LF4 Day a scam??

I didn't get any lf4s from the last LF4 event

 

Lol, there isn't any difference between the breakdown of Alpha, Beta and Gamma now. There was in 2011, there isn't now (it's actually 2014 now by the way ^^).
Funny enough though I already posted the alpha, beta and gamma modes, 2 pages ago:

REMOVED

https://board-en.darkorbit.com//threads/lf4-day-a-scam.35948/page-2#post-293776

So, if you could stop going in circles that would be really helpful.

Direct quote from yourself:
"We both know my extent of knowledge is considerably greater that your post is feebly attempting to suggest."

You claim to know so much more than me yet couldn't even name the type of document you were arguing about

The php code for galaxy gates is the same for everyone as is the swf emulation because they are derived from the server wide xml.

The code for account data is different, if it was the same we would all have identical equipment, usernames, userID, all be running off the same sessionID. Of course we don't have access to that data, then we could log into anyone account at any time we liked.

You don't understand the difference, that is not my fault.

Slowly back on topic; as I said in a previous post, booty box emulation if completely server side, there is no php which dictates it, if there was I would have posted it, it is open for modification by the developers but so if every file, they actually wrote it you know?

The content has changed yes, I thought your argument was meant to be that the chances have changed?

If you have proof of this I would love to see it, since this is the 2nd time you have said you can prove it and this is the 2nd time I have asked to see it. It would be very beneficial for everyone.

 

Having read Okapi32 response I thought I would give you an answer which actually in some way answers you question.

There is code directly relating to individual accounts / groups of accounts that is not accessible from the source Okapi32 is using when posting code such as the gate code. In fact there is significant data that is not available from that code source.

I will give you some examples directly relating to the gate code he posted.

That code does not now give the yield distribution for A,B,Y gates.

It does not show how many gate parts there are in each gate. ( I will get back to this )

It does not show the amount of each type of ammo, xeno etc. you get as there is separate code that gives fluctuating quantities for such items. I could give more examples but you can get the idea.

Now there could be many ways in which the output yield for a given item from the generator could be manipulated. for an individual account, groups of accounts or all accounts.

As examples ( not suggesting in any way the following is a reality )
Say for the Epsilon gate that has 99 parts there could be in the gate part list, code for parts 100 -110 and when they are hit, they return an immediate re-spin instead of one of the gate parts.

There could be an account related energy button that has a set of influencing values affecting the spin outcome.

There could just be a bug in the code that is not recognising a gate part that has already been won, or many other bugs that would affect the completion of a gate.

In short apart from interrogating the server/ individual account coding, there is now way of seeing if an account group of account or all accounts are subject to anomalous effect.

What has the drop rate on 550 keys used on a zeus event have to do with the current double lf4 event?

4 lf4s on zeus event with 550 keys is slightly above average typical from anecdotal information you would get 4 LF4 for 800 keys. 1-200

Even 28 LF4 from 2700 keys for an LF4 event day is slightly better than average which would be 1-100 so 27 LF4s assuming that the anecdotal historic data was representative of reality. Which it did seem to be.

Why would you multiply your result by 3? the double lf4 event is x2 not x3.

This LF4 event seem to have significant anecdotal data to suggest that the yield for this even was significantly less that what would have been expected.

 

lf4 event is x2 ?
had the idea it is x3 ... sry for mistake

 

LMAO This just show that you truly do not understand the information you post as fact.
There are different quantities of gate part for A,B,Y gates so if the yield was the same across all 3 gates then we would see more gamma gates parts than Alpha gate parts.
If they are all returning 13% then we would see over 2.5 time as many gamma parts than alpha parts. As there are only 34 alpha parts and 82 gamma parts.
So in reality we should be getting more gamma gates than Alpha gates these days.

You even post this :-
Fine, I give up Pacman, no point going in circles. I will make one last post on this

Then continue with the debate that you have so clearly lost.

No I do not claim to know so much more than you. It is you that claims to know so much and that I know nothing.

So are you really trying to suggest that the specific account code could not have within it, code that could affect the outcome of such things like gate yield. I guess you really have no clue or are still attempting to evade the facts.

I know the difference and have never tried to imply that "The code is the same for everyone" unlike you have to justify your argument.

I know they wrote it and that they can modify any outcome from any account.

For once you have made a valid point and accepted that I did actually make a statement of fact when I post it was a statement of fact. Maybe you can learn from that.
With regard to prof that would hold up in a criminal court I do not have such prof. I have never suggest I did. All I have is anecdotal information similar to what you posted except mine is current.

