Celtic Heroes

My clan has now done Aggra 3 times, and 80% of the drops are mage drops. Also, my clan has no mages that are mains. This could just be bad luck, but if it is not, could you please fix it.
Anyone else notice this?

My clan has now done Aggra 3 times, and 80% of the drops are mage drops. Also, my clan has no mages that are mains. This could just be bad luck, but if it is not, could you please fix it.
Anyone else notice this?

But you guys have only killed him 3 times...
It's kinda hard to base your conclusion off of that.

My clan has now done Aggra 3 times, and 80% of the drops are mage drops. Also, my clan has no mages that are mains. This could just be bad luck, but if it is not, could you please fix it.
Anyone else notice this?

But you guys have only killed him 3 times...
It's kinda hard to base your conclusion off of that.

4 times now and still mostly mage drops, I know its just a strange pattern, and now others are saying they are seeing the same thing. So if you combine what everyone else has said, it is a fairly large sample size.

Hi these are equally distributed and completely random, so it's just down to the luck of the draw I'm afraid.

Just wondering from a probability perspective, would it be due to the fact that there are more skills available for Druids and Mages thus more rings available for these classes adding to the increased probability.

For example:
10 warrior items for randomiser
14 mages items for randomiser
14 druid items for randomiser
10 rogue items for randomiser
10 ranger items for randomiser

Probability to get a warrior or rogue or ranger item = 10/58
Probability to get a mage or druid item = 14/58

Prob only Admin has a view on the variety and distribution of items by classs. And if this is true, perhaps more items need to be created for classes which are lacking, to make it fairer.

I don't believe you

I'm not complaining , I'm all for Druids and mages getting a boost but there does seem to be some imbalance .

The perceived imbalance may be due to the way in which the term 'random' is viewed.

For example, consider I have a coin which I flip 10 times, and I record whether it lands heads or tails.

This is one possible outcome of such a trial (where H=heads, T=tails):
HTTHHTTTH

Now, imagine that I did another 10 flips, and this was the outcome:
HHHHHHHHHH

I imagine that most people would assume the first trial to represent a 'random' series of coin flips, whilst the second represented a 'non-random' series. This view of randomness is known as the Representative Heurisitc, and the basic idea is that people will view a certain situation based on a pattern of their previous experiences or beliefs about that situation. In this case, the belief that in a series of coin flips there should be no obvious order of heads and tails.

However, the probability of both series occurring is the same, as a coin flip is an independent event (which means that the outcome of a coin flip does not depend on the outcome of a previous coin flip).

There is a similar situation with Aggragoth, and it (along with the coin flips) is known as a Gambler's Fallacy. This is the view that the probability of an event (in this case, what drop will a player get from Aggragoth) will change based on previous events (what Aggragoth has dropped before).

If Aggragoth drops 3 Mage items, then a person who is relying on the Gambler's Fallacy will believe that the odds of Aggragoth dropping another Mage item when he is defeated will be very low. However, the probability of Aggragoth dropping a Mage item has not changed, and therefore it is entirely possible that the next time Aggragoth is defeated he will drop a Mage item.

I hope that goes some way to explaining why some people may see Aggragoth's drops as not being random, and I hope I've explained it in such a way that makes it (relatively) easy to understand.

I don't believe you

I'm not complaining , I'm all for Druids and mages getting a boost but there does seem to be some imbalance .

The perceived imbalance may be due to the way in which the term 'random' is viewed.

For example, consider I have a coin which I flip 10 times, and I record whether it lands heads or tails.

This is one possible outcome of such a trial (where H=heads, T=tails):
HTTHHTTTH

Now, imagine that I did another 10 flips, and this was the outcome:
HHHHHHHHHH

I imagine that most people would assume the first trial to represent a 'random' series of coin flips, whilst the second represented a 'non-random' series. This view of randomness is known as the Representative Heurisitc, and the basic idea is that people will view a certain situation based on a pattern of their previous experiences or beliefs about that situation. In this case, the belief that in a series of coin flips there should be no obvious order of heads and tails.

However, the probability of both series occurring is the same, as a coin flip is an independent event (which means that the outcome of a coin flip does not depend on the outcome of a previous coin flip).

There is a similar situation with Aggragoth, and it (along with the coin flips) is known as a Gambler's Fallacy. This is the view that the probability of an event (in this case, what drop will a player get from Aggragoth) will change based on previous events (what Aggragoth has dropped before).

If Aggragoth drops 3 Mage items, then a person who is relying on the Gambler's Fallacy will believe that the odds of Aggragoth dropping another Mage item when he is defeated will be very low. However, the probability of Aggragoth dropping a Mage item has not changed, and therefore it is entirely possible that the next time Aggragoth is defeated he will drop a Mage item.

I hope that goes some way to explaining why some people may see Aggragoth's drops as not being random, and I hope I've explained it in such a way that makes it (relatively) easy to understand.

thought admin was a man of few words?!