Ok faggots what do you think
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Ok faggots what do you think
one in 4
50/50
Go ask /tg/
>>673065285
would that make it 25% therefore making it not a 50% chance of a crit?
0%
because even if i build crit i never get crits
hirez fix your shit game
>>673065180
if 1 crit is guaranteed u only consider second attack, which has 50% chance therefore 50/50 for double
50 idiot, one crist is sure cuz u said it, other hit its just 50/50
>>673065180
Considerig that the hits are consequentive, and do not occur at once- 1/3.
>one hit will be crit
>5p% crit chance
>2 hits
>50/2=25
>25 x 50 = a big number
>big numbers arent small
>2 is small
>2/2=1
>every 1 in 2 attacks is a crit
>50%chance of crit twice
>>673065180
50%
there is no answer to this question without further information on how the 1 fixed crit it determined /thread
educate yourself
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeping_Beauty_problem
>>673066082
this
>>673065591i know that feel
>>673065180
Uhhh... 50% you idiots. It's what they call "gamblers fallacy"
>>673065494
You're an idiot
>>673066603
Not even close
>>673065180
%50
1/3
>>673065180
Do we get to use weighted dice?
>>673066789
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
0%
Idiots
>>673066906
This is correct.
Another example of that would be I flip two coins. I know at least one of them is heads. The chance of the other one being tails is 2/3.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_or_Girl_paradox for reference.
>>673065180
33%
>>673065180
It's 1/3 or 1 in 3 or 33% chance
So first hit 50/50 crit or no crit, second hit 50/50 crit or no crit
So there are 4 possible scenarios: no crit then no crit, no crit then crit, crit then no crit and crit then crit.
Normally it would be 25% chance to get a 50/50 odds in your favour twice, but, we are told there is at least one crit.
so you eliminate the no crit then no crit scenario, and you are left with 3 possible scenarios, thus 1 in 3 chance
>>673067010
This isn't a gamblers fallacy, you didn't even read the op.
>>673065617
the first could not be a crit and the second could be a crit
1/3
>>673067236
No, because we're told one of them is crit. We'll assume that's the first one. So now it just depends on if the second one is and the odds of that happening is 50% => 50% chance.
1/4.2crits, 3/4 1crit
>>673070240
"We'll assume that's the first one."
There's your issue.
see >>673068033
>>673065180
50%.
We know that one of the two hits is a guaranteed crit, so the probability of both hits being crits is the same as the probability of one non-guaranteed hit being a crit, that is, 50%.
>>673070240
> we'll assume that's the first one.
Your first mistake.
50% easy fags
>>673071228
Kill yourself
>>673065180
50/50
one of them is a crit for sure. the chance of getting a crit(the not 100% one) is 50% so 50% chance that both will be crits. whats so difficult about this.
>>673071035
you are mistaken
we have 4 possibilities
hit-hit
hit-miss
miss-hit
miss-miss
just knowing that theres at least 1 hit only rules out the last possibility, so there are 3 possibilities
hit-hit
hit-miss
miss-hit
1/3 is hit-hit, therefore the odds of them both being a hit given you know at least 1 is a hit, is 1/3
Why is it 1/3 and not 1/4? i get that the 1/4 chance that would be No Crits can't happen, but doesn't that get changed into 1 crits anyway, instead of being spread to both 2 Crits and 1 Crit?
>>673065180
Its 50%, since either the first or second hit is a guaranteed 100%, its 50% chance the other one will hit too.
>>673065180
Ugh I remember this from prob n stats. Can't do it without ti-84 calc tho
>>673071626
>Why is it 1/3 and not 1/4? i get that the 1/4 chance that would be No Crits can't happen, but doesn't that get changed into 1 crits anyway, instead of being spread to both 2 Crits and 1 Crit?
given that all 4 combinations of events (crit-crit, crit-miss, miss-crit, miss-miss) have the same probability, if one of them is eliminated, its probability will be distributed evenly among the remaining possibilites, since they all have equal possibility
the 1 crit scenario IS more likely than 2 crits, but only because there are 2 different scenarios that both constitute 1 crit (crit-miss, miss-crit) and only 1 scenario that consittutes 2 crits (crit-crit)
>>673065180
RNG.