Anything in the code server side has the potential to affect the generic code such as the gate code you post or any other aspect of the game that could affect an account or group of accounts.

I joined the debate because you was stating anecdotal information from a long time ago to justify your attempt to prove that nothing has changed. Which has little relevance.

Currently from friends and other sources the current anecdotal yield for the last LF4 event was very bad.

You try to profess all knowing when in realty you input in the debate is far from that, while attempting to suggest I know nothing which is also so far from reality and you know that.
Stick to the debate rather that trying to profess how you know everything and other know nothing then it will be easier to debate the subject matter.

 

Your post was starting to go back on topic so I thought we could just get past this, apparently not.

The problem here is that you are reading the code wrong, or just do not understand how to read it. I know you will argue otherwise but come on, you didn't even know what type of code it was, how can you claim to know what it says :/

It is 13% chance to get a part. Since there is more gamma than beta and alpha then yes, out of that 13% you will be more likely to get a gamma piece by simple definition of ratios. However the code does not outline this since it has no need to. You just have a 13% chance to get a part.
You can't really argue it otherwise since that is exactly what the code says.
<cat id="part" percentage="13" />
Part percentage - 13% chance to get a part.

If you want to work out that break down percentage of alpha, beta and gamma taking into consideration their total parts then do so. However the code clearly states it is 13% chance to get a single part.

Please remember I have not made this up myself, I am literally just copy and pasting what the code tells us, the developers wrote it not me.

Nope, it can't
The emulation in the swf file only draws upon the php document for percentages. nothing else.
Please download the swf file, it as I did and show me where it draws upon data that manipulates the chances.
REMOVED

I joined this thread to say that the LF-4 event had helped me more than non LF-4 days.
You took it upon yourself to decide that my own finding were invalid yet did not call anyone else out, you obviously have something against me and continue to argue even when you do not know what type of code you are talking about.

 

It was you that said you "I will make one last post on this" then continued to debate information other than what is directly related to the thread.

Come on are you really still trying to suggest I know nothing. If I attempted to correct you on every evasion statement you make we would never get close to actually debate the real point of this thread.

I am not reading the code wrong.

You are presenting it as the totality of what can affect an account, group of accounts, or all accounts on a server which the code you posted can not do.

But in the same thread you consed that the server side data can override the code you are using to give the yield from gates.

I know you will try to argue differently, but the evidence is in this thread.

You have been just copying and pasting the code that you can access;

then making statement that are so obviously inaccurate, because of the way you present the information.

The code does clearly state 13%. I could go through each line of that code and show which is missing other coded information which so clearly affects and contradicts previous statement of yours.

Please show me in that code where it determines that one gets different amounts of, ammo, zeno, hp from an individual spin.
Please show me in that code when it decides how many part there are for each gate.
Please show me how it works out yield for A,B,Y gates when there are different quantities for each gate. Noting if it was how you suggest we would be getting more gamma gates that alpha gates these days.
( if you want me to go through the calculation to show this I could but it would just be another side debate)

I took it upon myself to point out that results from way back when the booty box / LF4 and LF4 even came out, is not relevant to show that the event today is not as it was back then.
You often try to imply you know so much, so you are without question correct in your posts. When I read such post if I consider them to not be as you post I will question it.
I do not need to post you no nothing in a vain attempt to justify my point of view.

The only thing I have against your posting style is that you imply you know everything and other know nothing. Debate the subject without the misguided approach of what you post is undeniable correct all the time, then I will not feel the need to show you are wrong or are misguided.

We both know how often DO has suggested things are different to how they actual are. I try to have an open mind and when I post I add things like " in my cynical view or I believe or in my opinion. I do not post supposition as fact, if I am posting fact then I say it is so.

 

Guys have to say I'm loving this.I don't know much about code or stats but feel
the code is flawed or its all a scam. listening to this and relating to my game experiences I'm leaning towards scam.If what Pacman say is remotely true they
can manipulate individual up to serverwide accounts.Could this explain the divide
between FE and UFE,The dumb pets,L-4s you work hard for but never get,People
doing less than 20 zeta' with full havok's and other doing just as many with 2 or 3 etc,ect,....this has been thought provoking to say the least.

 

This argument is very weird and funny, why is only one person giving proof ... pacman why don't you post code to show you are right?
Okapi post all the code to show what he is saying and you post nothing, you just say things and never show them, why is this? He ask you to show your proof and look for code yourself and you dont, you dont even say what type of files it are.
Pacman you say Okapi is wrong but he show code that says he is right and you put no code still, I think Okapi is right because you do not post any code yourself.
I don't think you know code, even what it says or how find it. Please put proof of yourself.

