Rare Harvests are 0.3%!

[Te'ana]

Domino please put on your protective helmet before reading this ! <p>I have been keeping tabs on my experience since the last update and this is what I found on my harvesting character on the Runnyeye server. I harvested over several days, each time staying with it for one to three hours. I harvested in Feerrott, which has color, so I did have to defend myself a bit, but not too much. Other than self-defense I dedicated myself to harvesting. I also harvested everything I came across. My harvesting skills were maxed out and I used harvesting tools.</p><p>I also seemed to get more than my share of one item per pull.</p><p>                    Total Items</p><p>Node Type   Harvested      Rares </p><p>Bushes       259</p><p>Den            217                  2</p><p>Stone        171</p><p>Ore           169</p><p>Wood        299                  1</p><p>Root          200                  1</p><p>Fish            77</p><p>Material       7</p><p>Rares          4</p><p>Total       1398</p><p>0.29% with fish and 0.3% without fish for true rares</p>

[Bloodfa]

You mean as in .3% of your total harvests, or .3% of the nodes you harvest?

[Te'ana]

<p>Total harvest. I can't seem to get the table from Word to show in the post. I will add in the totals instead.</p>

[Calthine]

When doing this you also need to indicate your harvesting toon's harvest skill levels.

[Cusashorn]

I've completely given up on trying to harvest rares. They're extinct now. Of course, I don't have much time to play during the week anymore, but that's beside the point. I'm still miffed at them nerfing the rates from 1 in 20 to 1 in a Googleplex (10 to the 600th power).

[Targ]

You do not have nearly enough data to be significant yet. You will need something like 25X that much data.

[Jesdyr]

in my opinion .. it is back to it's streaky goodness since before Domino started tweaking it. It seems higher than before from low tiers (like t1 -  t4 for 350 skill), but only a slight increase for t6 and t7. The problem is that you can be out there for hours and get nothing, then suddenly pull 4-6 rares within a few min of each other. I should note that <span class="postbody">1398 items since the last update is really very little. </span>

[Kaldrin]

With random number generators you're always going to have streaks. There's no realistic way around it. You can have streak breakers, but otherwise, it's kind of a non-issue.

[Asteroid]

<cite>Lateana@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Domino please put on your protective helmet before reading this ! <p>I have been keeping tabs on my experience since the last update and this is what I found on my harvesting character on the Runnyeye server. I harvested over several days, each time staying with it for one to three hours. I harvested in Feerrott, which has color, so I did have to defend myself a bit, but not too much. Other than self-defense I dedicated myself to harvesting. I also harvested everything I came across. My harvesting skills were maxed out and I used harvesting tools.</p><p>I also seemed to get more than my share of one item per pull.</p><p>                    Total Items</p><p>Node Type   Harvested      Rares </p><p>Bushes       259</p><p>Den            217                  2</p><p>Stone        171</p><p>Ore           169</p><p>Wood        299                  1</p><p>Root          200                  1</p><p>Fish            77</p><p>Material       7</p><p>Rares          4</p><p>Total       1398</p><p>0.29% with fish and 0.3% without fish for true rares</p></blockquote>When calculating harvested materials, you should throw out all imbue material and rares from your totals. This brings you to 1387. Take the fish out as well as you can't get rares from fish. This brings you to 1310. You got 4 rares, so this makes your normal to rare ratio 327.5:1 for T5. Yes, this is a little low, but as others have stated, you need a larger sample size before you can really claim that the ratio is off.Personally, when I go harvest in a tier, I usually harvest for about 4-6 hours at a time and can normally bring in 2-4000 materials. I've noticed trends where for the first 1000-1500 materials I only got 1 rare, but then over the next 500 materials, I get 9.Also, if you think about it, with the RNG, the rare section could be anywhere and could be any size. <b>IF</b> we assume that the RNG only goes 1-100, then the rare section could be as small as 1 or 2. But if the RNG goes from 1-10000, then the rare section could be as large as 100 or 200. And there really isn't any real way to tell what the numbers are and I'm pretty sure Domino isn't going to tell us. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[othera1]

I harvested for 1 week, 5 hours a day in feerot i came away with 4 rare roots... i had ALOT of raws its all chance ive seen friends get 5 in an hour.