>>673072001
Yep it's 1/4
>>673072607
It's 1/3.
See >>673071608
0.25
1/3
4 possibilities
2 noncrit
1 crit 1 noncrit
1 noncrit 1 crit
2 crit
This takes out 1 of the posibilities, the first one, leaving 3 left. 1 of the 3 is doublecrit.
>>673071608
how are the outcomes "hit-miss" and "miss-hit" different from one another?
100% faggot
>>673073401
fuck no its 1/3 didnt notice one had to be crit
Assuming he has at least one crit, then that makes the other crit 50%
>>673073563
They just are. If you flip a coin twice u have a half chance of getting 1 head 1 tail because of this wheras without this effect u would have a 1/3 chance. This is also the reason u have a 1/3 chance to crit here.
As one shot is already critic its probability is 100%. The other shot has a prob to be critic of 50%.
Result is 1 * 0.5 = 0.5.
50% you retards
>>673068033
No the kid was misgendered. Your offending me
>>673073757
"they just are" really doesn't demonstrate your logic.. I can't comprehend how getting the hit before the miss, or the miss before the hit makes the "1 hit 1 miss" outcome two separate outcomes based on order..
>>673065180
You hit twice
>At least one is a crit
that means theres only 3 out comes
Punch one crits second one doesnt and vise versa, or both crit
That means 1/3 (75%)
>>673074427
I mean 33.3%*...
>>673074305
im not the guy who said, "they just are", im the original poster you asked
im not sure what you're not understanding though, its quite obvious that there is a difference between getting a crit on the first hit and getting a crit on the second hit
those are obviously two different possibilites, and yet, they both constitute a case of just 1 crit occuring
whereas there is only 1 scenario where both hits are crits, and thats if both hits are crits
Took STA409 (Statistical Methods in Research) at uni last semester. Answer is .5. I go to college.
This> javascript:quote('673073593');
>>673075463
sounds like you need some remedial study
>>673065180
By stating that at LEAST 1 hit is a crit, we can already dismiss 1 hit... so now we have to find the probability that the un-disclosed hit is a crit, which is a 50% crit chance.
50%, done.
>>673075691
this
>>673075653
Try education sometime. It's good for you. Really.
>>673069356
Or they could both be. Therefore 1/2
>>673065180
50%
Possible answers
S={0,1 1,0 1,1}
That is three choices.
Learn to probability.
1/3
Where's that banana when you need it?
>>673076365
That is wrong.
>>673075463
Seriously you need to go back to your books and actually understand them
>>673065180
you homosexual
25%
1 scenario: both hits are normal
2 scenario: 1st hit crit, 2nd normal
3 scenario: 1st hit normal, 2nd crit
4 scenario: both hits are crit
scenario 4 has a chance of 1/4 = 25% of happening
>>673075289
This is what I'm not understanding: The probability is based on potential outcome, right? To me, and maybe I'm wrong, order is irrelevant to outcome, you either hit 1 crit, 2 crit, or no crits. Those are the possible outcomes, a differen't way of looking at it/wording it to how others have but never the less that is three potential outcomes that encompass all possible outcomes, right? Whether you hit the crit before the miss or not doesn't change the outcome of one critical hit. Do you see where I'm having trouble?
>>673065180
There are TWO confirmed hits. There is no confirmation on order, there is no first hit, or second hit, there is only Hit #1 and Hit #2, which can occur in any order.
We can confirm that at least one of the hits is a crit, so since order does not matter, we will designate the confirmed crit as Hit #1...
After confirming Hit #1 as a crit, what is the chance of Hit #2 being a crit? (50/50 chance...)
50%
Get it right or pay the price.
>>673068223
actually 33.33 repeating.
>>673076565
You wouldn't be able to understand them even if you tried. You can't even solve this simple 101 level problem. Does anyone else here actually have an education and experience with statistics, or is it just a bunch of GED champions like this genius?
>>673076727
"potential outcomes' can be defined however you like though
we could say that there are only two possible outcomes: at least 1 crit, and 0 crits
in that case we have 100% probability of crit because we've already been given that information
>Whether you hit the crit before the miss or not doesn't change the outcome of one critical hit.
correct, the reason we distinguish between them is not because we mistakenly think its relevant to the question of how many crits were acheived
its because they are relevant to the question of the probability of getting two crits
>>673076976
I'm with this guy. I'm genuinely surprised. I thought b was for nerds and dweebs, not actual retards.
