Talk:Armourer's Scrap
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This talk page is for discussing the article Armourer's Scrap.
- Sign your posts using four tildes (
~~~~) - Start a new topic at the bottom under a
==level 2 heading== - Indent replies using colons (
:) - Keep it civil
- Assume good faith
- Don't remove past discussions
Quality
Is this legend still true ? "Every 1% quality improves the chance of getting more sockets or links by 1%." Maybe can be revisited? --PsyCat Online (talk) 08:50, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- quality improve chance, but we don't know it is 1% increase or not. Neokowloon (talk) 11:58, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- yeah, I mean maybe for sockets now but for links ? 20% >= 3000 fusing ? isn't 20% (at least remove the part: "....by 1%" IMO) --PsyCat Online (talk) 12:48, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- increase quality does not mean 3l fusing for 6k does not happen. We don't know GGG exact probability but based on someone else experienced we knew the probability from sampling. However, it is AVERAGE and the distribution should follow a Bell shape that somewhat similar to Normal distribution . i.e. since it is chance based, 1 fusing or 10000 fusing can be happened but overall not much people encounter it Neokowloon (talk) 13:52, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- There is no reason to assume it has changed, especially not if you don't understand statistics in regards to likelihood, even if you do use a trillion fusings there is still a chance, no matter how small, that you will not get a 6-link. The increase was tested multiple times by the community, both with fusings (where exact chances are unknown) and sockets (where exact chances are known). I think there was also a ggg reference somewhere, but I can't track it downright now. --OmegaK2 (t|c) 16:22, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- If GGG said it was 1% quality and increase 1% chance (in Version 2.2.0 patch note), then cite it since we can't verify it has changed or not. Neokowloon (talk) 18:49, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me here. You literarily cited the patch notes provided by GGG and added them to the article. Also information shouldn't be removed based on "we don't know if it changed". That goes for almost any mechanic in the game every time a patch is applied (technically, some changes may even occur on the server side without announcement). Only if there is any actual evidence supporting changes. --OmegaK2 (t|c) 19:01, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- I just discovered the source after reading your reply. But normally i don't think wiki should have content purely based on speculation or unknown origin. For 1% quality improve outcome yes it is my fault to miss the origin of the claim. Neokowloon (talk) 19:44, 24 January 2020 (UTC)