[Umigo]

I harvest alot, so far i have harvested 1,012 true rares. What i have noticed is that rares are streaky, but some nodes like wood are rarer then others. While ore nodes are just hard to find in the first place, the number of rares from ores, dens, bushes/roots is about equal. Based on the price of rares on the broker vs the price of the items made from the rares, i think a little more tweaking is in order. Hard to make a lvl 40 item that sells for <3gp when the broker price for the needed rare is >30gp. Thats why i harvest so much. Just my 2cc.

[Finora]

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>I've completely given up on trying to harvest rares. They're extinct now. Of course, I don't have much time to play during the week anymore, but that's beside the point. I'm still miffed at them nerfing the rates from 1 in 20 to 1 in a Googleplex (10 to the 600th power).</blockquote><p>Not going to touch the original topic, as number crunching isn't my thing =)  but this I have to say something about.</p><p>Rares are most DEFINATLY not that hard to come by. I took a char to EL to level up her harvesting skills (mobs all blue or better to her there btw & woodworker tools not tinkered on that char) and came away with a few(was 3-4) in the hour or 2 I was there. Same thing nearly everytime I go out with any of my characters (not done much in t6-7 lately because I haven't needed raws from those tiers lately). Certainly far better than it did when my main was leveling up, that's for sure =).</p>

[Rijacki]

Another problem with this data, it counts number of items, not number of pulls from the node.  Commons can come in multiples including multiples -with- a rare while rares are always a single.  A small percentage of rares compared to commons is actually a larger percentage when you count only harvest pulls.  To count your pulls, you would have to parse your log for "you harvest" -something- messages and toss all the fish (I could harvest 100% fish nodes and would never get a rare leading to a conclusion that the percentage of rares vs pulls is 0%).However, the RNG doesn't count the number of times you have done something and give you a better result based on the number of times you have had the common result (as much as we'd sometimes like it to).  Even if it was 100% pure random and not a simulation of random it would still be streaky and some people would have a better result with some having an extremely poor result.

[greenmantle]

<cite>TheFever wrote:</cite><blockquote>I harvest alot, so far i have harvested 1,012 true rares. What i have noticed is that rares are streaky, but some nodes like wood are rarer then others. While ore nodes are just hard to find in the first place, the number of rares from ores, dens, bushes/roots is about equal. Based on the price of rares on the broker vs the price of the items made from the rares, i think a little more tweaking is in order. <b>Hard to make a lvl 40 item that sells for <3gp when the broker price for the needed rare is >30gp</b>. Thats why i harvest so much. Just my 2cc.</blockquote>I have to ask why you would bother to make the item , with fuel and other ingredients you are in effect making some thing like a 28 gp loss compared to just selling the raws?

[ke'la]

<cite>TheFever wrote:</cite><blockquote>I harvest alot, so far i have harvested 1,012 true rares. What i have noticed is that rares are streaky, but some nodes like wood are rarer then others. While ore nodes are just hard to find in the first place, the number of rares from ores, dens, bushes/roots is about equal. Based on the price of rares on the broker vs the price of the items made from the rares, i think a little more tweaking is in order. Hard to make a lvl 40 item that sells for <3gp when the broker price for the needed rare is >30gp. Thats why i harvest so much. Just my 2cc.</blockquote>Really? thats odd because I tend to end up with far more Wood Rares then any other type(save perhaps roots) though sence I am a carpanter I am not complaining.... though I do wish all the Ore cherry pickers would have and angry Naggy spawn on them from time to time<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />.  I need like a 1/4 the ore I need of wood but I always end up leaving a tier with like 5 stacks of wood and no ore because of the cherry pickers.

[Calthine]

It's random, it's random, it's random....rofl

[Obadiah]

Whatever it is, it's too high. The Great Shrubbery Changification totally destroyed the rare tailored market. In a matter of two weeks prices for these raws on Everfrost declined 70%. They remain the cheapest rares on the market except Xegonite, which is cheap only because it makes garbage. Reverse the Gerat Shrubbery Changification! <span style="font-size: x-large;"><img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e78feac27fa924c4d0ad6cf5819f3554.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></span>

[zaneluke]

