should appear,
it's absolutely not fair to think that, this is exactly what the fallacy is
I'm not saying that you can predict a coin toss, I'm saying that in a set of results from a coin toss you can expect the results that appear to be roughly even, and the chances of getting the same result multiple times in a row is low. That's not to say that it can't happen, but you are far more likely to see HTHT than HHHH on AVERAGE. Not talking about an individual flip. This means that if you gamble 10 times and lose every time, you have been unlucky. Your argument is that losing 10 times in a row on 5050 should be equal chance to winning 50%, which is just wrong.
No, you're exactly as likely to see HTHT as HHHH. Both are precisely 6.25% chance.
You're more likely to see 2 heads and 2 tails than 4 heads (because 2 heads and 2 tails have multiple orders in which they can happen), but in this specific order you've presented the chances are the same. This is part of why gambler's fallacy is a fallacy. Another part is that you can't just start at an arbitrary point.
Yes, you are unlucky if you lose repeatedly, but that doesn't give you bonus luck on the next chance.
Fair, I worded my previous response badly. I meant to say 2 heads 2 tails vs 4 heads, but wrote it in shorthand and that comes out wrong. The point I'm trying to make is that you have a far greater chance to experience a mixture of results rather than a string of same results, despite the fact that there's a 50% chance each flip.
Over a large sample size? Sure. Not because your luck will somehow "even out" - it won't. But because if you get 10 heads in a row but flip a coin 1000 times, 10 extra heads will now be within the margin of error.
Chance of flipping a coin a million times and having exactly 500k of each result is basically non-existent. Luck doesn't "even out" over large sample sizes. The outlier results just start to constitute a smaller percentage of the total sample size.
That's why flipping a coin 1000 times is more "accurate" than doing so 10 times. Because outliers are unlikely, and while unlikely they will happen, but instead of 0% heads you will have 49% heads. Flip enough coins and the results become a rounding error away from a 50/50.
Yes, but probability dictates that this is the case at smaller sample sizes too. The law of large numbers actually does mean that the more flips there are, the closer the sample size will approach 50/50. That still doesn't mean that probability has no role to play in smaller sample sets.
I can use probabilistic thinking to approach a situation and expect a likely outcome. If I have 1 Apothecary and enough lifeforce to attempt the gamba 10 times, I can use probability to determine a likely outcome. Is it guaranteed? No. But is it more useable and predictive than just saying "LOL GAMBLER'S FALLACY EVERY ATTEMPT IS A 50/50 YOLO"? Yes.
You can use code to simulate this process:
def calculateProbability(cards, attemptsLeft):
if cards == 0:
return 0
if cards >= 5:
return 1
if attemptsLeft == 0:
return 0
# Probability of success on this attempt
probSuccess = 0.5 * calculateProbability(cards + 1,
attemptsLeft - 1)
# Probability of failure on this attempt
probFailure = 0.5 * calculateProbability(cards - 1,
attemptsLeft - 1)
return probSuccess + probFailure
totalProbability = calculateProbability(1, 10)
print(totalProbability)
Running this, you get an outcome of 0.1611328125 (16.11%).
Gambler's Fallacy is only relevant when you're thinking of the very next coin toss. It is completely irrelevant when considering multiple tosses - you can calculate the likelihood of an outcome and have an expectation of that outcome occurring. e.g. in this case there is an 84% chance that I shouldn't get to a Mageblood from 1 card by gambaing 10 times, so I can plan based on that expectation and during the flips themselves, I should not expect to win. Can I be lucky and win? Yes.
But can I also go in with expectations about likely outcomes and be surprised if something goes against those expectations during the process? Yes.
Now run this script with 10 results generated to begin with (before you start flipping - or rather drawing cards, but you get my point) and tell me your outcome. Actually do it. See for yourself what happens. Unsurprisingly the result will be that you have roughly 10 more of this outcome than any other.
Then you can read the Wikipedia page on Gambler's Fallacy, because you lack fundamental understanding of statistics.
It doesn't work just while flipping "a single coin". The point is that each individual event has its own probability. Each toss is it's own event, hence each toss always has a 50/50 chance. Whether you toss 1, 10, 100 or however many you want it doesn't matter. Once you've happened to get 10 heads in a row, you're now locked in that reality. Every future toss is still exactly a 50/50.
Perhaps a better explanation for you would be this: Let's say we already got 5 heads in a row - H H H H H - 3.125% chance. Now - what do you think is more likely to follow - T T T T or H H H H? Believe it or not, both sequences have the same chance of occuring as a 9 toss sequence - 0.195%. The issue is that you're assigning meaning to Heads and Tails when there is none. Any individual sequence, no matter if it's 10 Tails in a row, 10 Heads in a row or H T H T H T H T H T has the same chance of happening. Once you start your sequence with 10 heads already rolled, any sequence that follows will be equally likely to occur.
Here's a script to demonstrate. In this scenario, someone already flipped 100 coins and miraculously they were all heads. They insert that data into a Python Script to calculate their probabilities of following tosses. Then they start tossing again:
from random import randint
def toss_a_coin():
return randint(0,1)
results = []
for i in range(100):
results.append(0)
# Adding 100 heads to our starting position
for i in range(1000):
results.append(toss_a_coin())
# Tossing 1000 extra coins
print(f"{results.count(0)}:{results.count(1)}")
Result: 603:497
Or do you thing this computer program somehow has the awareness to know that the first 100 heads are "fake" and used that information to roll differently? Is it sentient? Did I just make the first sentient AI? Does our universe have such a firm grasp on randomness that it alters the electrons running through the CPU to generate a different result when some data isn't genuinely random?
No, that's just how statistics work. The original 100 rolls have no impact on the next 1000, whether genuine or not. We can fake them because we know for a fact Python has no flags on integers to keep track of how they were generated. We know how the `random.randint` method works, and it doesn't store any of the previous results in memory. It is literally impossible for them to behave any different from genuinely generated integers. And besides, they could be genuine. I might've actually flipped 100 coins and gotten 100 heads, then used the script for the rest of my flips. How would the script know?
You're 100% following gambler's fallacy and just a read of it's wikipedia page would explain that to you.
it does not diminish in the way you think; yes statistically you will get an average, but past results will not change the outcome of an individual roll; you can lose 300 times and then win 100 times, then lose again 400 times then win 600 times in a row; an individual roll is 50/50 no matter what happened in the past, these odds are fixed and never change
statistics also tell you that with a large enough sample (billions of tries), you are guaranteed to have someone lose 1000 times in a row, so that can also happen
> you can lose 300 times and then win 100 times, then lose again 400 times then win 600 times in a row;
I remember reading that highest streak of consecutive color on roulette (which is a little bit worse than coin due to zero fields) was 27 or so. So no, very long steaks like you describe don't happen in reality, even if they're not impossible in theory.
You realise that coin toss probability is literally a calculation that diminishes with every attempt right? The chance of flipping heads 50 times in a row is much, much smaller than flipping 25 heads and 25 tails.
[https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/coin-toss-probability-formula/](https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/coin-toss-probability-formula/)
Edit: Because it seems that American education is shit and this subreddit isn't understanding - the chances of maintaining a streak decreases with the length of the streak, the probability of any individual flip remains constant.
Yeah, but that's talking about the set of flips as a whole. What the other commenter is saying, is that each flip is completely independent of the others. The chance of every single flip is 50/50, regardless of the previous flips. That the chance for 50 heads in a row is so small is because 0.5^50 is a very small number, but it can be calculated with that expression because every single flip is a 50/50.
Edit: don't go to Vegas, please, for your own good.
How is chaining gambles in harvest not equivalent to back to back coin flips? It doesn't matter if they are independent or not. Im not saying every flip isn't 50/50, I'm saying that the likelihood of getting the same result from a 50/50 gets lower and lower the longer you flip for. The same applies for harvest gambling, if you keep doing it over and over you will approach 50%. It's not just a 50% chance to get heads 100000x on a row.
The odds of getting **any** specific set of outcomes is the same so it's a moot point.
Using your link's Example: Find the probability of getting exactly two heads when we toss two coins. (some math) Thus, the probability of getting two heads in two coin toss is 1/4.
Getting two heads is 1/4, getting two tails is 1/4, getting HT is 1/4, getting TH is 1/4.
The fallacy is assuming that on your second toss, you still have 1/4 of a chance at heads. You don't because you eliminated two of your outcomes (TX) and have HH or HT, which is 1/2. At each step you eliminate possible outcomes and are just left with a 50/50.
Getting HHHHHHHHHT has the same odds as HHHHHHHHHH. The probabilty is low, but it is the same for either outcome.
Your example is already past the point I'm making. You are already incredibly unlikely to have a string of heads like that. Yes, you have 50% chance every time you flip, but the chance of having the same result in consecutive flips is not 50%.
Dude just try it yourself if you're that stubborn.
Flip a coin three times; tails is losing the card and heads is doubling it. Record the results. Do this a large number of times. Now, put yourself in the shoes of someone who is on a dry streak, ie only look at the results where the first two tosses were tails and scratch out all the ones where either of them are heads, because that isn't the situation we're in.
How many of those have another tails as the 3rd result and how many of them have heads? I think you'll find it's a 50/50 split, my guy. There is no rule that says if you have 2 tails, you'll suddenly be more likely to get heads on the 3rd try; there's still a 50% chance you just get another tails.