 

I'm just kindof curious.. what code can you not get to peeps?? The functions themselves.. i.e. the ones that show the calculations for these events?? Its odd how programs are written.. I've only written the c++ console apps... but I do know that we hide stuff in functions when we don't want people to see it. Then you just reference the function and it runs straight into the compiler.. Are you good enough to get this stuff??

I'm not saying BP is sneaky or anything but we were both around when they messed up the kami cooldown for so long it tempted many people (including myself) to spend money on a lvl 3 kami and premium..

Boots

 

There is a massive amount of server side code that we do not have access to unless the server was hacked. I am not able to post that code because I can not access it.

The code Okapi posted is only the code that we have access to and it does not show the whole picture.

Go to the gate materialiser, spin so you can see a few results for the same say ammo and look at the amount of a particular type of ammo you get each time.

Then go to the part of the code that Okapi posted and show where it gives the code that returns different amounts of that ammo each time.

I'll make it easy for you, here it is :-

REMOVED

As I have said Okapi only delivers the information that would support his argument rather than the whole picture.

Hi Boots

The code we do not have access to is just that, unless someone hacks the server.

It is unfortunate that Okapi32 decided to focus on the gate code rather than the booty box code. I guess that is because we have access to even less code relating to the booty box content.

(Note to Okapi32 I would like to get back to specifically taking about booty box content and the yield for the LF4 event after all that is the subject matter for the thread). I could relate this to either, but it is an LF4 event thread, so hopeful going forward we can all get back to debating the LF4 event.

I will start by saying any post I make, relating to the potential for manipulation of code, relating to such things as yield adjustment, is not based on fact unless I give factual information and will note it as so at the time. Often I use notations like "in my cynical view" because history has shown we are often, not given the true facts from DO, so I assume we are being treated the same as history would suggest.


Just as an example of how the content of the booty boxes can be changed and we can not see it.
When the BO1 and LF2 were made credit items they were removed from the booty boxes.
The code source Okapi32 is using to prove his point ( which it does not. ) does not and did not show in any way that they were remove from the booty content.

The only reason we know it happened, is because we were informed it has happened and we have anecdotal evidence to show it happened.

In the unlikely even that DO had replaced those 2 items with LF4s ( if only they had have done that, I would been posting in this forum so differently than I find myself posting these days. ) we would have gained significantly more LF4 from the booty boxes than before that change. We do not know how the distribution of content probability was adjusted as result of the removal of those items.

We do not have access to the data that specifically affect the yield probability for any item.
Maybe not the best idea, as I really do not want the debate getting back to gates, but I will use gates as an example We see that the gate part yield is 13% ( not suggesting that the following is happening ) the server side code could be giving 5% or 25%.

Getting back to the LF4 event.

1. We do not have access to the individual yield for a particular item within the booty boxes.
2. We do not have access to the full range of content at any given time.
3. we do not have access to the code that determines the yield for any item on an LF4 event compared to any other period in time.
I could go on, but you get the idea.

As Okapi32 is all knowing and I know nothing, I would challenge him to post all the code that affect the above 3 example adjustable factors.

Now let just say for argument that DO is like most other company that sell a product. How often do we see a sale lets say 50% off where an item the day before the sale was say £/$100 and on the day of the sale at 50% off is £/$95
or even worse £/$110 ( fact there are times when a sale price for an item is higher than the normal price)

With the booty boxes and LF4 event we do not even know the chance of getting them before or during the event.

Lets look at the cost of many DO offers, especial those that are directed at new / relatively new players.
Accepting that the MHH is random these offer cost more than could be gained by just buying uri on the MHH, but they are promoted as a sale because they work out in most cases as being cheaper than if the uri was bought at a time other than HH/MHH

If DO is prepared to openly use such tactics, is it wrong of me to cynically believe that this is extended to the LF4 event, knowing we can not see the affect on LF4 yield from the event?

PS Killer-NL now after reading this post please post your opinion on who is being more open with reality and the facts Okapi32 or me?
Noting I am asking you as you seem to have been suckered into believing Okapi32, on the basis that he posted the same type of information that he attempts to use to justify his position in a debate, rather than representing it for what it is.

PPS if anyone agrees with Okapi32 like his input. If anyone considers this post as more likely to reflect reality in the debate like this post. Undecideds need not vote

 

The data base on account details, obviously people should not have access to that at all or they could gain access to accounts at free will.
Server side emulation as well, so booty box chances are completely secret. However since the galaxy gates are client side it's no secret.