<cite>Lateana@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Domino please put on your protective helmet before reading this ! <p>I have been keeping tabs on my experience since the last update and this is what I found on my harvesting character on the Runnyeye server. I harvested over several days, each time staying with it for one to three hours. I harvested in Feerrott, which has color, so I did have to defend myself a bit, but not too much. Other than self-defense I dedicated myself to harvesting. I also harvested everything I came across. My harvesting skills were maxed out and I used harvesting tools.</p><p>I also seemed to get more than my share of one item per pull.</p><p>                    Total Items</p><p>Node Type   Harvested      Rares </p><p>Bushes       259</p><p>Den            217                  2</p><p>Stone        171</p><p>Ore           169</p><p>Wood        299                  1</p><p>Root          200                  1</p><p>Fish            77</p><p>Material       7</p><p>Rares          4</p><p>Total       1398</p><p>0.29% with fish and 0.3% without fish for true rares</p></blockquote>I harvested for 3 hour in one single hardcore harvest run to fill my bags in ten tangle.I harvested every node on, ravesect incurions point,temple grounds,gazer island and fear tainted isle.In three house i got two rare woods, two rare xenogites and 5 roots. 9 rares in three hours and i left when i ran out of inventory room. in order for any good statistical data about harvesting you are going to have to have a pretty good sixed group, say 20 people or so and each person should harvest for a good 4 hours straight and complie all the data from said 20 people.

[Killerbee3000]

0,3%? thats 1 rare in ~300 non rares in avg... you get about ~ 9 non rares per node.... that makes it less than 50 nodes to get a rare in avg.... i woudnt really call that rare....

[axl_2baz]

<p>These numbers are completely wrong.</p><p>What should be taken is not the number of items gained, but the number of harvest done (3per nods). The number of ressources change from 1 to 10 from a single draw, but rare always come by 1.</p>

[Kenazeer]

<p>From another thread:</p><p><cite>DominoDev wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>I have a super nice little feature on our internal test servers where I can automatically harvest a node 1000 times, just for testing these things.  And I can tell you that in Oakmyst Forest, 1000 from each "mixed" node just gave me:bush:425 jumjum444 coffee499 cabbage416 tea27 yarrowden:582 meat1303 pelt33 rare peltsore:999 tin1005 loam30 rare loam32 bronzestone:1075 lead1019 malachite31 copper39 lapis lazuli... all of which looks like nothing to worry about, particularly given that rares are less rare in lower levels.Note that I got only 416 tea ... when I tried a second time I got 496 tea.  Which just goes to show that even with large numbers, the RNG still can have a big variation!</blockquote><p>Her numbers  reflect around a 3% rate. If I remember correctly this was on a toon whose gathering skills were maxed. </p>

[Jesdyr]

<cite>Kenazeer wrote:</cite><blockquote>Her numbers  reflect around a 3% rate. If I remember correctly this was on a toon whose gathering skills were maxed. </blockquote>I missed that post. Thanks for reposting it. Good info and it does prove that the "mixed" nodes have a 2x chance of getting a rare (just maybe not the one you want).

[Te'ana]

<p>My harvester had her her harvesting skills maxed out for her level (41 adventure and 40 crafter). </p><p>I did not count the number of pulls, but I did note that I <i>seemed</i> to be drawing more than my share of one item per pull. This was especially noticable on ores and roots. But in the long run it really doesn't matter how many pulls are made to get a rare.  It is the total number of items that counts.</p><p>For this statisical analysis, the total number of items (excluding fish) is the correct devisor. Which I did note in my post.  My total sample size is more than adequate to evaluate results with about a 95% confidence level. By taking my sample over several days I was able to factor out the effect of "streaky luck." Although I don't claim to be a stat guru I do claim a bit of knowledge based upon my background as a CPA (Certified Public Accountant).</p><p>The result I and many others are interested in is the percentage of rares compared to the number of items collected. It would seem that compared to Domino's pre-update sample I am getting roughly about 1/10th the expected number of rares. My husband and I have noticed this with all our harvesters on both the servers we play on so I decided to keep track for a few days and analyze the results. They are not pretty but they are accurate. </p>

[Jesdyr]

<cite>Lateana@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>But in the long run it really doesn't matter how many pulls are made to get a rare. </p></blockquote>You are attempting to find the chance of getting a rare correct (harvest rate)? This means you have to use the number of harvesting actions not the number of common materials.Which would have the higher harvest rate? 1000 actions1500 common31 rareor 1000 actions3000 common 30 rare

[Te'ana]

<p><b>STATISTICS</b></p><p>Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."- <i>Autobiography of Mark Twain </i></p><p>The simple method is usually the best method to find the truth. Statistical obfuscation should be left to politicians <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[zaneluke]

65.56% of statistics are made up on the spot.