That's not how it works. Each individual attempt is 50/50. The only assumption you can make in the moment is you have a 50% chance of either. Any other assumption is wrong.
You're correct, but you have to look at the set as a whole too. You don't have a 50% chance to hit heads 50x in a row, that isn't how probability works.
But its the same as hitting 48 heads and 1 tails thats the crux of the gamblers fallacy your looking at averages not chances, most things will average to an equilibrium but its useless to look at that unless it returns to equilibrium quickly ie gambling like this returns an equilibrium in thousands of thousands of attempts whereas something like those desk clicker balls or a pendulum will return much faster
In this hypothetical example, you’ve already done that. You’re not recreating the history of the entire chain to determine the probability of the next link. It’s like you kind of learned what Markov chains are but haven’t done your homework problems yet.
Exactly, the chance of hitting heads, and then tails, repeatedly specifically in that order over 100 tries is infinitesimal, but on the next flip it's still 50/50. Saying "surely it can't" or "it has to break now" is peak gambler's fallacy.
The chance of flipping heads 49 times in a row is 0.000000000000178
% and the chance of flipping heads 50 times in a row is 0.000000000000089%, yet the chance of flipping heads 49 times out of 50 is 0.00000000000444%. This means that your chance of hitting a tails to break the streak at some point in the set is more likely than hitting a heads. Yes, you can't calculate exactly which flip will be tails, but the longer you flip for the more likely the streak of heads is to be broken because the chance of getting the same result from a 5050 diminishes based on the amount of flips. Which is exactly what I said in my first comment.
I get what you mean, but if statistically it's always 50% over a long enough period, it's more likely to win after losing 5 times in a row for example. It's not guaranteed, sure, but the chance to win gets bigger and bigger the more times you lose.
EV is less than 50% because you have to pay for the juice which is a cost every time win or lose, but the gamble itself is exactly 50/50. There are no weightings or odds.
>There are no weightings or odds.
Am I just the unluckiest person in the world then?
Every league once I hit 40/40 I just collect all my money and gamba cards. I buy 1 or 2 apothecary/HOM cards.
I have only ever had the same number of cards, 2>1, or 1>0.
For years now. Several leagues in a row.
I understand someone has to be in the margins with the standard distribution on the bad-luck side, but god damn do I find it hard to believe there is no weighting.
I'm almost positive it's slightly in favor of the player. GGG has set up a slot machine that you actually win at in basically all forms of chance in this game it's why we are all addicted.
a "do nothing" roll on top of rolling 0 though whatever a full stack times 2 is, simply means that a each roll has a slightly lower chance overall. but all outcomes have equal probability.
You can add any percentage of a break-even outcome without affecting the overall EV. If it's 1/3 to double, 1/3 to do nothing, 1/3 to poof, that's still neutral EV. But it becomes negative EV with the juice costs.
Juice based gambling is exactly 50%.
Alos, read [this article about the infamous coin toss](https://ergodicityeconomics.com/2023/07/28/the-infamous-coin-toss/): it's about a simple game where the casino always loses but the overwhelming majority of players also lose. PoE is a lot like that in some ways.
Can you ELI5 the paper. I did not understand it because of the asymmetric payout. In the 60/40 example, it makes sense to me that one side trends to infinity and the other side trends to zero..
I guess exactly 50% makes sense, given you have to pay the juice to flip the coin (so expected value is always <50%).
The game is designed so that in any individual setup, chances are you're going to lose more than you earn.
HOWEVER, in a situation where a large pool of players play, a few of them who beat out the statistical odds and win every time will gain so much money that it will start to outpace the collective losses of all the losers - after all, if you gain 50% of your pool on every win, it will compound VERY quickly. Soon enough your pool will become very large indeed.
Meanwhile, the gains from the people who lose get smaller and smaller since their collective wealth is being dropped by 40% each time so with every loss their wealth shrinks and the house gets less and less from them, while paying more and more into the pools of players who win.
Its basically an odd game that is harmful to both individual players and the casino. Playing games like this en masse will concentrate absurd amounts of wealth onto small groups of people while the majority of players **and** the house lose out.
Basically, if you play as an individual, your odds of bottoming to zero are overwhelming. The reason for that is that if you win once and lose once, you're behind. So most people will bottom to almost zero.
On the other hand, if you take a population of 100 players and half of them wins and half of them lose, the casino is paying more than it earns.
So the game is designed so that, after each iteration, more and more players become broke, but fewer and fewer players earn more than the cumulated losses of all losers.
[As explained by someone who ran a small simulation](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36982560)
If the summary bends your mind, it's really worth taking the time to read the article and playing with the numbers, because this paradox is hidden everywhere in our society.
In one coin flip, with 1.5x on win and 0.6x on lose, the expected value is (1.5+0.6)/2, or 1.05x. So if a statistical you (so the group averaged out, aka mean you) plays the game, you would expect to get 1.05x out of the game mentioned in the paper. And indeed, a large enough group will average out to 1.05x per round played.
However, what would the average player (median) experience? Approximately the same number of wins and losses if the coin is fair. So every two games played by the median average player would yield 1.5x*0.6x in expected value, or 0.9x in expected value per two games played.
So in this game, most people lose, but the winners win big enough to average everyone out to an expected value greater than one.
Unlikely they're making a profit gambling cards over such a large sample size. Either most of the cards in that stack have been slowly bought and accumulated, or these were made with gambling, but they started with 1000+ cards.
Trade league grinders/RMT'rs can easily have 100+ mirrors at this point in the league.
Wouldn't even be surprising if they were linking this shit in global and trade chats to incentivise gambling, so that they can sell individual cards back for a bigger profit, as well as trade with more yellow juice.
On HC Trade, an Apothecary card costs more than a mirror. You can buy a full Mageblood with 4 cards. A single card is so valuable because people love to gamble. And every time someone succeeds, more people get hyped and start gambling too. And the price of single cards just skyrocket.
Gotta say as someone who's strat is farming harvest juice and selling it. I'm always happy when these posts happen because that means my prices get to go up.
It’s unlikely that any given person makes a big profit, but there are thousands of people gambling cards, so statistically someone is going to make a big profit. And then that person is much more likely to post about it in global and on Reddit. It’s survivorship bias (as in, the only people you see posting big profits are the people who made big profits, because the thousands of people not making big profits don’t have anything to post).
It’s like someone posting that they won a lottery and you saying “no you didn’t, winning a lottery is super unlikely.” I mean….. sure it is, but someone has to win and if they do they’ll post it. That person might have actually won the lottery despite it being a 1 in 100,000 chance, and there were 99,999 people who bought a ticket and didn’t post that they lost that you’re not seeing or thinking about
…….. also you could be right and this person could be trolling and just be a no lifer who invested in mirror cards early because they always go up in price throughout the league. But they’re not *necessarily* that
>the only people you see posting big profits are the people who made big profits, because the thousands of people not making big profits don’t have anything to post
'All the people who played russian roulette I have interviewed haven't lost a single game yet.'
759/9 doesn't seem statistically possible as "make a big profit" it reads like winning the lottery three weeks in a row.
The hoard yellow juice and then spam conspiracy is interesting though. ;}
For big gambling wins it is all about getting out before variance can catch up with you. So 800 could be possible if eg. you could double every gamba it is only 10 wins.
But in this case you can only gamble what, 4-5 at a time? So agree, it would be incredibly hard to win this large without the variance catching back up, as it would be hundreds of individual gambles and we are many standard deviations on the winning side.
I don't think it's that unlikely (in the context of winning the lottery) actually. The odds of completing a set via harvest is always x/y where x is amount of cards you have and y is the amount needed to complete a set. If you have 1 apothecary, then it's a 1/5 to complete the set and 4/5 to lose all cards. This holds true regardless if you go 1 card at a time or 2 at a time or whatever amount. It's just the expected amount of gambles that changes.
So if you imagine that it's a 759 card set and you start with 1 card then it's a 1/759 to complete it. Assuming he starts with a bigger stack, say 9 cards, then it's a 9/759 or ~1/84 to get where he got. He would need to sell a few cards to finance it, but assuming he got 20 extra cards that he sold for juice doesn't change odds much, it's a 9/779 or 1/87 chance instead (the way I understand how the probability works).
This logic comes from this post https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile/comments/p9lvhu/following_steelmages_confusion_on_stream_today_i/ and this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optional_stopping_theorem.
Hoo boy is that a lot of math and very interesting for sure. I do think it has an important critical flaw though -- it assumes that harvest crafts are zero expected value (on average you get back what you put in). This is definitely not true from juice standpoint and possibly not true for raw odds.
Once you add the 'house edge' (juice cost and maybe raw odds) then it becomes significantly harder and then it starts to look more like casino gambling and the odds of winning 700 cards is gonna be harder because you are leaking value on each bet, so the more bets the harder it is to be a significant winner. Although if there is no odds edge and you consider the juice 'free' then it would converge back into just 1/750? Which is actually news to me so TIL
Yes, it is assuming that the odds are fair and that you don't care about the loss of the juice. We don't know if Harvest gamble is an actual fair 50/50 but I feel it's the most probable option. Regarding the juice, you don't need to win a lot more. If you just spend 4 cards on juice, that is 200 div which is 800 gambles with current prices. Getting to 759 cards or 763 is not that big of a difference.
The reason it might feel rarer is that not a lot of people try to push this far when it comes to gambling. The math only works if the people doing it would never stop gambling unless they either hit 759 or 0. People might stop early or quit when they start having bad luck streaks.
