Total BS, I was on .153 last night and everything I hit droped a blue or yellow, I didn't want to leave but it just RNG, sometime you get into streaks, that is why its RNG.
Total BS, I was on .153 last night and everything I hit droped a blue or yellow, I didn't want to leave but it just RNG, sometime you get into streaks, that is why its RNG.
As i say below 98 not ABOVE ... and below 98 u get More lvl 63 items and Better Rolls + on some servers 99.9% Chance of getting a Legendary drop please Read before posting.
Lol I love the people who automatically debunk this by just saying "bullshit, there's no way". It's very well possible.
Anyway, I'll be testing it out more and more each day and posting my results (everyone else needs to do the same!). So far from my first day of testing, yesterday, I had a legendary (the same crappy one dropped twice :/) drop from 64 and 76. However one did not drop from another 76 and two 78's. Well within RNG though which is why I encourage everyone to post their results as much as possible.
Well, to really test it you'd have to collect both low IP and high IP data. You would have to stick to a somewhat standardized farming route, and make at least 10-20 runs for each. Also it's important to write down the experience gain, since it can vary a lot between runs, and it is a clear measure of the number of mob kills.
Personally I think this whole issue is just hogwash... For those that actually believe this issue exists can you please state what Blizzard has to gain by designing such a loot system?
oh .. and if this is an exploit and/or bug I assume all of those logging/re-logging to get the lower ip servers are doing what they are supposed to do reporting this to Blizzard right? I thought so ... lol
Believe or not, in over 400 hour of play I didn´t see any set legendaries.
This evening one run on -74 (one green ring) and one run on -78 (one green monk 2H weapon).
And you would have thought nothing of it if you didn't see this thread.
Now how many people played on those servers and did NOT receive a legendary and didn't post here?
How many people played on other servers and did receive legendaries and didn't post here?
Example of this logical fallacy:
Wow, I ate at McDonalds and got sick! How many others has this happened to?
100,000 people did not get sick, saw that question, and did not bother to answer. A couple of those did respond, however. 30 people responded and said they did get sick at McDonalds. The 30 people that got sick at each other restaurant did NOT respond. Wow 30 people, almost everyone that responded! Obviously there's a problem with McDonalds food, it's making everyone sick!
No the people that don't meet the qualifications don't care.
Plus, is that data even correct? I'm less likely to believe data collected AFTER the conclusion is reached rather than before like say the MF thread's data.
Do you believe that the "loot tables", whatever that really means, are actually explicitly set-up differently for each server?
As much as I generally jump all over people for "conspiracy theory bullshit" it is potentially true in this case that each server might have a quota of X legendary drops per hour or per day or something like that. This isn't unheard of as other games have done similar things in the past to ensure that players can't just farm farm farm for hours on end and rake in extreme amounts of certain drops.
WoW for example, I think, does this with BoE pet drops and rare spawns like the TLPD. Sure, TLPD could spawn 2 times in a row and offer up 2 mounts to 2 different people, but it doesn't, ever. Sure you could sit in Zangarmarsh and farm the little dragonfly pet, but when one drops you won't see another that day. Is there documented proof of these examples? No, it is just speculation from my and my guilds endeavors to farm these things. But it would not be at all surprising or unheard of.
I think if people that are interested in this theory were to compile drop rates of various items based on the games IP addresses we could see how true or false this really is. But with the provided information from the OP (only showing even number IP games of 98 or lower) there is no way to really see any differences. But, I won't completely call bullshit on the theory.
Edit: Also, if each server has a drop quota along the lines of X legendary's per hour then it is completely possible that some employees may have tweaked the settings on certain servers so they can get better drops.
been messing around with this.. So far no legendary drops from odd number servers or even numbered above 98
Got 1 zunimassa off hand from a 34, and a Sankis axe from a 48...
Now for this being actually possible? Maybe.. would not be out of the realm of possibilities for Blizz to have their servers all with a variable loot % drop rate.. so when you play you keep getting crap loot and then BAM you get these marvelous items non-stop flooding your stash and then you are more driven to find them again but back to the crap drop IP servers...
Now that scenario is plausible but it is just as likely you and i had some decent luck and it happen to coincide with this theory... Human nature is to find and see patterns in everything, we subconsciously hunt them out (and some consciously do so)...
So is this theory complete bunk? No, but i would say 50% chance either way
Edit: Oh forgot to mention - only did 2 runs of the sub-98 even IP servers.. did 5 of the odd / above 98 servers. Each run was the same - Act 3 inferno clearing everything from light the fires to azmodan
I must have been on the magic .72 then last night... I had one legendary drop since the game came out, then suddenly last night within 10 minutes two legendaries, only problem: I was in Act 3 hell around with level 55ish character... so nothing dropped that is in anyway useful.