As far as xml, php, javascript, stylesheets and shockwave files, I have access to all of that. As does anyone if they know how, there are not real barriers apart from main.swf which is encrypted.

The important thing here is, darkorbit can obviously change things at will, as they did with the kamikaze cool down, however for them to do that the php document I have posted god knows how many times now along with the swf that does the emulations for GG building will have to change, but right now as of posting this it only uses the session ID of the user and the php file.

Honestly I ask anyone else to find out a fraction of the information I have posted and back it up with their own code to prove me otherwise, I will gladly admit it if anyone can actually post actual code like I have.

So far I am am the only one providing whilst others just ask hypothetical questions which they themselves can't even back up with code. Surely you can see how weird it is arguing over this with someone who doesn't even know what type of file he is talking about.

 

LMAO we all have access to the type of information you post.

Lets not use that, as you try to do, to profess you know everything and others know nothing.

Lets be completely transparent about code and how it affect the LF4 event.

Okapi32 as you seem to use some code to prove your point :-
Post all code that could affect the outcome of the LF4 event or admit that you do not have access to such code. Let alone, that you have no way of backing up your supposed facts and the code you profess to prove your points is just a fraction of the whole picture.

When are you going to actually debate the subject of the thread titled "lf4-day-a-scam"

So accepting that there is a massive amount of code that is "completely secret" and using the code you present as you knowing everything.
Show why we all see different amounts of say x4 ammo ( or any other variable amount), but your code does not reflect that there is any reason to believe that is a fact.

Then getting back the subject matter, show the code that confirms the yield for LF4s on an LF4 events is always half what it has always been for a normal booty box.

We both know you can not present this information.

Stop trying to justify you naive position by posting code and continuing to reference, that is both not relevant to the debate, or represents in any way how a specific account could react to that limit code.

 

Lol, I think reading the posts might help you greatly.

I openly said I can not see anything to do with LF4 event. I have said this twice already in the thread.

So again I have never said I know everything, instead people have decided themselves that I have said that even despite me clearly saying I don't. However everything I do know I back up with proof in the form of code, something which nobody else has done.
What was your point?

It was not me who started this whole galaxy gate debate, Pacman took it upon himself to start talking about spins and gate chances.
My first post in this thread was solely posting my finding on LF-4 event, however Pacman decided my results were invalid whilst everyone elses were fine, he obviously has something against me but is never able to actual prove himself and instead just asks hypothetical questions with no proof.

 

Once again I find myself conceding that you did indeed not say you know everything. That was a misrepresentation of the facts;

however you did post I know nothing, then use a code source that is extremely limited and quite irrelevant to the thread debate, in an attempt to imply your information was absolute and correct without question.

I could post quotes from your posts that are so obviously incorrect like:-

"The code is the same for everyone"
"gate parts are 13%, for every single gate"
"you know nothing about it!"
"However everything I do know I back up with proof in the form of code, something which nobody else has done."
Just a few of the statements you have made in this thread that are inaccurate.

as I have previously posted:-
" The only thing I have against your posting style is that you imply you know everything and other know nothing. Debate the subject without the misguided approach of what you post is undeniable correct, then I will not feel the need to show you are wrong or are misguided. "

If is funny how when you are asked a direct question relating to code (accepting you use a specific code source to suggest you have Superior knowledge) that would show you do not have access the relevant code, making the code you submit totally irrelevant to the the thread, you avoid that part of a post even when it is highlighted.

Let look at the whole galaxy gate debate:-

As I have already pointed out, and is so easy to check in this thread, I posted :-
" Not that that matters because the gate probabilities which is specified do not compare with reality these days." as a foot not to a part of my post in small print as a side comment.

It is you that turn that insignificant sentence into the main content of the debate because;

If we had just focus on the thread subject matter
"LF4 Day a scam??"
you would not have the same type of code to percent in you feeble attempt to profess you have superior relevant knowledge.

If you want to continue the gate debate lets do that in a separate thread and I will gladly shoot you down in a separate thread relating to gates.

lets focus just on the thread subject matter :- "LF4 Day a scam??" in this thread.
There is a massive amount of code that affect individual. group, or all accounts on a server that is not visible from the code source you use in an attempt to justify your position.

I Will add this from my boots reply.

Getting back to the LF4 event.

1. We do not have access to the individual yield for a particular item within the booty boxes.
2. We do not have access to the full range of content at any given time.
3. we do not have access to the code that determines the yield for any item on an LF4 event compared to any other period in time.
I could go on, but you get the idea.