[Mighty Melvor]

<cite>Calthine wrote:</cite><blockquote>It's random, it's random, it's random....rofl</blockquote><p>Haven't you learned by now Calthine?</p><p>It's a conspiracy to discourage harvesting!</p>

[Eueadan]

<cite>Kurgan@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>Whatever it is, it's too high. The Great Shrubbery Changification totally destroyed the rare tailored market. In a matter of two weeks prices for these raws on Everfrost declined 70%. They remain the cheapest rares on the market except Xegonite, which is cheap only because it makes garbage. Reverse the Gerat Shrubbery Changification! <span style="font-size: x-large;"><img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e78feac27fa924c4d0ad6cf5819f3554.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></span></blockquote><p>Actually, I disagree with this premise...  I have been watching the rare market on my server very closely for the past several weeks (because I buy any inexpensive rares I can find to make transmutable items), and my experience is that rare wood, rare pelts, and sometimes rare precious metals or stones, sell for much less than rare roots a good portion of the time.</p>

[Lalerin]

There is a plugin for the Advanced Combat Tracker that will keep track of your harvests. It also breaks down the info to nodes and items from each pull.That said. I tend to agree with Calthine here<span class="postbody">It's random, it's random, it's random....rofl</span> <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Te'ana]

<p>I just checked the Qeynos broker on the Bazaar server. Remember this is not a scientific study, just a snapshot <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>The results are very interesting, meaningless of course, but still interesting.</p><p>Tier Seven                                                                          Tier Five</p><p>Xegonite                           22 gold                                     Ebon Cluster                                  35 gold</p><p>Spongy Loam                    45 gold                                     Fused Loam                                   45 gold</p><p>Rough Moonstone             45 gold                                     Rough Ruby                                   50 gold</p><p>Acrylia Cluster                   50 gold                                     Rhodium Cluster                            30 gold</p><p>Rough Lumbered Ebony    70 gold                                     Severed Cedar                              17 gold</p><p>Dragonhide Leather Pelt   50 gold                                     Augmented leather Pelt                 5 gold</p><p>Nimbus Root                      35 gold                                     Figwart Root                                 10 gold</p><p>Scintillating Material          10 Copper                                Glimmering Material                       10 silver</p>

[Targ]

<cite>Lateana@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p> My total sample size is more than adequate to evaluate results with about a 95% confidence level. By taking my sample over several days I was able to factor out the effect of "streaky luck." Although I don't claim to be a stat guru I do claim a bit of knowledge based upon my background as a CPA (Certified Public Accountant).</p></blockquote>This is incorrect. A very simple way to evaluate if your sample size is large enough, is to consider the case if you made one more pull how much could it effect the result. In your case if you made one more pull and it was a rare it would change your results by 20%. When your sample size is large enough so that it will not change by more then 1% you will have some interesting data.  To  predicte actual total rare harvest rate the sample size you need should be large enough so that would not change more then .5% then your going to be some where around a 95% confidence level.

[Te'ana]

<p>Interesting idea, and one that points to why statistics are so devilish, but.............</p><p>National polls are frequently conducted using 500 people out the the millions of voters we have and the best polls use only 1500 or so out of the millions of people available. Of course that is comparing apples with oranges, but then so are ALL statistics in the end. There is nothing tangible about statistics. That is why the simple methods get closer to the truth, especially if they are supported by anecdotal evidence. i.e. I percieved rares to be rarer and supported my impression with simple statistics.</p><p>According to one statistical theory you would VERY rarely, if ever,  get the same results twice. This is confused in the world of computer software by the fact that  there really is no such thing as a truly random number in computers. Thus statistics are even more meaningless than ususal in a game like EQ2. Although they may be usefull to determine trends or support impressions of events.</p><p>There are close aproximations to randomness in software, but since programmers generally use a duplicatable seed to look up numbers in tables, you can duplicate your results if you follow the same RNG path. As I understand it, the ability to duplicate supposedly random events is the basic principle behind software testing in the aerospace and defense industries. For them it is desirable to duplicate a potentially fatal bug that may have come about from a supposedly unrelated bit of code and fix it before the shuttle falls out of the sky or the new tank explodes on its way to the war zone.</p><p>Of course what this means is that if the first programmer used a standard hash of a standard number always related to a specific character that character could possibly be lucky or unlucky depending upon where that character's seed pointed to in the table or tables of numbers used to create a "random" number. If however, the seed is taken from something that constantly changes, such as the last digit of the time of day you would not be able to easily duplicate results unless that was noted in the computer logs (which it should be). </p><p>In auditing, if we couldn't find our random number table for seeds we would all pull out a dollar bill, throw them up in the air, and use the last digit of the serial number of the one that landed on the top of the pile!</p><p>BTW, I agree with your logic. But that is not how it is applied in accounting. If I were to sample 50 items out of 10,000 and found no errors I would conclude that there was not a very high probablilty of finding any errors. If the next person's sample found the only error in the group of 10,000 items that person would infer an error rate that was higher than the actual error rate. Wierd stuff statistics and not really reliable on a gut level, but the mathematicians say otherwise.</p>