Well, to really test it you'd have to collect both low IP and high IP data. You would have to stick to a somewhat standardized farming route, and make at least 10-20 runs for each. Also it's important to write down the experience gain, since it can vary a lot between runs, and it is a clear measure of the number of mob kills.
10-20 runs would still give you a very broad confidence interval. With 100 runs' worth of data, you could begin to draw some conclusions. If you're only doing a handful of runs each, you're not doing science, you're doing pattern matching... something the human brain is demonstrably over-enthusiastic about.
Also, we can make some very reasonable assumptions about RNG seeding and clustering and load-balancing which render this hypothesis extremely dubious from the outset (and therefore requiring a hell of a lot more rigor than we're seeing here).
Lol I love the people who automatically debunk this by just saying "bullshit, there's no way". It's very well possible.
Anyway, I'll be testing it out more and more each day and posting my results (everyone else needs to do the same!). So far from my first day of testing, yesterday, I had a legendary (the same crappy one dropped twice :/) drop from 64 and 76. However one did not drop from another 76 and two 78's. Well within RNG though which is why I encourage everyone to post their results as much as possible.
Well, to really test it you'd have to collect both low IP and high IP data. You would have to stick to a somewhat standardized farming route, and make at least 10-20 runs for each. Also it's important to write down the experience gain, since it can vary a lot between runs, and it is a clear measure of the number of mob kills.
You're on the right track, but you got one part of this very wrong. Instead of at least 10-20 runs for each, try 1000-2000 runs for each. Does nobody here understand what small number statistics means?
Well, to really test it you'd have to collect both low IP and high IP data. You would have to stick to a somewhat standardized farming route, and make at least 10-20 runs for each. Also it's important to write down the experience gain, since it can vary a lot between runs, and it is a clear measure of the number of mob kills.
10-20 runs would still give you a very broad confidence interval. With 100 runs' worth of data, you could begin to draw some conclusions. If you're only doing a handful of runs each, you're not doing science, you're doing pattern matching... something the human brain is demonstrably over-enthusiastic about.
Also, we can make some very reasonable assumptions about RNG seeding and clustering and load-balancing which render this hypothesis extremely dubious from the outset (and therefore requiring a hell of a lot more rigor than we're seeing here).
Sadly, you used far too many big words for most of the tin-foil wearing enthusiasts out there...
I'll say it again. If you think it's BS provide your reasoning for it. Give me your numbers that support they don't exist. Until then, I'll be working on proving they do exist (not saying I'm sure they do, just that I'm very interested in finding out the truth).
Now if you want to really compare this (like i said previous it could or could not, i lean more towards dumb luck then mysterious special servers) then run each of these at a minimum of 1000 runs.
Log every single thing that drops in a item level range of 60-63, all rares, legendary and set pieces in their own grouping. Then split those into quality ranging from total crap up to godly...Now once you have done that for each of those on this list...
Go to every single server NOT on this list and do the same... Once you have all the data from all the servers then you can do a more accurate comparative..but still not completely accurate. Now you have about 200 - 300 others do the same and compile all of that data into 1 big mix and do a comparison..
And then you would have proved or disproved this theory... till then it is just a guess.. Am i trying it out? some what, i peep the server IP when i start a new run, and do a rough track of the drops to see if they avg out better or worse..
Edit: Forgot to add in. you would need to normalize the variables so be at paragon 100 so your MF doesnt change during the runs which would throw off the numbers entirely..
Believe or not, in over 400 hour of play I didn´t see any set legendaries.
This evening one run on -74 (one green ring) and one run on -78 (one green monk 2H weapon).
So you think in 400 hours of play you never once were placed into a server that meets this criteria? Sure, sounds plausible. After 20 minutes of throwing darts at a dartboard I shifted my foot to the left 1 centimeter and then hit the bullseye. It must be magic.
Very good points, I'll start over and do this.
And you would have thought nothing of it if you didn't see this thread.
Now how many people played on those servers and did NOT receive a legendary and didn't post here?
How many people played on other servers and did receive legendaries and didn't post here?
Example of this logical fallacy:
Wow, I ate at McDonalds and got sick! How many others has this happened to?
100,000 people did not get sick, saw that question, and did not bother to answer. A couple of those did respond, however. 30 people responded and said they did get sick at McDonalds. The 30 people that got sick at each other restaurant did NOT respond. Wow 30 people, almost everyone that responded! Obviously there's a problem with McDonalds food, it's making everyone sick!