Answer is 1/3. You need to account for all possible scenarios, and then eliminate those without at least one crit.
>>673077598
>im with this guy
>answer is 1/3
but anon, that guy said the answer is .5
>>673077598
>>673077754
SICK BURN
>>673077503
>we could say that there are only two possible outcomes: at least 1 crit, and 0 crits
No you couldn't, because you would be excluding the possibility of 2 crits, which is undeniably a possible outcome.
I haven't left out any potential outcome in my listed three scenarios, have I? So WHY is order relevant?
>>673065180
HM
MH
HH
1/3
>>673078142
2 crits falls under "at least 1 crit" does it not?
2 is of course "at least 1"
>>673065591
Crits suck now just go qins and attack speed bruh
>>673077754
Ah, my mistake not following the posts. I was just agreeing with the seeming lack of education.
I support those giving the answer as 1/3.
>>673076976
The crux of the matter is whether hit first and miss second is equivalent to hit first and miss second.
I'd argue that given that it's a sequential event, they are distinct outcomes and hence the answer is 1/3.
>>673078447
yes, so it stays in as a scenario. you are eliminating the scenarios which don't have at least 1 crit.
>>673065591
>>673078625
>TFW you realize other /b/rethren play Smite
>>673078785
whether or not its sequential doesnt matter
even if they happened at the exact same time, there would still be a difference, you would just have to define the difference differently (right hit vs left hit, A hit vs B hit)
>>673065180
88%
>>673078785
Ahhh, I'd have to agree with you then.
>>673078447
Ahh I misread you there. Yes it does but to say "at least 1 hit" Puts 2 possible outcomes (1 hit, 2 hit) under 1 header and treats it as a single possibility which is a clear logical fallacy, it's two possible outcomes, no matter how you want to word it, 1 hit and 1 miss is not the same outcome as 2 hits. You can not possibly have both outcomes simultaneously within 2 moves.
Missing on one hit and landing another on target is still the same outcome whichever order you hit or missed in so HM or MH is the same final outcome.
>>673078851
damn im really struggling to make you understand
we're talking about a different question now. forget the OP. take a different two hits, we dont know how many crits there are, nothing else is given, okay?
now in this new scenario, we want to answer the question of whether at least 1 of these two hits is a crit
thats it, is 1 of them a crit.
now given that the crit chance is 50%, thats 50% for hit 1 to crit, 50% for hit 2 to crit.
for there to NOT be 1 crit, that must mean both are not crits, right? so you take the possibility of a noncrit for swing 1, and you multiply it by the possibility of a noncrit for swing 2, 50% times 50% is 25%. therefore the possibility of getting zero crits is 25%
which makes the possibility of getting ***at least*** 1 crit 75%
are you following?
that 75% also includes the possibility of two crits.
>>673079649
yesss....??
Your point?
It all depends on how you find out that there is at least one crit.
>>673079649
I'm just furthermore confused. I didn't do very well in maths at school, as you have probably sussed by this point.
>>673079826
I guess it depends whether or not they're sequential events.
I agree: 1/3 chance it's a double clit
Scenario I: The first hit is always a critical
100% crit chance for hit 1
50% crit chance for hit 2
1/1 * 1/2 = 0.5 = 50% both are critical
Scenario II: Second hit is always critical
Same as above, so 50%
>>673065494
No you dumb shit.
>>673079826
Confirmed. You can't have a 50% chance to crit then just say "one of them is a crit". That means you've already seen the result. From this result, we must assume there is now only 1 hit that is applicable to the 50% rule, and the other is moot. Therefore you've got a 50% chance there are 2 crits.
If the real question is "if there is a 50% chance to crit and you hit twice, what is the chance that you get to 2 total crits assuming the first (or 2nd) hit crits (exclusively).