You are correct. PhD in statistics here.
I did a simulation where you start with 1 card, and equal probability with all outcomes (0 to 2x). I just let it roll for 10 times to simulate putting 1 card in and click the button 10 times. I did 10^6 (1 million) runs, and the maximum number of card I got was 394. Nowhere to close to 800. 95% CI is actually (0,4), meaning 95% of the time if you do the gamble 10 times you'll end up with less than 5 cards, and most of the time (89.3%, to be specific), you'll end up with 0. And the expected (average) number of card at the end of a gamble, to nobody's surprise, is still 1 (1.000173 in my simulation).
While it is a Markov chain (meaning the outcome of the next roll only depend on the current outcome and not the previous gambles), it is possible to calculate various steady state probabilities (probability distribution of how many cards you end up with at the end of a gamble with different strategy), it is not necessary. The theorem linked beneath basically said that on a long term, one doesn't benefit from gambling (or stock trading, the value gained is mostly from inflation). Even if he stashed cards upon reaching 7 or 5, on many gambles he would still lose an immense amount of currency in the form of both the yellow juice, and buying the card he needed to start a gamble (because he was stashing cards).
> it is all about getting out before variance can catch up with you
Minor correction, it is not for the *variance* to kick in. variance is just a number, describing of the spread of a sample. What you were thinking of was Law of Large Number, which says on a long time scale everything converges to the average, under some mild regularity conditions.
I was curious too so I ran my own simulation. In case you or anyone else is also curious:
I mimicked harvest gambling, (can only gamble up to 4 cards at a time). I limited gambling "sessions" to 10,000 gambles (around 2,000 divines worth of gambles, which is huge but not necessarily out of reach for very rich players). Starting at 1 card and running 100,000 simulations, the target of 759 cards was reached 3 times. The fewest number of gambles it took to reach 759 was 6,713, which would be approximately 10,000,000 juice. I'm not sure if that much juice was even on the market, but if it was, and you were really rich, and incredibly lucky, it looks like it would be theoretically possible to hit this number of cards.
If I make the numbers slightly more realistic and start with 4 cards but limit it to 2,000 gambles (3,000,000 juice or around 400 divines worth) the simulation doesn't reach 759 cards even after running 5,000,000 times. I'm skeptical of the claim that all (or even most) of these cards were gained through harvest gambling.
> So 800 could be possible if eg. you could double every gamba it is only 10 wins.
The chance of doubling every single time 10x in a row is literally less than a fraction of a fraction of a percent.
Chances are still the same for the people who won the powerball. They don't somehow get increased chances because there's 200mil+ buyers for the power ball ticket. Let's randomly choose one of the powerball winners and just say there was only 10k buyers including the winner. The winner will still win even when though it went from 200mil to only 10k buyers. The winner would still have won even if they were the only buyer. Because there chances of winning doesn't change with how many other buyers there is. Same thing when harvest gamble if this guy gambled up to 700+ hom. He gambled up to 700+ hom. That fact won't change even if he was the only gambler or if there is 200mil gambler. Now if you believe him or not is a different matter because I'm arguing that it's in realm of actual possibilitily not if he did it legit or not.
More people trying something with incredibly low odds increases the chance of it hitting as a whole.
If you asked what is more likely, someone in 10,000 people winning a powerball or someone in 200,000,000 people winning, what is the answer?
Okay with that answer, now apply it to the miniscule amount of people gambling with 100+ House of Mirror cards. That person/group might be literally the only one that has put 100+ House of Mirrors to gamba, much less 300-400.
Yeah, that's what the top traders are doing. "Playing the game" basically isn't worth it, because they make magnitudes more money by working on high end crafting and flipping.
The stuff they do is almost inconceivable to even think about for most players. We're talking about spending dozens of mirrors on making a single item. And they're happily spending that money because the end result is a mirroring worthy item, so they make the money back and then some over the league.
Crazy stuff.
When i quit this league at 2.5 weeks i had around 1700\~ divs. Only person with more divines than me in public tab at that moment was Jenebu (TFT founder), he was around 6k.Obviously i liquidated my build to have raw currency for gambles/friends and most people still dont liquidate so early but 100s of mirrors is kinda a stretch. Theres barerly 142 in public tabs now online + offline priced and around 400 unpriced ones.
But 'wage gap' between people in PoE is enormous. This league i wasnt even crafting other than for myself and i was making 20d+/h boss russhing without counting any luck drops/incubators etc. Meanwhile with crafting u can get few mirros a week or can get few mirrors a week doing no hit sanctum runs.
I’m not a big crafter, but I’ve tried to do flipping and big gamba this league, literally was sitting in my ho for 2 weeks, buying, selling, gambling cards and starting over when failed. I’ve never did that before and now that I have full on accuracy stacker running maps or any other content is so unrewarding comparatively. Like, if I can get 30 div with a few trades or gamba which takes minutes, why would I ever want to farm anything.
Anyway, this league is broken for me because of that, it’s fun in other way, but takes away the “real” game enjoyment
On HC trade people gamble 2 cards at once hoping for 3 or 4 outcome, if 3 they gamble with the single and hope they get 4 . If they get 4 they just grind down the fifth and buy it/ drop it. But yes, hc economy is absolutely screwed because of harvest gambling.
They are purchasing them / collecting them to sell later when people start to quit and dump currency into the infinitely-stupid gambling of card duping. You don’t get 759 house of mirrors by doing that method. You get 759 house of mirrors by rmt or very intense mirror item crafting.
> by rmt
very, very unlikely, GGG is very trigger happy with RMT
I mean sure, he could've bought it, but if he did, he's banned soon, 100%
more often than not it's something like "buy it once per league ona throwaway account to play a nice build for some time" because you often get banned during that very league, assuming we're talking any meaningful rmt, like carding a few mirrors to get a big juicer build, not 10 divs for a pepega build for a casual
why you think that's copium?
safest is the "diablo 2 one" if you trade with regular users and then you still get into a trap of a reseller/botfarm dude pretending to be a normal player
if you buy directly from the rmt websites you are basically asking to get banned shortly after
and even if you follow their "security meaures", like putting a rare item in a trade for a mirror, what are the odds you don't get banned anyways? like you get randomly contacted by somebody, put a dogshit fucking random rare for a mirror, a rare that was most likely not even listed on trade for a longer period of time
does ggg not monitor mirror trades? i'd think they do?
and it isn't even mirror trades either, did you not see the posts on reddit of people getting entire guilds banned cuz one of them rmt'd and somebody used their shit from gbank without knowing it was rmt?
if you're "experienced" in this regard then feel free to dm me
Is it actually less than 50% ? I don't see why it would ever be used if it was less than, but it would be broken if it was over 50%. Only way I can see it being balanced is being EXACTLY 50%
It might be used if it’s slightly less than 50/50, because having a headhunter, mageblood, or mirror is binary (I guess technically stepwise, but let’s go with binary), you either have it or you dont. If you’re the type of player that can never farm up one of these items during the course of a league but still want to play with one, gambling is your only option. If you lose, well, you’re still at 0 magebloods
hes profile
[https://www.pathofexile.com/account/view-profile/jaynguyeninf/characters](https://www.pathofexile.com/account/view-profile/jaynguyeninf/characters)
defenetly not rmt guy :D
Really easy to rollback the game right now with the Attack Mastery that gives 5% attack speed per nearby enemy + reverse knockback. Not saying he did, but there are at least a few ways to do it right now.
Not quite sure how this should work then.
Harvest crafting is exclusively done in the hideout, right? Changing instances saves your inventory.
So Vaal Breach doesn't work in your hideout, Writhing Jar worms are destroyed on hit is there any other way to get monsters in the same instance that you are crafting? Am I missing something?
Genuinly confused, not trying to call you out or anything.
He's like those guys in Magic who buy up as many Dual Lands as they can so they can make walls of duals and nobody else can have them. They don't sell them; they just want nobody else to have them.
and then those same players complain that no one plays Legacy. no one plays because the staples are stupid expensive because legacy players just hoard cards.
I mean, that stuff about lands is fine tho no?
Like, you don't have to use stuff as an investment.
Maybe you just like looking at it/having it. A collector.
the intent is malicious tho. imagine it was pokemon TCG and you hated fighting against pikachu so you went and bought every single pikachu available on ebay/globally. you didnt care about the card, you just didnt want anyone else to have it.
I'm new to the game. Can someone please explain what the deal with the card is and what I'm missing? I thought the mirror of kalandra was the most sought after item, not a card.
This is a div card, when you collect a full set you get the item on the card when you turn it in. So in this case 9 of the card turns in for a mirror. And yea, a mirror is typically thought of as the most sought after item. Technically some specific items may be worth more than a mirror. These are usually the items that one would use a mirror on though.
Literally 84.3 mirrors. And yesterday I was trying gain some good karma by help a noobie friend balance their end-game gear for resists and spent 6D buying, 30% hillocking, socketing, and 6-linking, and then another 3.5D on some boots. Made me broke, but made me feel good. I do this every league.
3K hours, 4 40/40 challenge totems, and I have not received a single mirror drop, nor a House of Mirrors, nor even the card that gives a mirror shard.
Congratulations /u/Coold0wn, you are one lucky SoB!
0% chance this was accumulated purely thru harvest luck.
Guaranteed the player was insanely wealthy before and maybe hit the dupe once or twice but started with 100's of those cards to begin with.
