Ring Games - A question for math geeks.

Since the ring games are returning this weekend, I have a question. I've done all the mathematical calculations to determine the odds of winning tickets for both games. (Yes, i'm a geek too )

In the 16 ring game, each ring is equal. Over time you will lose tickets. This game is a better bet for the unlucky title because you will lose less with each game than 9-ring and you'll increase your unlucky title for less money.

9 Ring is much faster however at increasing your lucky title, but it costs more gold per hour than the other game. If you want the unlucky title as well, the corner rings are a better bet, but overall each ring averages out to the same cost per game.

These calculations are based on pure math theory and they assume a perfect random number generator (RNG). In reality there is no such thing as a perfect compterized RNG. So, here's my question: Has anyone here done any analysis on the RNG used in the ring games? Any noticable flaws popping up that tend to favor a ring? I'm assuming that since most of GW is based on "dice rolling" combat damage that they have a fairly decent RNG developed, but I can always hope.

corner rings are best if you have money to start with for lots of tickets. if you dont have enough for 1500 tickets to start then go for the middle ring thats for 9 rings.

Yes, I know that. I'm asking about the RNG used to generate the winning ring. Any flaws? Are certain rings being favored over others?

There was a big thread about the maths involved with the ring games back when they appeared the first time. Suppose you could search for it.

don't think anyone's actually examined that since that would mean sitting there for hours and tallying up each winning circle. for all previous ring calculations, it was assumed that each ring had an equal chance of winning and no rings were being favored.

For me personally, when the rings were there i only left my char in the middle ring of the 9 ring game. I would buy like 10 stacks of tickets and go out for the evening then head to bed. when i woke up the next day usually i had like 2 stacks left.

This method got me too 401k tickets won, and like 17k games lost when they were there. But it will require about 75k to be able to do for this weekend. seeing as on average, the char was on the ring for around 10-12 hours straight.

As far as I know there is no way to tell if a ring is "lucky" unless you stand in it for several hours and see how much tickets you win or loose. Personally, I found a ring last time that won me 4 extra stacks of tickets. But there was a bug where the game wasn't saving correctly and people would loose progress that they had done and a patch came out, after I had downloaded the patch my ring wasn't "lucky" anymore.

I think this belongs in the off topic section of the thread. BTW, I passed the logic unit in my math class

No Frazzy, YOU belong in the off topic section. The OP has a valid question that pertains to GW.

Yes the 4 corner rings are favored equally is what i was saying. Usually if u stand at the podium looking at the 9 rings the far left ring in the corner is just a hair better odds.

They all have a cycle. Hire someone to take note and once the cycle seems to repeat, there you go. 100% wins. But there might be thousand/millions of combinations for 1 cycle.

From what i see, these games will never yield any money back. Everytime the game start, we are actually losing money to ANET. I guess this is 1 way to get rid of the amount of gold in game.

Ok, thx for all the replies guys. I guess I'll just start by trying each corner ring for an hour or so and see if any patterns develop. It sounds like A-net has a decent RNG so I don't expect much of an edge to develop. But, hey, it was worth a shot. I've played other games before with such horrible RNGs that it was possible to determine the outcome before even starting the game.

Oh Frazzy, I passed my logic class too. Got an A+ actually. I just want to know if the guys that programmed the ring games passed theirs.

well you have to take into account for how many rand-numbers it generates per a set amount of time, the simplest way is to use prime numbers or irrationals for the basis of RNG. They do repeat, given it is continuously generated, and no changes are made to the process. But in this case they add in new districts here and now, which will throw the pattern off if there is any.

There is a simple way to show the average person what i mean, If you have a TI-83plus or those types, try this, do a complete format (clear ALL memory) then use the "rand" function. Then repeat the clearing part, and everytime the 1st rand number it gives you will be the same.

That's the type of pattern i think Theraven is looking for.