Strategy guide recruitment % can be way off

#21terminal21Posted 1/31/2013 11:00:56 AM
Someone on my wife's side of the family (I think like 3 generations ago or so) gave birth to 10 girls. I think starting from 0 children the chances of 10 girls are 1/1024. Over 1000 times more likely to have a boy in there somewhere and yet, 10 girls. Luck is weird.
#22Flyojumper(Topic Creator)Posted 1/31/2013 11:03:11 AM
Vithar posted...
of the chain yes but that's not how it works. You have 25% chance at each try.That's it. you can get it on your first try and never get it at all if you are unlucky. Even if you try 35 times or 10000 it is still 25% per try.

Now if the games contains hidden algorithm that ups the chance to more you try or some secret first encounter 75% chance no one knows except them heh


I know how probabilities work but just because as I said in an earlier post, there's such a thing as "beyond reasonable doubt". Also like I stated in an earlier post, would you deem it unreasonable to question the fairness of a coin after 10000 toss if they all landed on heads? Surely that is also statistically possible, so a coin should never ever be questioned?

As I said, please be my guest and go try to capture 3+ napcaps and report on how many tries it took you.
---
After extensive lab research, it appears that sterility is indeed hereditary...
#23snakbarPosted 1/31/2013 11:03:15 AM
Flyojumper posted...


It is not a gambler's fallacy. A gambler's fallacy would be saying on the Nth attempt "well I didn't get it all those previous tries, now on this next try I am bound to get it!".
I analyzed the probability of the whole chain of events, 35 rolls without a success, and that chain is indeed one chance out of 23596. There's no fallacy in that and no mistake, it is simply probability analysis.


Well if you were just complaining that what happened to you is a statistical anomaly then you must see that the percentage could very well be completely correct and that you yourself could be the exception that proves the rule.

Besides where would we be without statistical anomalies? I certainly wouldn't have a box full of shiny pokemon in white 2. Would have lost much more money play a 7/2 off suit in texas hold 'em.

I'm sure you can think of some situations that apply to yourself.
---
my psn: snakbar7 feel free to add me
pokemon W FC: 3439-2994-1803, W2 FC: 1850-9494-7225
#24snakbarPosted 1/31/2013 11:07:18 AM
Just by the by I caught a napcap which has now metamorphed to its second form, actually that part took forever because I maxed the little guys level. Getting off topic, Took me less than 10 encounters to catch.
---
my psn: snakbar7 feel free to add me
pokemon W FC: 3439-2994-1803, W2 FC: 1850-9494-7225
#25Flyojumper(Topic Creator)Posted 1/31/2013 11:14:02 AM
Here's a wiki of interest:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance

Analysis of statistics and probabilities would be impossible if we required complete certainty regarding the assessment of a random event.
I will reiterate, doubters please prove me wrong and go capture 3 napcaps, you will see first hand that it will take you many many times more tries than would be expected on a 25% occurrence.
---
After extensive lab research, it appears that sterility is indeed hereditary...
#26Flyojumper(Topic Creator)Posted 1/31/2013 11:15:50 AM
snakbar posted...
Just by the by I caught a napcap which has now metamorphed to its second form, actually that part took forever because I maxed the little guys level. Getting off topic, Took me less than 10 encounters to catch.


A napcap? I already formulated that I think the 1st capture may have boosted rate. Kill 20 more and see if you get anywhere near 5 napcaps out of it...
---
After extensive lab research, it appears that sterility is indeed hereditary...
#27EgHeadFoolPosted 1/31/2013 11:16:10 AM
In the Japanese version I got my Napcap on the first battle. I got a second one about 3-5 battles later. I wasn't even trying to catch it because I'd already caught a later form. I don't think I even kept it.
#28snakbarPosted 1/31/2013 11:21:34 AM
Flyojumper posted...

I already formulated that I think the 1st capture may have boosted rate.


do you have any proof of such an allegation? if so wouldn't that make your initial claim even more unlikely? finally you and I both know that a sample size of 20 is nowhere near enough to make an accurate judgement and I don't have that kind of time.
---
my psn: snakbar7 feel free to add me
pokemon W FC: 3439-2994-1803, W2 FC: 1850-9494-7225
#29Flyojumper(Topic Creator)Posted 1/31/2013 11:34:38 AM
snakbar posted...
Flyojumper posted...

I already formulated that I think the 1st capture may have boosted rate.


do you have any proof of such an allegation? if so wouldn't that make your initial claim even more unlikely? finally you and I both know that a sample size of 20 is nowhere near enough to make an accurate judgement and I don't have that kind of time.


No, no proof on the 1st capture bit, that is just a feeling I have at this moment based on experience with capture, so that could very well be off.
However I feel my claim that 25% is off is definitely solid. Capturing 20 should, in average, yield you 5 napcaps if it was 25%. I can guarantee you that you won't get 5, nor 4, nor 3. Statistics are funny, but the law of averages holds true and when you start seeing that for every 10 napcaps you kill you don't get ANYWHERE near 2.5 captured napcaps, maybe you will start believing me.
---
After extensive lab research, it appears that sterility is indeed hereditary...