>75%
>>673079790
>>673080191
we can say that there are 3 outcomes if it floats your boat
0 crits
1 crit
2 crits
but now we must calculate the probability of each outcome
0 crits is 50% times 50%=25%
2 crits is 50% times 50%=25%
1 crit must therefore have a 50% likelihood, because there are only 3 outcomes, and together they must mkae 100% right?
so why do you think there is twice the likelihood of 1 crit to 0 or 2 crits?
the answer is that there are 2 different scenarios that both constitute 1 crit, crit-miss and miss-crit, but only 1 scenario for the other possibilities, crit-crit or miss-miss
>>673080469
So if you take both of those scenarios and add them together, you one scenario for Hit 1 crit, one scenario for hit 2 crit and in each scenarios is both hits crit.
0+0+1 / 3 is 1/3rd, 33/33% chance
Right!?
Binomial model u cucks
hit miss
miss hit
that's the process, order, not outcome.
If I show you two dye, one showing 2, and the other showing 5 and tell you I just rolled that, 2 and 5 is the outcome. If I roll the same two dice, you don't know which was the 5 or the 2 on my last roll, but I roll a 5 and 2 again, is that outcome the same as the first roll? Could you argue "I cannot determine the outcome because I don't know which dice had the 5 or 2 to begin with" ?
A quarter
You guys need to learn some university level probabilities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditional_probability
Therefore: 50%
Two possible interpretations of the problem
1. the first hit is crit, and second is in question.
So what's the chance of the second hit being crit? Well, it's in the question, it's 50%.
2. it could also be the first hit is in question, and the second hit is crit.
So, what's the chance of your first hit being crit? Well, it's in the question, it's 50%.
So it's 50% regardless of bad wording. If you're going to disagree, please refute my logic rather than just stating your own.
Highguiz im still in third grade it's 4 cause M is for multiply
If you were to flip 2 coins there would be 4 possibilities, guaranteeing one of the coin flips means that one coin is completely removed from the equation, making the odds of both of the coins landing the same way 50%
>>673080469
You counted twice the same event of double clit (in Scenario I and Scenario II)
Thus the wrong result when you merge both.
Right answer is 1/3
>>673081506
Again,
You counted twice the same event of double clit (in Scenario I and Scenario II)
Thus the wrong result when you merge both.
Right answer is 1/3
>>673081506
you're wrong because both hits are in question.
all we know is that at least 1 is a crit. we are not asking: given that 1 is a crit, what is the probability the other is a crit
we are asking, given that 1 is a crit, what are the odds that both are a crit.
The facts are:
1. Two hits.
2. One hit is a crit, but we don't know whether the other hit is a crit.
3. The chance of a crit is 50%.
Q: What is the chance that the remaining hit is a crit?
A: 50%
>>673080889
Total probability of getting at least one crit: Ncr(2,1)*.5*.5+Ncr(2,2)*.5^2 =.5 + .25 = .75
Probability of getting both crits: Ncr(2,2)*5^2 = .25
Both crits/ total = .25/.75
1/3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpwSGsb-rTs
This explains it well
>>673080808
Two different SCENARIOS that constitute 1 crit, but the OUTCOME of those two scenarios is still the same. Your probability of hitting a critical isn't affected by whether or not you hit the critical first, right? Then by allowing that factor to stipulate two independent outcomes (hit miss, miss hit) and therefore decrease your probability doesn't make sense to me.
>>673082102
Given that one hit is a crit the only one left to chance is the other hit
>>673065180
50%
Alright you fuckers, listen up. I'm going to explain the logic here in simple terms.
The answer is NOT 50%.
>>673081506 I will get into why this is not correct.
TOTAL OUTCOMES FROM TWO HITS
1. No crits
2. First hit crits, second does not
3. First hit does not crit, second one crits
4. Both hits crit
WE ASSUME WE HAVE AT LEAST ONE CRIT
From the total outcomes, we eliminate the outcome THAT DOES NOT CONTAIN A CRIT (the first outcome I listed)
Where does that leave us?
We now have:
1. First crits, second doesn't
2. First one doesn't crit, second one crits
3. Both hits crit
Now the problem states we are looking for the outcome where both hits crit.
From this reduced set of outcomes, what is the probability?
ONLY ONE of the THREE outcomes will result in two crits. That is the logic behind this.
Answer is 1/3.
You cannot read "assume one crit" and only look at the probability for the next hit to figure this out.
>>673081767
but we aren't guaranteeing one of the coin flips
neither of the coins is "completely removed from the equation", because they both could be the one thats not a crit
>>673082102
Your answer assumes that both are in question at the same time. Only one can be in question.