No the people that don't meet the qualifications don't care.
Plus, is that data even correct? I'm less likely to believe data collected AFTER the conclusion is reached rather than before like say the MF thread's data.
I simply can't stand nonsense like this.
I'm not debunking the theory, since I have no proof of its invalidity. But the number of samples suggests statistically insignificant results.
Do you believe that the "loot tables", whatever that really means, are actually explicitly set-up differently for each server?
As much as I generally jump all over people for "conspiracy theory bullshit" it is potentially true in this case that each server might have a quota of X legendary drops per hour or per day or something like that. This isn't unheard of as other games have done similar things in the past to ensure that players can't just farm farm farm for hours on end and rake in extreme amounts of certain drops.
WoW for example, I think, does this with BoE pet drops and rare spawns like the TLPD. Sure, TLPD could spawn 2 times in a row and offer up 2 mounts to 2 different people, but it doesn't, ever. Sure you could sit in Zangarmarsh and farm the little dragonfly pet, but when one drops you won't see another that day. Is there documented proof of these examples? No, it is just speculation from my and my guilds endeavors to farm these things. But it would not be at all surprising or unheard of.
I think if people that are interested in this theory were to compile drop rates of various items based on the games IP addresses we could see how true or false this really is. But with the provided information from the OP (only showing even number IP games of 98 or lower) there is no way to really see any differences. But, I won't completely call bullshit on the theory.
Edit: Also, if each server has a drop quota along the lines of X legendary's per hour then it is completely possible that some employees may have tweaked the settings on certain servers so they can get better drops.
Got 1 zunimassa off hand from a 34, and a Sankis axe from a 48...
Now for this being actually possible? Maybe.. would not be out of the realm of possibilities for Blizz to have their servers all with a variable loot % drop rate.. so when you play you keep getting crap loot and then BAM you get these marvelous items non-stop flooding your stash and then you are more driven to find them again but back to the crap drop IP servers...
Now that scenario is plausible but it is just as likely you and i had some decent luck and it happen to coincide with this theory... Human nature is to find and see patterns in everything, we subconsciously hunt them out (and some consciously do so)...
So is this theory complete bunk? No, but i would say 50% chance either way
Edit: Oh forgot to mention - only did 2 runs of the sub-98 even IP servers.. did 5 of the odd / above 98 servers. Each run was the same - Act 3 inferno clearing everything from light the fires to azmodan
#34 - 2 legendaries
#64 - nothing
will do some more tomorrow...
10-20 runs would still give you a very broad confidence interval. With 100 runs' worth of data, you could begin to draw some conclusions. If you're only doing a handful of runs each, you're not doing science, you're doing pattern matching... something the human brain is demonstrably over-enthusiastic about.
Also, we can make some very reasonable assumptions about RNG seeding and clustering and load-balancing which render this hypothesis extremely dubious from the outset (and therefore requiring a hell of a lot more rigor than we're seeing here).
You're on the right track, but you got one part of this very wrong. Instead of at least 10-20 runs for each, try 1000-2000 runs for each. Does nobody here understand what small number statistics means?
Sadly, you used far too many big words for most of the tin-foil wearing enthusiasts out there...
2 18 34 50 66 82 98
4 20 36 52 68 84
6 22 38 54 70 86
8 24 40 56 72 88
10 26 42 58 74 90
12 28 44 60 76 92
14 30 46 62 78 94
16 32 48 64 80 96
Now if you want to really compare this (like i said previous it could or could not, i lean more towards dumb luck then mysterious special servers) then run each of these at a minimum of 1000 runs.
Log every single thing that drops in a item level range of 60-63, all rares, legendary and set pieces in their own grouping. Then split those into quality ranging from total crap up to godly...Now once you have done that for each of those on this list...
Go to every single server NOT on this list and do the same... Once you have all the data from all the servers then you can do a more accurate comparative..but still not completely accurate. Now you have about 200 - 300 others do the same and compile all of that data into 1 big mix and do a comparison..
And then you would have proved or disproved this theory... till then it is just a guess.. Am i trying it out? some what, i peep the server IP when i start a new run, and do a rough track of the drops to see if they avg out better or worse..
Edit: Forgot to add in. you would need to normalize the variables so be at paragon 100 so your MF doesnt change during the runs which would throw off the numbers entirely..
So you think in 400 hours of play you never once were placed into a server that meets this criteria? Sure, sounds plausible. After 20 minutes of throwing darts at a dartboard I shifted my foot to the left 1 centimeter and then hit the bullseye. It must be magic.
There was a thread there about it but the moderator closed it using the rolling eyes emote ... lol