because Xen does not trust his data from a few months ago means i cant trust Falkao's?
thats another logic fail right there
It means you should be sceptic, too, in case something has indeed changed.
This is no fallacy, but what you do is close to one - disregarding possibilities because you simply do not like them is a cocksure way to go wrong.
You might say that i am just being paranoid, but then you are calling Xen (and everyone who wants to be on the safe side) paranoid, too...
"Better dafe than sorry" is a known concept to you?
Scientific data, especially empirical data, cannot be confirmed enough.
As i have said over and over, there is no pattern because there are many people who did not hit big after losing big time. law of large numbers will do the trick for both these case and your answer to why those people did not hit big yet, ie, cycle more peds?
I have provided a simple explanation for what you ask - look, even your supermarket investigates where to place the toilet paper so it makes you buy more. It is only logical to assume that MA adapts the payout rate to your gaming style. You completely ignore this, and well, what else can i say other than repeating myself:
You are disregarding possibilities here simply because you don't like them.
is not gambling and no luck involved really a prerequisit?i dont think so, both are possible?
Possible only if you think MA lies and the swedish authorities do so, too.
While this is indeed a possibility, we should start somewhere and take some prerequisites as granted.
If you don't like them, please elaborate on why you think the swedish authorities might lie and we might take it into consideration. (i.e. bribery?)
but i could make a stab at a alternate system, based on the shared loot model, most damage done has the highest chance to loot x, but only the highest chance, not a certainty, now picture every avatar having a coefficent based upon "deviation from 90% norm", and the higher that coefficent the higher the chance of recieving one of the extremely rare higher loot classes, at any given time there are x amount of ppl running around looting mobs/dropping probes, this is not a personal loot pool and would explain some people thinking they have a personal loot pool and some people not getting compensation loots. It didnt take me long to think this up as a alternate theory, there must be others?
That coefficient is just another way to express that loot is based on your past losses - another term for the same mechanism is "personal loot pool".
You didn't even realize that you are argueing in favour of "MA tracks long-term loots and compensates players", did you?
"it clearly didnt before" just isnt born out by any facts i have seen, period. i am playing atm after a long break of two years and everything seems the same to me.
It is very well supported by facts i have seen.
And i cannot comment on whether it has changed recently or not, no time to play atm - but i said that in my last post already.
you can use my argument against me just not your
argument, they are your views not mine?
I can use whatever argument i want to use, with very little constraints - it is up to you to disprove them, because that's how a debate works.
i have always been picky? search is your friend
No idea, i tend to not remember (or not attribute posts correctly) if people do not even have an avatar picture.
However, if you are that much of a critic, why do you disagree with my general observation that something does not match???
I have never stated that it is completely ruled out that there isnt a element of chance or gambling as you wish in entropia. The only thing i have a problem with is the twisted logic you use and the things you state as facts that have no basis in fact as i understand facts
I do not twist logic, and if i do please carefully point out what exactly you deem illogical.
You, in contrast, ignore possibilites with no other reason than not liking them - just look at the first part of your post, you are doing it all the time.
I think "facts" do mean something entirely different to you than to i.e. me, and i wonder if this conversation really makes any sense when you argue only based on gut feelings and accuse me of doing the same.
And, "believe" in a personal loot pool means exactly just that - "belief" is a known concept to you?
If i could prove it beyond any doubt, it would no longer be belief - however, this does NOT mean that it is wrong, only because i cannot prove it. Feel free to disprove it though, but learn the basics of "how empirical knowledge can be gained" first, you appear to make it wrong.