>>673081993
I'm not merging, just proving that the answer is the same whichever way you interpret it.
>>673082310
That's a faulty way of getting the possible outcomes. The possible outcome are "hit in question is crit" and "hit in question is not crit".
>>673082422
But that would nullify the meaning of "at least one is a crit"
>>673082293
reread my post friend, tell me where you fell of the train to logic town
do you disagree with the math that proves the possibility of getting 1 crit is 50%, 0 crits 25%, and 2 crits 25% ????
if not, then id like to hear your theory on why 1 crit is exactly TWICE as likely as two crits, IF, as you insist, the fact that there are two scenarios that result in 1 crit doesnt matter
>>673082733
Sorry I read that wrong, but it would imply that you can question both separately even though one is guaranteed
>>673082570
>The possible outcome are "hit in question is crit" and "hit in question is not crit"
There is no fault in the way I got the total of four outcomes. Without the assumption, we have to calculate total outcomes.
After you've obtained the four outcomes of two events with a 50% chance, THEN you use the assumption to eliminate what is known to be true.
>>673082310
Nah, you got it wrong. The possibilities are:
1. 0 crits
2. 1 crit
3. 2 crits
Eliminating 1, we are left with 2 possibilities, not 3. Therefore 50/50.
>>673082733
no it doesn't
if at least 1 is a crit, that means its possible that 1 of them is not a crit
and since we dont know which is which, then both of them could be the one thats not a crit
>Your answer assumes that both are in question at the same time. Only one can be in question.
you've misinterpreted the question
the question is neither of these:
given that hit 1 is a crit, what are the odds hit 2 is a crit
or
given that hit 2 is a crit, what are the odds hit 1 is a crit
the question is
given that either hit 1 or hit 2 is a crit, what are the odds that they are both crits (as opposed to just 1 being a crit)
>>673083004
75%..?
1 will crit and the other's 50/50
>>673083004
The reason that your explanation fails here is because you are discounting the fact that the crit can occur on either the first, or the second. There are two possibilities where the outcome results in only one crit, not just one as you state here.
>>673082310
/thread
that sums it up for all you retards
>>673083004
Fucktards are dividing the 1 crit into two separate possibilities. I.e., first coin ctri vs second coin crit, but it doesn't really matter which one it is, so it's 50%, as I said before: conditional probability.
>>673083186
>>673083309
see above
>>673076455
No, its not.
When did /b/ become so full of morons? The answer is 1/3 as has been explained repeatedly.
>>673082310
WRONG! It doesn't matter whether it's the first or the second, therefore 50%, google conditional probability.
>>673083429
we know about conditional probability bruh, thats we know the answer is 1/3
give me some evidence for this claim here
>Fucktards are dividing the 1 crit into two separate possibilities. I.e., first coin ctri vs second coin crit, but it doesn't really matter which one it is
why do you think it doesnt matter which it is?
50%
Very basic Bayesian probabilities
I think people who are confused by the answer of 1/3 don't understand that OP is discarding one of the possible results.
For any two hits, there are four possible results for C (crit) and N (no-crit), each of which have the same probability of happening:
1. CC
2. CN
3. NC
4. NN
Except that OP is discarding the NN case. If OP gets NN, he's discarding that and re-rolling so that the only result that he presenting to you are going to be one of these:
1. CC
2. CN
3. NC
So of those three results, each of which still have the same probability of occurring, what are the chances of CC?
After playing the new fire emblem The came out. I can honestly say 0
The only reason the question exists is because the answer is counterintuitive. If the answer was 50%, nobody would bother asking the question. Faggots
>>673083594
nah dawg, you are definitely wrong
when you roll dice, the odds of getting a 3 are higher than the odds of getting a 2
why?
because the order matters
the only way to get a 2 is to get a 1 and a 1
to get a 3, you could get a 2 and a 1 OR a 1 and a 2
or do you deny that a 3 is more likely when you roll two dice than a 2?
>>673081506
Here is the explaination on drawing
>>673082803
I'm trying to understand it, I really am. It's just not clicking for me and I'm finding it pretty mentally taxing trying to get a grasp on so I'm gonna just bow out, proclaim ad nauseam and maybe try again at a later date.
