On Probability

Chained chances are different. You have a 6% chance for winning, so a 94% chance for loosing. Your chance of loosing 6 times in a row (so not winning in 6 tests in a row) is 0.94^6 is 0.689, which means 31% chance of a win in these 6 tries. With ticket 1, you get 15% for the same money.
Again, this suppose independence. That is not the case in a lottery for example.
 
Looks like this is just the geometric distribution - the probability that winning takes k attempts, each attempt having win probability p. The mean of the geometric distribution is 1/p, so the expected expenditure to win for each of the 3 scenarios is: 120/0.15 = 800, 60/0.09 = 666, 20/0.06 = 333. So the best to go for is the 3rd scenario. Obviously this is the expected spend - could win 1st time or it might take the millionth! But the third is the best policy.
 
Thanks but the price for the first ticket is 120, not 60 like for the 2nd one.

But great nevertheless. 👍
ops... with the correct price, I obtain

Markdown (GitHub flavored):
## TICKET SIMULATION RESULTS

Ticket Price: $120.00
Win Probability: 15.00%
Number of Trials: 1,000,000

Mean Cost: $800.31
Standard Deviation: $737.73

## TICKET SIMULATION RESULTS

Ticket Price: $60.00
Win Probability: 9.00%
Number of Trials: 1,000,000

Mean Cost: $666.24
Standard Deviation: $635.77

## TICKET SIMULATION RESULTS

Ticket Price: $20.00
Win Probability: 6.00%
Number of Trials: 1,000,000

Mean Cost: $333.71
Standard Deviation: $323.63
 
ops... with the correct price, I obtain

Markdown (GitHub flavored):
## TICKET SIMULATION RESULTS

Ticket Price: $120.00
Win Probability: 15.00%
Number of Trials: 1,000,000

Mean Cost: $800.31
Standard Deviation: $737.73

## TICKET SIMULATION RESULTS

Ticket Price: $60.00
Win Probability: 9.00%
Number of Trials: 1,000,000

Mean Cost: $666.24
Standard Deviation: $635.77

## TICKET SIMULATION RESULTS

Ticket Price: $20.00
Win Probability: 6.00%
Number of Trials: 1,000,000

Mean Cost: $333.71
Standard Deviation: $323.63
This will be very similar to the theoretical results: 800, 666.66, 333.33. Similarly for the standard deviation - which is sqrt(1-p)/p for the Geometric distribution, so giving: 120 * sqrt(0.85)/0.15 = 737.56 etc. If you run more simulations you'll get closer and closer to these values.
 
Leibnitz (the mathematician, not the cracker)
...geez,... 😂

for repaired size Tolerance she put ZERO.
😂😂😂... since engineers knew that, and business administrators like to misuse the phrase "100% are impossible" to deal themselves blanco cheques to sell 60% crap, I guess the education of this person was kind of law school or political? 😁

Let we have a lottery with numbered 100 balls, ticket 1 mean a ball between 1 and 5 is taken, ticket 2 a ball between 6 and 10, etc.

That's exactly the point on this whole discussion which to me is not clear.
Let's stay with this picture/model of a lottery with balls taken.
The question is: Are the balls thrown back, after each draw, or not?
If so, the chance to win stays the same at every draw, while with an decreasing pool the chance to win on numbers not drawn rises.
As long as the mechanics of this lottery are not clear anything is pretty useless, and purely academic IMO.

However,
in a free-to-play MMORPG.
When this game is kind of "pay to win" - you know, free to play, but for money you can buy better equipment like weapons with more chance to hit, lucky charms etc., then I personally would not assume this is a real fair mathematical probability issue to be examined any closer, but to assume this "lottery" is rigged anyhow.
 
The question is: Are the balls thrown back, after each draw, or not?
If so, the chance to win stays the same at every draw, while with an decreasing pool the chance to win on numbers not drawn rises.
As long as the mechanics of this lottery are not clear anything is pretty useless, and purely academic IMO.

The specifications are not much clear, but they cannot be interpreted like a "normal lottery" because they say:

Which ticket offers the best value for money if you buy as much tickets until you win. Of course you want to spend as little money as possible.

So it must be a repeated lottery, because in a normal lottery you cannot buy a ticket "until you win".

Suppose we can buy multiple tickets of the same lottery, and in particular all the tickets. Then if there is only one winning ticket, there must be exactly 6.66.. tickets with probability 15%. If you buy all of them (6 normal tickets, plus a misterious 0.666.. ticket), you will be secure to win spending $800.

11.111... tickets with probability 9%. 11.111... x $60 = $666.666...

16.666.. tickets with probability 6%. 16.666... x 20 = $333.333...

These are the same results of the repeated lottery. So the two models are equivalent.
 
The question states:- "Which ticket offers the best value for money if you buy as much tickets until you win."

