So, there is no explanation for the picture and you're essentially trolling me. It's cool, I forgive you.
1. The photo shows what a dealt Royal Flush looks like on a video poker machine in a casino. A $1.50 wager win $5,600. That is what happens when my friend got that EXTREMELY rare hand. $5,600 or 5,600 reasons.
2. There is a saying in Physics: Natura valde simplex est et sibi consonsa (by Newton) which translates into “Nature is exceedingly simple and harmonious with itself”.
Da Wimsta you work with surveys and contingency tables or real elementary, basic stuff. You don’t try to understand nature, natural phenomena, or the underlying functions that generate these phenomena.
The function that generates chest spins is:
Y = Beta(1) * Layla + Beta(2) * Hera + .... Beta(22) * Green Potion (21 degrees of freedom)
This isn’t the only function but this function works. It’s an algorithm or source code that a programmer can use to write code. All the programmer has to code is whenever some buys a chest, choose a random number from 101 to 1,000. If the result is 101 to 105, the person wins Hera; if the result is 106 to 110, the person wins Layla, and so forth where the implied odds or probability to win that associated prize is match on the continuum, respectively.
Then there is the Da Wimsta’s approach of using few degrees of freedom due to use data at the category level using summary statistics.
So Da Wimsta’s function goes as follows:
Y = Beta(1) * Legendary + Beta(2) * Epic + ... + Beta(5) * Common [with 4 degrees of freedom].
Beta(1) is 1%, Beta(2) is 7%, etc
The programmer has no problem writing code that says choose a random number from 1 to 100, if the result is 1 the person wins a legendary prize; if the result is 2 to 8, the person wins an Epic prize, etc.
That is what these functions mean. A function is generating these natural phenomena.
However, the programmer has a problem: he can only pick legendary, epic, etc prizes BUT not the individual prizes.
So the programmer has to write MORE CODE: if the prize is a legendary, choose a SEPARATE random number from 1 to 2 with 1 being Hera and 2 being Layla. So the programmer has to WRITE more CODE for Epic, Rare, etc.
Programmers and other high IQ people will tell Da Wimsta that he is NUTS!!
Go back to Newton’s phrase: Nature is simple and harmonious.
It is so much easier to write CODE using the first function (with more degrees of freedom) than Da Wimsta’s approach.
Da Wimsta’s approach is flawed because it cannot answer the prize at the data level and thus makes an assumption at the data level. The first function tests at the data level, which is what you should be doing because IT MAKES NO ASSUMPTION about the data.
For example, suppose I get 7 Jera’s as my only prize in the EPIC category. Under Da Wimsta, all he cares about is 7 EPIC prizes, not the composition of the prizes. At the Data level, those 7 Jera’s adds a lot of value and greatly influences the Chi Square statistics vs 7 EPIC divided amongst Jera, Zurran, Amon, and OK, respectively.
The math threads are the best threads.
even better when they escalate to Latin quotations, what we really need though is some graphs
Pretty soon we'll have powerpoint presentations...