As Okapi32 is all knowing and I know nothing, I would challenge him to post all the code that affect the above 3 example adjustable factors.

You profess to have Superior knowledge and are using code to justify that, so post the code that will show you have access to the relevant code that could affect the LF4 event or consed the code source you have can not show the relevant code from all accounts. Well actually any account.

 

Yh this is very funny thread lol you can tell that pacman and okapi need to get out of the house more now and then haha , like seriously what on earth are they going on about its like a stand off to see who knows the most useless crap that anyone could ever know , both of them trying to be king of all knowledge on the forum lol very boring to read but gets a lot of views because its funny .

 

I GIVE UP WITH THIS POST
remove it from my watch list IMEDIATELY

 

Lol tell me about it. I just look at the first line, then move on.

 

Where to start...

Off-topic: Galaxy Gate percentages are defined values. They are not subject to change for individual accounts, however, basic probability does mean that the results achieved will differ between accounts. You cannot base an estimation of results on what you receive - the parameters for the probabilities are defined by the circumstances that create them. In this case, a random number is generated from 1-100, with 13 instances of those being a Galaxy Gate part. It is as simple as that. Further RNG (random number generation) is then used to determine the specific part awarded, with duplicates obviously resulting in a multiplier instead.

On-topic: The same applies to Booty Box rewards. Chances for each possible outcome are defined by the weighting of the probabilities, and they are then chosen by random number generation. If you want to get really picky, you can address your complaints to whoever invented the computer-generated random number algorithm, since "randomly generated numbers" are actually just a ridiculously long sequence of numbers to approximate the concept of "randomness".

With regards to the 2x LF-4 day itself, either the probability for receiving an LF-4 is doubled in the initial instance, or the results would be re-rolled if an LF-4 is not received in the initial roll. The chance that you will receive an LF-4 is therefore defined (and doubled, in some fashion) - whether you actually receive one will still be based on "luck" (which is entirely decided by what position the RNG algorithm happens to be at at that point in time).

I will tentatively leave this open to see if we can get back on topic, but any further postings which contain game code will be deleted without question, and the users will be penalised accordingly. This is your only warning.

 

Hi =SERAPH= I was not going to respond to your post, but as it is being referred to as proving me wrong, I would like to question your source for the basis of you response.
Noting that I have not suggest what I posted was unconditionally fact in this thread, and you have not either.

Off-topic: Galaxy Gate
Do you have access to the server side code, that could affect an individual account or group of account, to guarantee whether from a bug or glitch or actual adjusted code, what you have posted unquestionable reflect reality?

Or is it based on what we would like to believe is reality, as in what we would expect if everything within the code was working as it should be?
I would suggest this is what you have based your post on rather than the first paragraph option.

How many spins would you expect should be required to return a normal distribution for a computer regenerate 13% yield probability?

Not being able to re-post the code to show it, we know for a fact that the A,B,Y code has been changed. That change is likely to have the potential to have a significant difference on the average outcome of completing a,b,y gates, but we were never told of the change.

We do not have access to the server side code that I can so clearly prove affect aspects of the results we see from the gate materialiser.

I could post A,B,Y gate 100 spin yields for thousands of spins that show a significant statistically relevant change in distribution from new/duplicate part yield comparing a sustained period to the most recent period, along with other A,B,Y historic data I have posted over time , but it would be best posted in a different thread.

On-topic:
Accepting there could be a multitude of bug, glitches or predetermined code changes that could affect the yield of any item found in the booty boxes, also noting we know there has been changes to the content;

Do you have access to the server side code that gives the booty content and the yield probabilities for all content, or is your post based on supposition of what we would hope to reflect reality?

Do you know the actual coded probably for LF4 yield for the standard booty box from when they were first introduced until the current day?

Do you know how the yield for LF4s from day 1 compares to the actual yield for the double lf4 event?

Have both the standard and double LF4 event yielded or at least been programmed to yield the same from day one in both instances?

Or would this also be supposition based on what we would like to believe is reality?

I would suggest that it would be nice to believe everything is how we would hope it was,
but the thread question is a valid one and we can not honestly guaranteeing that it is or is not a scam.

If you can without question guarantee what you posted as fact I would love to see such a guarantee. Then I will happy accept that I was wrong in question reality compared to what we perceive is reality.

I hope you do not mind me questioning the bases for you posted information, but it is being used as fact to suggest what I have posted is wrong. Rather than a view of how things should be in an ideal world, without access to the relevant server side code since the booty boxes were introduced.