To recap: we have 3 kinds of tickets:-
option 1: 15% chance of success, cost $120
option 2: 9% chance of success, cost $60
option 3: 6% chance of success, cost $20

Assumptions.
1. there is no limit to the number of tickets available (none is stated in the question, and a previous post from OP in this thread states that is the case);
2. we have unlimited funds available;
3. the ticket try events are independent, like rolls of a single die (no dependency between events is stated in the question); such that the theory of cumulative probability can be used to model the scenario.

Let P be the probability of losing any one try.
The cumulative probability of losing after N tries for any specific ticket type is P^N, and hence that of winning is 1-(P^N).

Let us assume that (to a first approximation) we need a 99% (or 0.99) probability of winning to qualify as "success" (100% certainty can never be achieved).
So we need to find the number of trys required to yield a cumulative probability of losing of 1%, or 0.01 (since 1-0.99=0.01).

Then P has the following values:-
option 1($120 per ticket) : 1-0.15 = 0.85
option 2 ($60 per ticket) : 1-0.09 = 0.91
option 3 ($20 per ticket) : 1-0.06 = 0.94

In each case, what power of P will yield a cumulative probability of losing of 0.01?
Then we need to solve for x in the equation:
P^x = 0.01

Taking logs:-
log(P^x) = log(0.01)
x. log(P) = -2
x = -2 / log(P)

So the number of trys required to obtain a 99% chance of winning with each ticket option is:-

option 1:
x = -2 / log(0.85)
= 28 tries

option 2:
x = -2 / log(0.91)
= 49 tries

option 3:
x = -2 / log(0.94)
= 74 tries

Hence the total cost if you buy as many tickets as you need until you win (with a 99% chance of winning) is:-
option 1: cost = 28 * 120 = $3360
option 2: cost = 49 * 60 = $2940
option 3: cost = 74 * 20 = $1480

Similarly we can calculate the number of tries and spend required to give a 99.9% chance of winning:-
option 1: -3/log(0.85) = 43 => cost = 43*120 = $5160
option 2: -3/log(0.91) = 73 => cost = 73*60 = $4380
option 3: -3/log(0.94) = 112 => cost = 112*20 = $2240

Therefore option 3 is the best value for money; with the proviso that we have assumed the ticket try events are independent and that cumulative probability can therefore be applied.

Reference.
 
As long as the mechanics of this lottery are not clear anything is pretty useless, and purely academic IMO.
We do not know if it is a lottery. We do not know what is behind.

You can see a ticket as a random variable X taking values 1 or 0.

You have P(X=1)=p and P(X=0)=1-p

But you do not have joint distributions, you do not know for example P(X=i and Y=j) where i,j in {0,1}

You do not know if X and Y are independent, for example P(X=i and Y=j) = P(X=i) * P(Y=j).

I repeated this things many times, gave examples, in vain.
 
Let's pretend there is a game and the prize is the thing you ever wanted. There are several tickets which have a certain probability to win that prize.

Ticket 1:
Probability to win: 15%
Price: $120

Ticket 2:
Probability to win: 9%
Price: $60

Ticket 3:
Probability to win: 6%
Price: $20

Which ticket offers the best value for money if you buy as much tickets until you win. Of course you want to spend as little money as possible.
So do you know the answer, OP? Did any of us get it right? :)
 
Oh, that'll take a while to check. I'm chronically broke and have only been able to buy tier C pets ("ticket 3", 6% chance, ~20 million gold) five times so far, for a total of 100 million. Farming all that gold takes forever.

Of course, no luck yet.
 
I had an argument with our new QA manager.
We were submitting a condition report and for repaired size Tolerance she put ZERO. I told her you cannot have zero tolerance even at subatomic particle level.
That is the quality assurance manager?? Of is she/he just a box ticker to say that some kind of quality process has been followed, without any understanding of the engineering involved? "Yes, we filled in all the fields on the form you sent us", tick!
 
Am I going to get sent another puzzle leading to a chain of further puzzles and finally a job interview at GCHQ with the opportunity of a fantastic 22K a year job at the end of it?? 😂
 
That is the quality assurance manager??
The new one this week.... My company got bought out //went broke and the new company is inserting their team.

I am sorry for my Off-Topic post...

I saw somebody mention "Infinity" and it just strikes me as much of the same as tolerances.
 
Yes, the whole pet system is a money sink to counteract inflation.
Runescape RNG got me into not gambling :p

I thought everything just had a chance at dropping or not casually, but the more I read about Rare drop table, there's all sorts of conditions (including a Mega drop table, gem drop table, and all 3 + regular drop table influenced by Ring of Wealth, and monsters existing above a ditch-line (wilderness) get different drop tables than the rest of the overworld)

Meanwhile a few days ago I prepped for a long grind for a rare drop (Chaos talisman), and got the drop first kill 😆
 
Back
Top