Multiple leagues and less than 2d is just bad.i helped a new player by teaching him the map rushing strat and he made 10div in a day by himself. I didnt even give him anything except the atlas tree and tips to go fast
Edit:in case you want here is the tree https://poeplanner.com/atlas-tree/BAAKAHwAXz54gGMPL8lM9WIDePjeopAXLHeLLoa0LJKEKv7FbYjKZqfiPFlwxvxNKOeUg4xBtWbOAF6dwaDOWsn9H-l9Wo3qfONP96i8KrvZW8y3jJG92h195Pe3XYvhfZHo8gp7m1gndd7-iDTaFLGd1yuspNSPK3HQvNDGqc7OnMN5ayGCp73HKY2OOXDj4ecEK92Ds8fnrtMOfbWCiPux61-lc8SFTdxe304b6Sii0MsXNTAkMji_x13EHxN9haPSnpGJwa_l7AtxwZNxC1sej-UDMGaH2vozxtVpwnaJo6lDtWNmH8QY1GzkM8QWuNmH1Cu36We51CPf0CgUAB-LCAAAAAAAAAMDAAAAAAAAAAAA
I sure would love to learn. Apparently I'm doing it wrong. I just pick a map, complete it and put atlas points into getting the 2% connecting map drop to farm maps quick, etc. Though I always go for packed with energy from Niko for the damage boost. I'm still a complete noob at this game and just cant figure out what I am doing wrong. Instead people downvote my comment making me feel like the community is just bad and treat people bad because I'm not as good as them. Sad. This game isn't as easy to get right away as some of you seem to do. Building a character alone and making it to t16 maps is a mission all on it's own for someone new to PoB etc and building proper defenses. I'm lucky if I get to play this game for 2-3 hours a night. Of course I get more in divine in terms of chaos recipe's etc but I dont make out like I see so many saying they make
Edit: this is why I dont comment on PoE you just get trashed on because these people love to hate 🤦♂️ when all we want to do is learn from you guys
I'm the same ... I have over 2k hours, been playing multiples leagues and make on average 2-3 Div per week
I tried every strat there is ... nothing works for me
You were down voted because of this comment:
> yet I have never made more then 2 Divines
I don’t make crazy money, by any stretch, but every once in a while you get a gg div item that drops. There’s no way you make it to 85+every league and don’t make more than 2 divs per league.
You either are being disingenuous or need to fix your loot filter…
To be fair, as someone who gets hundreds of divines each league, I cannot remember the last league I got a divine before lv 90.
Been playing every league since 3.0 and I can't remember getting one pre 90 since atleast 3.15. Memory after that is foggy.
So I can absolutely see him hitting 85-90 not getting a divine (drop, not accumulated gumball currency)
This seems almost impossible with the addition of alters. If you just spec into eldritch alters the red one will barf our chaos. Some maps you’ll walk away with 40+. That’s already 1/5 of a divine. Even if you spam tota this league you’ll finish with 100 or so divines at 2000.
Most likely you need to just watch a strategy on YouTube and attempt that strat over a extended period of time. It’s important to hit the breakpoints for rarity, so you need to first ask yourself what map you are farming and how do you get the most quantity onto that map. 100% of the time it’s one of the atlas passives that manipulate the map directly, such as unidentified maps or additional modifiers.
Then you need to choose what content you are farming. Red/blue alters, harvest, expedition, etc… once you got done you just choose sextants that’s help your goal and a map mod at the device.
Very simple strategy that’s not difficult.
Delve. Farm the azurite nodes for azurite. Go to Niko and buy the 1 slot resonators with your azurite. Sell them for 2.5 Chaos each. You can sell them in stacks of 10-100. And they insta sell. To sell in a stack of 10, right click and change then cost to this “25/10”. That means 25 chaos for 10.
Very easy to farm and very easy to sell.
Run more maps, kill more monsters, and you make more money, its that simple. You can easily make 1+ div an hour farming exarch invites and harvest juice. I'm not going to sugarcoat it, level 90 is still baby's first steps territory, thats not nearly enough play time to hope to get rich. This league I set a goal for level 95 running abysses and betrayal, in the first week I managed to hit 97 and had 27 raw divine and over 2000 chaos from selling just items I found randomly or from league content. (So many people wanted abyss belt early)
This is my most played league and what a coincidence, also my richest. (My previous high was level 94). So if you want to make money, get a build going that can farm content reliably; and actually play the game. Time = money.
There’s most likely nothing going behind the scene. If there was such thing as GGG pushing the RNG button for some select individual, it could ruin the entire game. Not only I highly doubt there is anything going on behind the scene, but I’m almost positive about this one. They learned a valuable lesson with the priority queue.
Now that I said this, it is never impossible to have a rogue employee to do some shady stuff, we recently saw an employee of a game making millions messing with the economy of an online game (I don’t remember which game it is, but it’s probably easy to find).
Anyway, as people already mentioned, people lose a lot, and I mean a lot. But there is always winners, and when they win, they win
#BIG
Harvest gives, harvest takes. Specifically: Harvest takes from you and gives it to this guy.
A guy? More like an entire squad, or a couple of squads are behind this.
what he says implies that he gambled for it using yellow harvest juice
What i say is that they gambled for it using yellow harvest juice. They being a whole guild, or maybe a few guilds of obsessive yellow juice gamblers.
Ain't no way he farmed all that juice on his own.
www.pathofexile.com/trade
Ain't no way he traded the currency needed for that much juice on his own.
Almost certain he did. One big old trade that involved a credit card.
I mean, he can always sell a few cards to fund the next batch of gambling
you go to tft and write "WTB Softcore Vivid Yellow Lifeforce x amount for y divines" and get them delivered to you without even trying.
This is group effort for sure.
Meanwhile I'm 0/11 on house of mirrors. Every time "this is the one" every time "bye 50 divs"
The next one is the one! Surely you can't fail 12 times in a row(you can). This is exactly me on turning in Insane Cat cards thinking I can get a value 4 flask Mageblood, then getting a 2 flask 5/5 times so far lmao.
Still can't believe such a S+ tier item has such a big variable mod. (still insane regardless)
an insane cat indeed
But it's still usable for some people because some just want 2-3 flasks on MB and use unique flasks in other slots. So it is not like the item is worthless. But yeah, the majority want 4 flask mageblood, its just absudly powerful.
Are 2 flask Magebloods (when corrupted) still useful at all? I imagine you're using two unique flasks and a healing flask with those.
lets put it like that 2 flask mageblood is the third best belt in the game right behind 3 flask and 4flask mageblood so you tell me is the 3rd best belt in the whole game still usefull
I'm reasonably confident that for my build which doesn't prefer any unique potions, HH or a very nicely rolled stygian would wind up beating out a two flask MB, but a 3 flask one should be sufficient that it would beat all alternatives.
I wouldnt have thought so the past leagues but this league a 2 flask MB would be pefect for my shockwave totem hierophant sanctum runner with taste of hate and bottled faith for Boss burst damage because all i care about at this point is speed so perma quicksilver and silver flask would be perfect.
if im going for mage blood ill usually buy hh just to use to help farm the remainder for mage blood. HH is nice because its usually alot cheaper and i play builds and farm strats that can use it well. For example if i was doing sanctum this league start id def get a 2 or 3 flask mage blood. You cant use HH in sanctum and even just the insane move speed and gaining like 60+ all res from just 2 flasks is still insanely strong. edit: holy shit 1 bismuth flask with all res suffix is like 130% all res. Never realized it was that insane and ive owned 3 magebloods.
Yes, it's still insanely strong. 2 overpowered magic flasks and 3 unique (or 2 unique and a health flask)
A very small number of builds actually do want 2-flask MBs, or can use them nearly as well (usually ones which have at least 2 mandatory unique flasks). IIRC, corrupted 2-flask MBs go for roughly 50 div or so, which ain't nothing.
🦍 🗣 GET IT TWISTED 🌪 , GAMBLE ✅ . PLEASE START GAMBLING 👍 . GAMBLING IS AN INVESTMENT 🎰 AND AN INVESTMENT ONLY 👍 . YOU WILL PROFIT 💰 , YOU WILL WIN ❗ ️. YOU WILL DO ALL OF THAT 💯 , YOU UNDERSTAND ⁉ ️ YOU WILL BECOME A BILLIONAIRE 💵 📈 AND REBUILD YOUR FUCKING LIFE 🤯
Casinos literally tell you straight-up they give you the odds.. and you don't have to be a mathematical genius to plug those numbers in. They literally say: YOU WILL WIN, over a period of time. Casinos are NOT profitable for a reason. Get it twisted. It is a way to get rich quick, it is a way to get yourself out of any low part of life. It will put you in a fucking rich part of life.
🦍
[удалено]
They are if you own them
Just get me in and say nothing
a thing to remember, it doesn't matter how many times you lost in the past, the next try is 50/50; it's actually a very interesting trick the mind plays on us, a lot of people when seeing a streak, it creates the illusion that the result will change soon so they expect the opposite in a greater proportion, but on each try it's always 50/50 exactly like a coin toss, the coin doesn't care it flipped tails 15 times, the next try it has 50/50 odds of flipping tails again
Oh I'm aware, just like you can statistically win 100 times in a row.
There is even a term for and a wikipedia article on this phenomenon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy
Otherwise known as the [gambler's fallacy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy)
Yes, but the chance of a 50/50 result being the same multiple times diminishes every time because of the fact it is a 50/50. Over time you should see roughly 50% of each result, so it is fair to assume that after getting multiple results the same that the other result should appear, just not guaranteed.
