So, I just lost at a 100% challenge...

I was doing the “The Exceptional Rose” for tickets. My Watchful is 144. The description said “Your Watchful quality gives you a 100% chance of success.”, but I lost.
Is this the revenge of the RNG? Should I not have told everybody about its secret weakness in that other thread?

Bug report. Likely a weird exception or a flaw in the RNG that calculates precision to a certain significance, but is rounded in the calculation to one fewer digit, making for a remarkably tiny edge case when randVal < successChance is false.

[quote=Fhoenix]I was doing the “The Exceptional Rose” for tickets. My Watchful is 144. The description said “Your Watchful quality gives you a 100% chance of success.”, but I lost.
Is this the revenge of the RNG? Should I not have told everybody about its secret weakness in that other thread?[/quote]

Odd. I lost the same challenge the first time I tried it today. I thought I just clicked the wrong one, but if someone else saw it, too…

Are you actually being unsucessful? or just unlucky?
I have seen a case at least once before (can’t remember exactly where though) when I was SUCCESSFUL, but UNLUCKY. The challange was a similar 100% sucess rate challenge, and I don’t think there was any indication that there would be luck in play at all.
Could the RARE lucky result, be matched by an equally RARE UNlucky result?
edited by MadameHeather on 2/25/2013

Hmm, I don’t know. I thought it might be rounding, but Fallen London appears to be rounding half percentages down when giving out percentage predictions. Also, you should be WELL above the required stat for a 100% success rate, not just at the very barrier of 100%. If I understand how the “broad” difficulty system works, anything above Watchful 100 should be guaranteed success on that particular stat test.

So I guess it must be a bug?
edited by HighPriest on 2/25/2013

This just happened to me, as well. Honestly, as much as a change to difficulties might have been needful, this is starting to feel like a lot of BS. I already get one success for every four failures on dancing at the Feast (with, ostensibly, a 79% success rate), and now I’m failing challenges the game tells me are 100%. Not cool.

Hello! This is fairly obviously either a misunderstanding or a bug. If it’s still happening, can you drop a line to the usual address? It’s probably less morally satisfying then calling the game BS, but it would really help is fix it. Thanks!

Hard to check for it again, since if it’s a bug, it has a very very low probability of happening. Which is why I made the thread to check if others had this problem. Will bug report if I see it again.

Hello! This is fairly obviously either a misunderstanding or a bug. If it’s still happening, can you drop a line to the usual address? It’s probably less morally satisfying then calling the game BS, but it would really help is fix it. Thanks![/quote]

Of course I will! I was on my mobile when it happened and otherwise engaged, else I would have reported it. Obviously, I still love FBG :)

This happened to me as well, several times and not just when I did the Exceptional Rose. Most recent 100% Straightforward failure I had just now in the Flit when I was Preparing for a Big Score (Looking for Targets option). I suppose it must’ve been a glitch.

[color=#009900]Folks, if this happesns to you, do drop us a bug report with as much info as possible, including your username, which branch it happened on, and what the relevant stat score was. It’s impractical to run support via the forum, we’d like to fix this and it’s obviously difficult to reproduce. We’re sure it’s not a rounding error - I suspect it’ll turn out to be some contextual quirk.[/color]

Oh my… I wonder - could this situation possibly support a theory I once had regarding time, and the periodicy of ‘streaks’ of luck?

I had developed a theory involving circumstances, where the activity speed of something I designated as the ‘Universal Server’ of luck, potentially lagged behind the activity speed of a particular person (who I catagorized as being a ‘client’ of luck) causing persistence of a particular outcome of ‘luck’ across several actions of the luck-client? Yes - given the nature of the Feast activities (repeated rapid-fire actions performed in hopes of gaining a few sparse rare outcomes), could it be that some persisting value…

Oh blather it all! I was trying to escape this madening pursuit of patterns in the random behavior of luck, by drowning myself in Scandal and wallowing in the divine oblivion of moral bankrupcy!

I wash my hands of it - and leave it to you fine upstanding citizens to dilligently compile your complaints against the ‘Universal server of Luck’ while I gaily continue on my long and sordid journey, with the only inevitable destination being the Tomb Colonies.

Help send me on my Bon Voyage, by feeding my seemingly insatiable hunger for Scandal for what little time there is left.

Sincerely,

If the Luck Server is taking longer to realize that it just allotted me my luck, thereby occasionally giving it to me more times than it meant to (and anecdotal evidence does not refute the suggestion), then I have no intention of filing a complaint.