[Obadiah]

<cite>Lateana@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I just checked the Qeynos broker on the Bazaar server. Remember this is not a scientific study, just a snapshot <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" /></p><p>The results are very interesting, meaningless of course, but still interesting.</p><p>Tier Seven                                                                          Tier Five</p><p>Xegonite                           22 gold                                     Ebon Cluster                                  35 gold</p><p>Spongy Loam                    45 gold                                     Fused Loam                                   45 gold</p><p>Rough Moonstone             45 gold                                     Rough Ruby                                   50 gold</p><p>Acrylia Cluster                   50 gold                                     Rhodium Cluster                            30 gold</p><p>Rough Lumbered Ebony    70 gold                                     Severed Cedar                              17 gold</p><p>Dragonhide Leather Pelt   50 gold                                     Augmented leather Pelt                 5 gold</p><p>Nimbus Root                      35 gold                                     Figwart Root                                 10 gold</p><p>Scintillating Material          10 Copper                                Glimmering Material                       10 silver</p></blockquote>Yeah, maybe somewhat meaningless, and will vary from server to server as Eueadan noted. Nothing but Xegonite and Moonstone have dipped lower than roots in my "house". I look every day at least once. But interesting. There should be a DOW-like index of these measuring economic health. Here's Everfrost, but not as clean:Nimbus 24 Xego 38 Spongy Loam 52.5 Moonstone 24 Ebony 69 Acrylia 60 Dragonhide 43 Ebon 54 Fused 36 Ruby 20 Rhodium 37 Cedar 35 Figwart 12.5 Augmented 3

[Illmarr]

<cite>Lateana@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I just checked the Qeynos broker on the Bazaar server. Remember this is not a scientific study, just a snapshot <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src=" width="15" height="15" />" width="15" height="15"></p><p>The results are very interesting, meaningless of course, but still interesting.</p><p>Tier Seven                                                                          Tier Five</p><p>Xegonite                           22 gold                                     Ebon Cluster                                  35 gold</p><p>Spongy Loam                    45 gold                                     Fused Loam                                   45 gold</p><p>Rough Moonstone             45 gold                                     Rough Ruby                                   50 gold</p><p>Acrylia Cluster                   50 gold                                     Rhodium Cluster                            30 gold</p><p>Rough Lumbered Ebony    70 gold                                     Severed Cedar                              17 gold</p><p>Dragonhide Leather Pelt   50 gold                                     Augmented leather Pelt                 5 gold</p><p>Nimbus Root                      35 gold                                     Figwart Root                                 10 gold</p><p>Scintillating Material          10 Copper                                Glimmering Material                       10 silver</p></blockquote><p>Those results tell me A) more people are harvesting T7 than T5. B) Mastercrafted gear is much better for the tier in T5 than T7, so there is more demand from twinks. C) More people want the biggest sales displays from T7 since there are only 2 T7 rare wood status pieces to make.</p><p>And from your original post, where is the comparable data from before the last update? We're supposed to compare the data you supplied with what you think it seemed like before? </p><p>Sorry you have been having this problem of not getting enough rares to satisfy you. I guess it has not gotten any better since the 22 page thread you started back in August after the correcting adjustment that made rares not fall from the sky but left an increased chance than before anything was done the update before last. T</p><p>he thread where even on Sept 24th in that thread you said, <i>"Rares are still too rare for me. I can't harvest enough to craft for my alts and the prices are sky high on my server. That just isn't fun or profitable unless you are a speculator or someone with a good RNG seed who sells the rares instead of using them. "</i></p><p>Good to know when a thread gets over 20 pages or drops off the first page we can add some random numbers and make a new one which is a rehash of the same thing.</p><p>I wish you better harvesting luck in the future, I know no one who needs it more.</p>