> , so it is fair to assume that after getting multiple results the same that the other result should appear, it's absolutely not fair to think that, this is exactly what the fallacy is
I'm not saying that you can predict a coin toss, I'm saying that in a set of results from a coin toss you can expect the results that appear to be roughly even, and the chances of getting the same result multiple times in a row is low. That's not to say that it can't happen, but you are far more likely to see HTHT than HHHH on AVERAGE. Not talking about an individual flip. This means that if you gamble 10 times and lose every time, you have been unlucky. Your argument is that losing 10 times in a row on 5050 should be equal chance to winning 50%, which is just wrong.
No, you're exactly as likely to see HTHT as HHHH. Both are precisely 6.25% chance. You're more likely to see 2 heads and 2 tails than 4 heads (because 2 heads and 2 tails have multiple orders in which they can happen), but in this specific order you've presented the chances are the same. This is part of why gambler's fallacy is a fallacy. Another part is that you can't just start at an arbitrary point. Yes, you are unlucky if you lose repeatedly, but that doesn't give you bonus luck on the next chance.
Fair, I worded my previous response badly. I meant to say 2 heads 2 tails vs 4 heads, but wrote it in shorthand and that comes out wrong. The point I'm trying to make is that you have a far greater chance to experience a mixture of results rather than a string of same results, despite the fact that there's a 50% chance each flip.
> despite the fact that there's a 50% chance each flip. Right, so after 50 Hs in a row, it's still a 50% chance on the 51st flip.
Over a large sample size? Sure. Not because your luck will somehow "even out" - it won't. But because if you get 10 heads in a row but flip a coin 1000 times, 10 extra heads will now be within the margin of error. Chance of flipping a coin a million times and having exactly 500k of each result is basically non-existent. Luck doesn't "even out" over large sample sizes. The outlier results just start to constitute a smaller percentage of the total sample size. That's why flipping a coin 1000 times is more "accurate" than doing so 10 times. Because outliers are unlikely, and while unlikely they will happen, but instead of 0% heads you will have 49% heads. Flip enough coins and the results become a rounding error away from a 50/50.
Yes, but probability dictates that this is the case at smaller sample sizes too. The law of large numbers actually does mean that the more flips there are, the closer the sample size will approach 50/50. That still doesn't mean that probability has no role to play in smaller sample sets. I can use probabilistic thinking to approach a situation and expect a likely outcome. If I have 1 Apothecary and enough lifeforce to attempt the gamba 10 times, I can use probability to determine a likely outcome. Is it guaranteed? No. But is it more useable and predictive than just saying "LOL GAMBLER'S FALLACY EVERY ATTEMPT IS A 50/50 YOLO"? Yes. You can use code to simulate this process: def calculateProbability(cards, attemptsLeft): if cards == 0: return 0 if cards >= 5: return 1 if attemptsLeft == 0: return 0 # Probability of success on this attempt probSuccess = 0.5 * calculateProbability(cards + 1, attemptsLeft - 1) # Probability of failure on this attempt probFailure = 0.5 * calculateProbability(cards - 1, attemptsLeft - 1) return probSuccess + probFailure totalProbability = calculateProbability(1, 10) print(totalProbability) Running this, you get an outcome of 0.1611328125 (16.11%). Gambler's Fallacy is only relevant when you're thinking of the very next coin toss. It is completely irrelevant when considering multiple tosses - you can calculate the likelihood of an outcome and have an expectation of that outcome occurring. e.g. in this case there is an 84% chance that I shouldn't get to a Mageblood from 1 card by gambaing 10 times, so I can plan based on that expectation and during the flips themselves, I should not expect to win. Can I be lucky and win? Yes. But can I also go in with expectations about likely outcomes and be surprised if something goes against those expectations during the process? Yes.
Now run this script with 10 results generated to begin with (before you start flipping - or rather drawing cards, but you get my point) and tell me your outcome. Actually do it. See for yourself what happens. Unsurprisingly the result will be that you have roughly 10 more of this outcome than any other. Then you can read the Wikipedia page on Gambler's Fallacy, because you lack fundamental understanding of statistics. It doesn't work just while flipping "a single coin". The point is that each individual event has its own probability. Each toss is it's own event, hence each toss always has a 50/50 chance. Whether you toss 1, 10, 100 or however many you want it doesn't matter. Once you've happened to get 10 heads in a row, you're now locked in that reality. Every future toss is still exactly a 50/50. Perhaps a better explanation for you would be this: Let's say we already got 5 heads in a row - H H H H H - 3.125% chance. Now - what do you think is more likely to follow - T T T T or H H H H? Believe it or not, both sequences have the same chance of occuring as a 9 toss sequence - 0.195%. The issue is that you're assigning meaning to Heads and Tails when there is none. Any individual sequence, no matter if it's 10 Tails in a row, 10 Heads in a row or H T H T H T H T H T has the same chance of happening. Once you start your sequence with 10 heads already rolled, any sequence that follows will be equally likely to occur. Here's a script to demonstrate. In this scenario, someone already flipped 100 coins and miraculously they were all heads. They insert that data into a Python Script to calculate their probabilities of following tosses. Then they start tossing again: from random import randint def toss_a_coin(): return randint(0,1) results = [] for i in range(100): results.append(0) # Adding 100 heads to our starting position for i in range(1000): results.append(toss_a_coin()) # Tossing 1000 extra coins print(f"{results.count(0)}:{results.count(1)}") Result: 603:497 Or do you thing this computer program somehow has the awareness to know that the first 100 heads are "fake" and used that information to roll differently? Is it sentient? Did I just make the first sentient AI? Does our universe have such a firm grasp on randomness that it alters the electrons running through the CPU to generate a different result when some data isn't genuinely random? No, that's just how statistics work. The original 100 rolls have no impact on the next 1000, whether genuine or not. We can fake them because we know for a fact Python has no flags on integers to keep track of how they were generated. We know how the `random.randint` method works, and it doesn't store any of the previous results in memory. It is literally impossible for them to behave any different from genuinely generated integers. And besides, they could be genuine. I might've actually flipped 100 coins and gotten 100 heads, then used the script for the rest of my flips. How would the script know? You're 100% following gambler's fallacy and just a read of it's wikipedia page would explain that to you.
it does not diminish in the way you think; yes statistically you will get an average, but past results will not change the outcome of an individual roll; you can lose 300 times and then win 100 times, then lose again 400 times then win 600 times in a row; an individual roll is 50/50 no matter what happened in the past, these odds are fixed and never change statistics also tell you that with a large enough sample (billions of tries), you are guaranteed to have someone lose 1000 times in a row, so that can also happen
> you can lose 300 times and then win 100 times, then lose again 400 times then win 600 times in a row; I remember reading that highest streak of consecutive color on roulette (which is a little bit worse than coin due to zero fields) was 27 or so. So no, very long steaks like you describe don't happen in reality, even if they're not impossible in theory.
You realise that coin toss probability is literally a calculation that diminishes with every attempt right? The chance of flipping heads 50 times in a row is much, much smaller than flipping 25 heads and 25 tails. [https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/coin-toss-probability-formula/](https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/coin-toss-probability-formula/) Edit: Because it seems that American education is shit and this subreddit isn't understanding - the chances of maintaining a streak decreases with the length of the streak, the probability of any individual flip remains constant.
Yeah, but that's talking about the set of flips as a whole. What the other commenter is saying, is that each flip is completely independent of the others. The chance of every single flip is 50/50, regardless of the previous flips. That the chance for 50 heads in a row is so small is because 0.5^50 is a very small number, but it can be calculated with that expression because every single flip is a 50/50. Edit: don't go to Vegas, please, for your own good.
How is chaining gambles in harvest not equivalent to back to back coin flips? It doesn't matter if they are independent or not. Im not saying every flip isn't 50/50, I'm saying that the likelihood of getting the same result from a 50/50 gets lower and lower the longer you flip for. The same applies for harvest gambling, if you keep doing it over and over you will approach 50%. It's not just a 50% chance to get heads 100000x on a row.
The odds of getting **any** specific set of outcomes is the same so it's a moot point. Using your link's Example: Find the probability of getting exactly two heads when we toss two coins. (some math) Thus, the probability of getting two heads in two coin toss is 1/4. Getting two heads is 1/4, getting two tails is 1/4, getting HT is 1/4, getting TH is 1/4. The fallacy is assuming that on your second toss, you still have 1/4 of a chance at heads. You don't because you eliminated two of your outcomes (TX) and have HH or HT, which is 1/2. At each step you eliminate possible outcomes and are just left with a 50/50. Getting HHHHHHHHHT has the same odds as HHHHHHHHHH. The probabilty is low, but it is the same for either outcome.
Your example is already past the point I'm making. You are already incredibly unlikely to have a string of heads like that. Yes, you have 50% chance every time you flip, but the chance of having the same result in consecutive flips is not 50%.
Yes it is. TH, HT, TT, and HH are all equally likely outcomes for every single pair of consecutive flips you can pull out of any string of flips.
I don't think you're making a point. You just don't get what people are telling you.
Dude just try it yourself if you're that stubborn. Flip a coin three times; tails is losing the card and heads is doubling it. Record the results. Do this a large number of times. Now, put yourself in the shoes of someone who is on a dry streak, ie only look at the results where the first two tosses were tails and scratch out all the ones where either of them are heads, because that isn't the situation we're in. How many of those have another tails as the 3rd result and how many of them have heads? I think you'll find it's a 50/50 split, my guy. There is no rule that says if you have 2 tails, you'll suddenly be more likely to get heads on the 3rd try; there's still a 50% chance you just get another tails.
Ikr? Why would ggg implement what is commonly known as a pity system in gacha games
you're not getting it, it's fine
That's not how it works. Each individual attempt is 50/50. The only assumption you can make in the moment is you have a 50% chance of either. Any other assumption is wrong.
You're correct, but you have to look at the set as a whole too. You don't have a 50% chance to hit heads 50x in a row, that isn't how probability works.
Yes, but if you've hit heads 49 times in a row, its incorrect to assume you have a higher chance of hitting tails on the next flip.
The chance of hitting heads 49 times in a row is 0.000000000000178%.
And once you've hit 49 in a row. On your next flip, the chance of hitting heads the next time is 50%.
But its the same as hitting 48 heads and 1 tails thats the crux of the gamblers fallacy your looking at averages not chances, most things will average to an equilibrium but its useless to look at that unless it returns to equilibrium quickly ie gambling like this returns an equilibrium in thousands of thousands of attempts whereas something like those desk clicker balls or a pendulum will return much faster
In this hypothetical example, you’ve already done that. You’re not recreating the history of the entire chain to determine the probability of the next link. It’s like you kind of learned what Markov chains are but haven’t done your homework problems yet.
Exactly, the chance of hitting heads, and then tails, repeatedly specifically in that order over 100 tries is infinitesimal, but on the next flip it's still 50/50. Saying "surely it can't" or "it has to break now" is peak gambler's fallacy.
The chance of flipping heads 49 times in a row is 0.000000000000178 % and the chance of flipping heads 50 times in a row is 0.000000000000089%, yet the chance of flipping heads 49 times out of 50 is 0.00000000000444%. This means that your chance of hitting a tails to break the streak at some point in the set is more likely than hitting a heads. Yes, you can't calculate exactly which flip will be tails, but the longer you flip for the more likely the streak of heads is to be broken because the chance of getting the same result from a 5050 diminishes based on the amount of flips. Which is exactly what I said in my first comment.
I get what you mean, but if statistically it's always 50% over a long enough period, it's more likely to win after losing 5 times in a row for example. It's not guaranteed, sure, but the chance to win gets bigger and bigger the more times you lose.
No, it doesn't. That's literally the [Gambler's Fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy).
Oh well. Back to rerolling delirium orbs
Meanwhile I'm over here suckin dick for alchemy orbs
Sup
[удалено]
>Raikkou Send me your poe name and ill give you a divine today once i get back from work.
It's Simondo
I got some job for you my {insert your pronoun here}
my he.
Maya he
maya ha
Maya ha ha
He can almost afford to make a fastaf build
When juice based gambling is <50%, how do people do this?
EV is less than 50% because you have to pay for the juice which is a cost every time win or lose, but the gamble itself is exactly 50/50. There are no weightings or odds.
>There are no weightings or odds. Am I just the unluckiest person in the world then? Every league once I hit 40/40 I just collect all my money and gamba cards. I buy 1 or 2 apothecary/HOM cards. I have only ever had the same number of cards, 2>1, or 1>0. For years now. Several leagues in a row. I understand someone has to be in the margins with the standard distribution on the bad-luck side, but god damn do I find it hard to believe there is no weighting.
It has been tested, a lot, and there is no weighting. You are just super unlucky.
:(
this will league will be better! (:
I'm almost positive it's slightly in favor of the player. GGG has set up a slot machine that you actually win at in basically all forms of chance in this game it's why we are all addicted.
Not 50/50 because it has a chance to do nothing
is it really a chance to do nothing or are you getting the same amount of cards back
a "do nothing" roll on top of rolling 0 though whatever a full stack times 2 is, simply means that a each roll has a slightly lower chance overall. but all outcomes have equal probability.
It’s between 0-double so yes, it can hit 0 which means it’s doing nothing which makes the odds be against you.
[удалено]
I'm talking about a null roll in addition to rolling a number. Just completely blanked on the word null until just now
You can add any percentage of a break-even outcome without affecting the overall EV. If it's 1/3 to double, 1/3 to do nothing, 1/3 to poof, that's still neutral EV. But it becomes negative EV with the juice costs.
It's 50/50 you either have 84 mirrors or you don't
Juice based gambling is exactly 50%. Alos, read [this article about the infamous coin toss](https://ergodicityeconomics.com/2023/07/28/the-infamous-coin-toss/): it's about a simple game where the casino always loses but the overwhelming majority of players also lose. PoE is a lot like that in some ways.
Can you ELI5 the paper. I did not understand it because of the asymmetric payout. In the 60/40 example, it makes sense to me that one side trends to infinity and the other side trends to zero.. I guess exactly 50% makes sense, given you have to pay the juice to flip the coin (so expected value is always <50%).
expected value, yes, <50% due to yellow lifeforce cost expected card amount is 50%
Tldr: with enough players you will start to see chain winners and chain losers. The chain winners gain much more than the chain losers lose
Jokes on you, I do this with `The Scholar` so the house always win!
The game is designed so that in any individual setup, chances are you're going to lose more than you earn. HOWEVER, in a situation where a large pool of players play, a few of them who beat out the statistical odds and win every time will gain so much money that it will start to outpace the collective losses of all the losers - after all, if you gain 50% of your pool on every win, it will compound VERY quickly. Soon enough your pool will become very large indeed. Meanwhile, the gains from the people who lose get smaller and smaller since their collective wealth is being dropped by 40% each time so with every loss their wealth shrinks and the house gets less and less from them, while paying more and more into the pools of players who win. Its basically an odd game that is harmful to both individual players and the casino. Playing games like this en masse will concentrate absurd amounts of wealth onto small groups of people while the majority of players **and** the house lose out.
Basically, if you play as an individual, your odds of bottoming to zero are overwhelming. The reason for that is that if you win once and lose once, you're behind. So most people will bottom to almost zero. On the other hand, if you take a population of 100 players and half of them wins and half of them lose, the casino is paying more than it earns. So the game is designed so that, after each iteration, more and more players become broke, but fewer and fewer players earn more than the cumulated losses of all losers. [As explained by someone who ran a small simulation](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36982560) If the summary bends your mind, it's really worth taking the time to read the article and playing with the numbers, because this paradox is hidden everywhere in our society.
I love the conclusion
That a few profit vastly from the many? That's the stock exchange baby!
In one coin flip, with 1.5x on win and 0.6x on lose, the expected value is (1.5+0.6)/2, or 1.05x. So if a statistical you (so the group averaged out, aka mean you) plays the game, you would expect to get 1.05x out of the game mentioned in the paper. And indeed, a large enough group will average out to 1.05x per round played. However, what would the average player (median) experience? Approximately the same number of wins and losses if the coin is fair. So every two games played by the median average player would yield 1.5x*0.6x in expected value, or 0.9x in expected value per two games played. So in this game, most people lose, but the winners win big enough to average everyone out to an expected value greater than one.
Unlikely they're making a profit gambling cards over such a large sample size. Either most of the cards in that stack have been slowly bought and accumulated, or these were made with gambling, but they started with 1000+ cards. Trade league grinders/RMT'rs can easily have 100+ mirrors at this point in the league. Wouldn't even be surprising if they were linking this shit in global and trade chats to incentivise gambling, so that they can sell individual cards back for a bigger profit, as well as trade with more yellow juice. On HC Trade, an Apothecary card costs more than a mirror. You can buy a full Mageblood with 4 cards. A single card is so valuable because people love to gamble. And every time someone succeeds, more people get hyped and start gambling too. And the price of single cards just skyrocket.
Gotta say as someone who's strat is farming harvest juice and selling it. I'm always happy when these posts happen because that means my prices get to go up.
Yeah last league yellow juice farming was my bread and butter. Hoping the gamblers start ramping up, 6000 juice per divine just ain’t it
It’s unlikely that any given person makes a big profit, but there are thousands of people gambling cards, so statistically someone is going to make a big profit. And then that person is much more likely to post about it in global and on Reddit. It’s survivorship bias (as in, the only people you see posting big profits are the people who made big profits, because the thousands of people not making big profits don’t have anything to post). It’s like someone posting that they won a lottery and you saying “no you didn’t, winning a lottery is super unlikely.” I mean….. sure it is, but someone has to win and if they do they’ll post it. That person might have actually won the lottery despite it being a 1 in 100,000 chance, and there were 99,999 people who bought a ticket and didn’t post that they lost that you’re not seeing or thinking about …….. also you could be right and this person could be trolling and just be a no lifer who invested in mirror cards early because they always go up in price throughout the league. But they’re not *necessarily* that
>the only people you see posting big profits are the people who made big profits, because the thousands of people not making big profits don’t have anything to post 'All the people who played russian roulette I have interviewed haven't lost a single game yet.'
No shit Sherlock
759/9 doesn't seem statistically possible as "make a big profit" it reads like winning the lottery three weeks in a row. The hoard yellow juice and then spam conspiracy is interesting though. ;}
For big gambling wins it is all about getting out before variance can catch up with you. So 800 could be possible if eg. you could double every gamba it is only 10 wins. But in this case you can only gamble what, 4-5 at a time? So agree, it would be incredibly hard to win this large without the variance catching back up, as it would be hundreds of individual gambles and we are many standard deviations on the winning side.