[Obadiah]

<cite>Ilmaaaaah@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>Those results tell me A) more people are harvesting T7 than T5. B) Mastercrafted gear is much better for the tier in T5 than T7, so there is more demand from twinks. C) More people want the biggest sales displays from T7 since there are only 2 T7 rare wood status pieces to make. </blockquote>See . . . they tell me that rare roots are too gosh darn common and that the Great Shrubbery Changification needs to be reversed. Oh . . . and that nobody likes leather in T5. Sheesh. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[hun_gover]

I see plenty of Rares on the broker,  all the prices are reasonable.  I appreciate that some people sometimes get a bit of bad luck, but thats all it is.There are plenty of rares currently available and we dont need more flooding the market.

[zaneluke]

<cite>Lateana@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Interesting idea, and one that points to why statistics are so devilish, but.............</p><p>National polls are frequently conducted using 500 people out the the millions of voters we have and the best polls use only 1500 or so out of the millions of people available. Of course that is comparing apples with oranges, but then so are ALL statistics in the end. There is nothing tangible about statistics. That is why the simple methods get closer to the truth, especially if they are supported by anecdotal evidence. i.e. I percieved rares to be rarer and supported my impression with simple statistics.</p><p>According to one statistical theory you would VERY rarely, if ever,  get the same results twice. This is confused in the world of computer software by the fact that  there really is no such thing as a truly random number in computers. Thus statistics are even more meaningless than ususal in a game like EQ2. Although they may be usefull to determine trends or support impressions of events.</p><p>There are close aproximations to randomness in software, but since programmers generally use a duplicatable seed to look up numbers in tables, you can duplicate your results if you follow the same RNG path. As I understand it, the ability to duplicate supposedly random events is the basic principle behind software testing in the aerospace and defense industries. For them it is desirable to duplicate a potentially fatal bug that may have come about from a supposedly unrelated bit of code and fix it before the shuttle falls out of the sky or the new tank explodes on its way to the war zone.</p><p>Of course what this means is that if the first programmer used a standard hash of a standard number always related to a specific character that character could possibly be lucky or unlucky depending upon where that character's seed pointed to in the table or tables of numbers used to create a "random" number. If however, the seed is taken from something that constantly changes, such as the last digit of the time of day you would not be able to easily duplicate results unless that was noted in the computer logs (which it should be). </p><p>In auditing, if we couldn't find our random number table for seeds we would all pull out a dollar bill, throw them up in the air, and use the last digit of the serial number of the one that landed on the top of the pile!</p><p>BTW, I agree with your logic. But that is not how it is applied in accounting. If I were to sample 50 items out of 10,000 and found no errors I would conclude that there was not a very high probablilty of finding any errors. If the next person's sample found the only error in the group of 10,000 items that person would infer an error rate that was higher than the actual error rate. Wierd stuff statistics and not really reliable on a gut level, but the mathematicians say otherwise.</p></blockquote>It    is     a    game.    Honestly, not to be rude, but if you go in to this much depth with regards to a video game you should go hiking or something and feel the warm sun on your face. If this was work i could understand, but come on now, this is a game.

[Te'ana]

<p>Yep, its a game. And like people who follow baseball or football, the stats are part of the experience. </p><p>BTW, I am still getting way too few rares. If other people are really doing better at harvesting than I am, then I MUST have a bad RNG seed. Or maybe my bad luck streak has just lasted for nearly three years and I am due to hit the GG Lottery any day <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Or perhaps my luck will change with LU 39 or with ROK. I ceratinly hope so <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[opine]

I found a very simple solution to my rare harvest issue - leave the harvesting to my wife. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />In a 2 hour session on the weekend I harvested 1 rare, she managed to find 5 in 45 minutes.  Then again, same goes with groups - I walked out of Crushbone keep group with a lousy ork ear; she skipped out holding a legendary hat, 2 treasured items and a adept 1.EQ2s random number generator simply likes my wife more then me.  Some people luck out more then others.