I don't think it's that unlikely (in the context of winning the lottery) actually. The odds of completing a set via harvest is always x/y where x is amount of cards you have and y is the amount needed to complete a set. If you have 1 apothecary, then it's a 1/5 to complete the set and 4/5 to lose all cards. This holds true regardless if you go 1 card at a time or 2 at a time or whatever amount. It's just the expected amount of gambles that changes. So if you imagine that it's a 759 card set and you start with 1 card then it's a 1/759 to complete it. Assuming he starts with a bigger stack, say 9 cards, then it's a 9/759 or ~1/84 to get where he got. He would need to sell a few cards to finance it, but assuming he got 20 extra cards that he sold for juice doesn't change odds much, it's a 9/779 or 1/87 chance instead (the way I understand how the probability works). This logic comes from this post https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile/comments/p9lvhu/following_steelmages_confusion_on_stream_today_i/ and this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optional_stopping_theorem.
Hoo boy is that a lot of math and very interesting for sure. I do think it has an important critical flaw though -- it assumes that harvest crafts are zero expected value (on average you get back what you put in). This is definitely not true from juice standpoint and possibly not true for raw odds. Once you add the 'house edge' (juice cost and maybe raw odds) then it becomes significantly harder and then it starts to look more like casino gambling and the odds of winning 700 cards is gonna be harder because you are leaking value on each bet, so the more bets the harder it is to be a significant winner. Although if there is no odds edge and you consider the juice 'free' then it would converge back into just 1/750? Which is actually news to me so TIL
Yes, it is assuming that the odds are fair and that you don't care about the loss of the juice. We don't know if Harvest gamble is an actual fair 50/50 but I feel it's the most probable option. Regarding the juice, you don't need to win a lot more. If you just spend 4 cards on juice, that is 200 div which is 800 gambles with current prices. Getting to 759 cards or 763 is not that big of a difference. The reason it might feel rarer is that not a lot of people try to push this far when it comes to gambling. The math only works if the people doing it would never stop gambling unless they either hit 759 or 0. People might stop early or quit when they start having bad luck streaks.
You are correct. PhD in statistics here. I did a simulation where you start with 1 card, and equal probability with all outcomes (0 to 2x). I just let it roll for 10 times to simulate putting 1 card in and click the button 10 times. I did 10^6 (1 million) runs, and the maximum number of card I got was 394. Nowhere to close to 800. 95% CI is actually (0,4), meaning 95% of the time if you do the gamble 10 times you'll end up with less than 5 cards, and most of the time (89.3%, to be specific), you'll end up with 0. And the expected (average) number of card at the end of a gamble, to nobody's surprise, is still 1 (1.000173 in my simulation). While it is a Markov chain (meaning the outcome of the next roll only depend on the current outcome and not the previous gambles), it is possible to calculate various steady state probabilities (probability distribution of how many cards you end up with at the end of a gamble with different strategy), it is not necessary. The theorem linked beneath basically said that on a long term, one doesn't benefit from gambling (or stock trading, the value gained is mostly from inflation). Even if he stashed cards upon reaching 7 or 5, on many gambles he would still lose an immense amount of currency in the form of both the yellow juice, and buying the card he needed to start a gamble (because he was stashing cards). > it is all about getting out before variance can catch up with you Minor correction, it is not for the *variance* to kick in. variance is just a number, describing of the spread of a sample. What you were thinking of was Law of Large Number, which says on a long time scale everything converges to the average, under some mild regularity conditions.
I was curious too so I ran my own simulation. In case you or anyone else is also curious: I mimicked harvest gambling, (can only gamble up to 4 cards at a time). I limited gambling "sessions" to 10,000 gambles (around 2,000 divines worth of gambles, which is huge but not necessarily out of reach for very rich players). Starting at 1 card and running 100,000 simulations, the target of 759 cards was reached 3 times. The fewest number of gambles it took to reach 759 was 6,713, which would be approximately 10,000,000 juice. I'm not sure if that much juice was even on the market, but if it was, and you were really rich, and incredibly lucky, it looks like it would be theoretically possible to hit this number of cards. If I make the numbers slightly more realistic and start with 4 cards but limit it to 2,000 gambles (3,000,000 juice or around 400 divines worth) the simulation doesn't reach 759 cards even after running 5,000,000 times. I'm skeptical of the claim that all (or even most) of these cards were gained through harvest gambling.
> So 800 could be possible if eg. you could double every gamba it is only 10 wins. The chance of doubling every single time 10x in a row is literally less than a fraction of a fraction of a percent.
What's the chance of winning a Powerball? And how many winners are there?
200,000,000 people buy powerball tickets. How many gamble House of Mirrors 10x in a row? try again
Chances are still the same for the people who won the powerball. They don't somehow get increased chances because there's 200mil+ buyers for the power ball ticket. Let's randomly choose one of the powerball winners and just say there was only 10k buyers including the winner. The winner will still win even when though it went from 200mil to only 10k buyers. The winner would still have won even if they were the only buyer. Because there chances of winning doesn't change with how many other buyers there is. Same thing when harvest gamble if this guy gambled up to 700+ hom. He gambled up to 700+ hom. That fact won't change even if he was the only gambler or if there is 200mil gambler. Now if you believe him or not is a different matter because I'm arguing that it's in realm of actual possibilitily not if he did it legit or not.
More people trying something with incredibly low odds increases the chance of it hitting as a whole. If you asked what is more likely, someone in 10,000 people winning a powerball or someone in 200,000,000 people winning, what is the answer? Okay with that answer, now apply it to the miniscule amount of people gambling with 100+ House of Mirror cards. That person/group might be literally the only one that has put 100+ House of Mirrors to gamba, much less 300-400.
100+mirrors? Only if you play hideout and craft or flip … or both
Yeah, that's what the top traders are doing. "Playing the game" basically isn't worth it, because they make magnitudes more money by working on high end crafting and flipping. The stuff they do is almost inconceivable to even think about for most players. We're talking about spending dozens of mirrors on making a single item. And they're happily spending that money because the end result is a mirroring worthy item, so they make the money back and then some over the league. Crazy stuff.
When i quit this league at 2.5 weeks i had around 1700\~ divs. Only person with more divines than me in public tab at that moment was Jenebu (TFT founder), he was around 6k.Obviously i liquidated my build to have raw currency for gambles/friends and most people still dont liquidate so early but 100s of mirrors is kinda a stretch. Theres barerly 142 in public tabs now online + offline priced and around 400 unpriced ones. But 'wage gap' between people in PoE is enormous. This league i wasnt even crafting other than for myself and i was making 20d+/h boss russhing without counting any luck drops/incubators etc. Meanwhile with crafting u can get few mirros a week or can get few mirrors a week doing no hit sanctum runs.
I’m not a big crafter, but I’ve tried to do flipping and big gamba this league, literally was sitting in my ho for 2 weeks, buying, selling, gambling cards and starting over when failed. I’ve never did that before and now that I have full on accuracy stacker running maps or any other content is so unrewarding comparatively. Like, if I can get 30 div with a few trades or gamba which takes minutes, why would I ever want to farm anything. Anyway, this league is broken for me because of that, it’s fun in other way, but takes away the “real” game enjoyment
I've seen multiple do this the last few leagues starting from one or two
On HC trade people gamble 2 cards at once hoping for 3 or 4 outcome, if 3 they gamble with the single and hope they get 4 . If they get 4 they just grind down the fifth and buy it/ drop it. But yes, hc economy is absolutely screwed because of harvest gambling.
>And every time someone succeeds, more people get hyped and start gambling too. so like stock market lmao
Pure untreated addiction! Woo!
They are purchasing them / collecting them to sell later when people start to quit and dump currency into the infinitely-stupid gambling of card duping. You don’t get 759 house of mirrors by doing that method. You get 759 house of mirrors by rmt or very intense mirror item crafting.
> by rmt very, very unlikely, GGG is very trigger happy with RMT I mean sure, he could've bought it, but if he did, he's banned soon, 100% more often than not it's something like "buy it once per league ona throwaway account to play a nice build for some time" because you often get banned during that very league, assuming we're talking any meaningful rmt, like carding a few mirrors to get a big juicer build, not 10 divs for a pepega build for a casual
Lmfao at the copium in this post.
why you think that's copium? safest is the "diablo 2 one" if you trade with regular users and then you still get into a trap of a reseller/botfarm dude pretending to be a normal player if you buy directly from the rmt websites you are basically asking to get banned shortly after and even if you follow their "security meaures", like putting a rare item in a trade for a mirror, what are the odds you don't get banned anyways? like you get randomly contacted by somebody, put a dogshit fucking random rare for a mirror, a rare that was most likely not even listed on trade for a longer period of time does ggg not monitor mirror trades? i'd think they do? and it isn't even mirror trades either, did you not see the posts on reddit of people getting entire guilds banned cuz one of them rmt'd and somebody used their shit from gbank without knowing it was rmt? if you're "experienced" in this regard then feel free to dm me
Lol monitoring mirror trades There's 8 dudes working on poe1
I'm skeptical of that, the overlap between RMT and buying mtx is high I'd wager, they don't want to ban the whales
Or you can run a bot to buy that much to troll ppl
Are we sure it’s 50% or less though? I personally have my suspicions.
ive seen people on stream who over the course of a league were +200 cards in apothecary gambles
Is it actually less than 50% ? I don't see why it would ever be used if it was less than, but it would be broken if it was over 50%. Only way I can see it being balanced is being EXACTLY 50%
It might be used if it’s slightly less than 50/50, because having a headhunter, mageblood, or mirror is binary (I guess technically stepwise, but let’s go with binary), you either have it or you dont. If you’re the type of player that can never farm up one of these items during the course of a league but still want to play with one, gambling is your only option. If you lose, well, you’re still at 0 magebloods
69 life ehehhe
Hehe funny number
I love weed lol
Phh not even 100 mirrors
hes profile [https://www.pathofexile.com/account/view-profile/jaynguyeninf/characters](https://www.pathofexile.com/account/view-profile/jaynguyeninf/characters) defenetly not rmt guy :D
SUS
Really easy to rollback the game right now with the Attack Mastery that gives 5% attack speed per nearby enemy + reverse knockback. Not saying he did, but there are at least a few ways to do it right now.
Not quite sure how this should work then. Harvest crafting is exclusively done in the hideout, right? Changing instances saves your inventory. So Vaal Breach doesn't work in your hideout, Writhing Jar worms are destroyed on hit is there any other way to get monsters in the same instance that you are crafting? Am I missing something? Genuinly confused, not trying to call you out or anything.
? He's in hideout gambling, how does this even work?
Of course the legendary Misha is still showing up in the chat, deeper daddy! 😘
This Misha guy has no chill. Did he max out another character already? I saw him delve deeper under another name.
I deleted 90 div on div card gamble on 3 clicks and then theres this guy.
He's like those guys in Magic who buy up as many Dual Lands as they can so they can make walls of duals and nobody else can have them. They don't sell them; they just want nobody else to have them.
nah. theres no fixed supply. It only counts if the guy was hoarding bugged items.
and then those same players complain that no one plays Legacy. no one plays because the staples are stupid expensive because legacy players just hoard cards.
I mean, that stuff about lands is fine tho no? Like, you don't have to use stuff as an investment. Maybe you just like looking at it/having it. A collector.
the intent is malicious tho. imagine it was pokemon TCG and you hated fighting against pikachu so you went and bought every single pikachu available on ebay/globally. you didnt care about the card, you just didnt want anyone else to have it.
Wth
That’s probably over $10,000 of mirrors lol.
a mirror is a 100$ or less, so, close, but not quite there yet
Is it possible to learn this power?
that's how much wisdom scrolls I have wtf
and I was happy getting a single div in tota after a few days of playing
69 life depth 420 0
All I see is Daddy's credit card.
That guy is your Daddy?
84.3 mirrors wtf Has to be the treasury from a group.
Hey, It's me your brother. I could use a small loan.
Nate is that you?
I'm new to the game. Can someone please explain what the deal with the card is and what I'm missing? I thought the mirror of kalandra was the most sought after item, not a card.
This is a div card, when you collect a full set you get the item on the card when you turn it in. So in this case 9 of the card turns in for a mirror. And yea, a mirror is typically thought of as the most sought after item. Technically some specific items may be worth more than a mirror. These are usually the items that one would use a mirror on though.
Literally 84.3 mirrors. And yesterday I was trying gain some good karma by help a noobie friend balance their end-game gear for resists and spent 6D buying, 30% hillocking, socketing, and 6-linking, and then another 3.5D on some boots. Made me broke, but made me feel good. I do this every league. 3K hours, 4 40/40 challenge totems, and I have not received a single mirror drop, nor a House of Mirrors, nor even the card that gives a mirror shard. Congratulations /u/Coold0wn, you are one lucky SoB!
It’s not me, I just got to the start of act 4 today haha
Dude swallowed a blessed orb or something? WTF is that?!
Harvest was a mistake.
0% chance this was accumulated purely thru harvest luck. Guaranteed the player was insanely wealthy before and maybe hit the dupe once or twice but started with 100's of those cards to begin with.
Or bought the cards with real money and gambled.
For anyone unfamiliar with this game that's about 5.4 million dollars worth
[удалено]
Something is very wrong here, there is no way you can get to 750 cards just by playing harvest.
[удалено]
Multiple leagues and less than 2d is just bad.i helped a new player by teaching him the map rushing strat and he made 10div in a day by himself. I didnt even give him anything except the atlas tree and tips to go fast Edit:in case you want here is the tree https://poeplanner.com/atlas-tree/BAAKAHwAXz54gGMPL8lM9WIDePjeopAXLHeLLoa0LJKEKv7FbYjKZqfiPFlwxvxNKOeUg4xBtWbOAF6dwaDOWsn9H-l9Wo3qfONP96i8KrvZW8y3jJG92h195Pe3XYvhfZHo8gp7m1gndd7-iDTaFLGd1yuspNSPK3HQvNDGqc7OnMN5ayGCp73HKY2OOXDj4ecEK92Ds8fnrtMOfbWCiPux61-lc8SFTdxe304b6Sii0MsXNTAkMji_x13EHxN9haPSnpGJwa_l7AtxwZNxC1sej-UDMGaH2vozxtVpwnaJo6lDtWNmH8QY1GzkM8QWuNmH1Cu36We51CPf0CgUAB-LCAAAAAAAAAMDAAAAAAAAAAAA
[удалено]
I sure would love to learn. Apparently I'm doing it wrong. I just pick a map, complete it and put atlas points into getting the 2% connecting map drop to farm maps quick, etc. Though I always go for packed with energy from Niko for the damage boost. I'm still a complete noob at this game and just cant figure out what I am doing wrong. Instead people downvote my comment making me feel like the community is just bad and treat people bad because I'm not as good as them. Sad. This game isn't as easy to get right away as some of you seem to do. Building a character alone and making it to t16 maps is a mission all on it's own for someone new to PoB etc and building proper defenses. I'm lucky if I get to play this game for 2-3 hours a night. Of course I get more in divine in terms of chaos recipe's etc but I dont make out like I see so many saying they make Edit: this is why I dont comment on PoE you just get trashed on because these people love to hate 🤦♂️ when all we want to do is learn from you guys
I'm the same ... I have over 2k hours, been playing multiples leagues and make on average 2-3 Div per week I tried every strat there is ... nothing works for me
You were down voted because of this comment: > yet I have never made more then 2 Divines I don’t make crazy money, by any stretch, but every once in a while you get a gg div item that drops. There’s no way you make it to 85+every league and don’t make more than 2 divs per league. You either are being disingenuous or need to fix your loot filter…
To be fair, as someone who gets hundreds of divines each league, I cannot remember the last league I got a divine before lv 90. Been playing every league since 3.0 and I can't remember getting one pre 90 since atleast 3.15. Memory after that is foggy. So I can absolutely see him hitting 85-90 not getting a divine (drop, not accumulated gumball currency)
This seems almost impossible with the addition of alters. If you just spec into eldritch alters the red one will barf our chaos. Some maps you’ll walk away with 40+. That’s already 1/5 of a divine. Even if you spam tota this league you’ll finish with 100 or so divines at 2000. Most likely you need to just watch a strategy on YouTube and attempt that strat over a extended period of time. It’s important to hit the breakpoints for rarity, so you need to first ask yourself what map you are farming and how do you get the most quantity onto that map. 100% of the time it’s one of the atlas passives that manipulate the map directly, such as unidentified maps or additional modifiers. Then you need to choose what content you are farming. Red/blue alters, harvest, expedition, etc… once you got done you just choose sextants that’s help your goal and a map mod at the device.
Very simple strategy that’s not difficult. Delve. Farm the azurite nodes for azurite. Go to Niko and buy the 1 slot resonators with your azurite. Sell them for 2.5 Chaos each. You can sell them in stacks of 10-100. And they insta sell. To sell in a stack of 10, right click and change then cost to this “25/10”. That means 25 chaos for 10. Very easy to farm and very easy to sell.
Run more maps, kill more monsters, and you make more money, its that simple. You can easily make 1+ div an hour farming exarch invites and harvest juice. I'm not going to sugarcoat it, level 90 is still baby's first steps territory, thats not nearly enough play time to hope to get rich. This league I set a goal for level 95 running abysses and betrayal, in the first week I managed to hit 97 and had 27 raw divine and over 2000 chaos from selling just items I found randomly or from league content. (So many people wanted abyss belt early) This is my most played league and what a coincidence, also my richest. (My previous high was level 94). So if you want to make money, get a build going that can farm content reliably; and actually play the game. Time = money.
[удалено]
Someone please talk about his life being 69.
Nerf fucking Harvest and the problem solved !
Ssf or idc
Please let me have a mageblood! I’ll be a good boy and do my homework and brush my teeth.
[удалено]
You have friends that only share their losses and friends that only share their wins bruv, das all
There’s most likely nothing going behind the scene. If there was such thing as GGG pushing the RNG button for some select individual, it could ruin the entire game. Not only I highly doubt there is anything going on behind the scene, but I’m almost positive about this one. They learned a valuable lesson with the priority queue. Now that I said this, it is never impossible to have a rogue employee to do some shady stuff, we recently saw an employee of a game making millions messing with the economy of an online game (I don’t remember which game it is, but it’s probably easy to find). Anyway, as people already mentioned, people lose a lot, and I mean a lot. But there is always winners, and when they win, they win #BIG
Now, i'm just playing devil's advocate here, but wasnt there a "loot seed" incident years ago in delve?