One of the attempts (either of them) is given to be a hit. It doesn't matter. So the other attempt has %50 chance.
Overall it is %50
Whoever says one possibility is both attempts missing are wrong because the premise already assumes one is a hit
>>673083626
No you don't, otherwise you'd know that the calculation is 0.5*0.5/0.5.
Why do I think it doesn't matter? Because it fucking doesn't! does OP state that a specific hit is a crit? So it doesn't fucking matter.
>>673083949
This does not apply to the given statement
>>673083186
It does not matter whether the critical is on 1 or 2, the question states that half of the hits are 100% guaranteed to be critical. Therefore, the other half is up to a 50% chance.
Now we are left with one result pinned on yes and one left up to chance, whichever one is pinned is not questioned therefore to argue that both are questioned is incorrect, now there is one variable, either left or right, but not both, left at 50%.
33%
you're a retard if you claim otherwise
What if there are a trillion lions though?
It's 1/4 or 25%. This has nothing to do with gambler's fallacy. Just draw a probability tree, 4th graders can figure this out.
>>673083793
NC=CN
Order doesn't matter, we just want one of the hits to be crit, therefore 50%.
>>673083949
Weak bait.
>>673065180
75%
>>673084233
Faggot.
>>673084019
You missed the explaination: do not count twice the same event or you get wrong overall result.
See >>673083975
>>673084200
Except miss/miss isn't an option so 1/3
>>673084390
That's a reasonable argument, retard. I didn't finish my grad studies in physics and applied maths for this shit.
>>673084506
Also, order is not important, so 1/2.
>>673084136
>the question states that half of the hits are 100% guaranteed to be critical
thats a really weird way of phrasing the OP's question
the only thing thats 100% given the OP is that EITHER 1 or 2 is a crit
NEITHER of them is guaranteed to be a crit, the crit chance of any given hit is 50%
just because we know that 1 of the 2 is a crit, doesnt mean we get to say "assume 1 is a crit, 2's chance must be 50%" because that ignores the possibility that 2 was the only crit all along, and 1 was not a hit
Think about it this way, there is one out of 2 that is guaranteed, which means that it is not questioned, leaving you with one being questioned at 50%
>>673084685
if order was important it would be 1/2, order is not important so CH is an outcome just like HC, hence it's 1/3
pull yourself together nigger
depends how much Agility he has
>>673084876
To assume order is irrelevant means that hc and ch are one in the same
>>673084685
"Also, order is not important, so 1/2."
The point is about counting events, so you have to differenciate the cases, order does matter.
miss - miss
Crit - miss
Miss - crit
Crit - crit
Assuming one crit is guaranteed, you take out the miss-miss scenario:
Miss - crit
Crit - miss
Crit - crit
However, since crit - miss and miss - crit are essentially the same, you're left with:
Miss - crit (crit - miss)
Crit - crit
The problem is asking for the probability of both hits critting, therefore in this scenario, you are guaranteed either:
Crit - miss
Crit - crit
Therefore 50% chance. The order of the guaranteed crit does not matter since crit-miss and miss-Crit are one in the same.
>>673085114
if the question said:
first hit is guaranteed a crit then your possible scenarios are :
CH
CC
else if question said:
second hit is guaranteed a crit then your possible scenarios are :
HC
CC
else (which is our question) if it said one of the hits are guaranteed a crit then your possible scenarios are:
CH
HC
CC
hence 33%, can't make it clearer really
50%
At least ONE is a critical hit
>>673084876
Is this bait? Or are you just fucking retarded?
Order not important:
CC
NC (=CN)
1/2
Order important:
CC
NC
CN
1/3
Are you high or something?
>>673085242
Order does NOT matter, OP does not state that the FIRST DRAW IS A HIT, or that the SECOND DRAW IS A HIT, therefore ORDER IS NOT IMPORTANT!
>>673065180
Assuming this is valve logic, every hits crit cause crits are fair and balanced game mechanics
>>673085379
This is top tier trolling, I'm out. I don't know how I even fell for this.
>>673084685
You have four outcomes...
HH
HM
MH
MM
We can discount MM due to the conditions in the OP. If OP said the first was a crit, then that would give two remaining outcomes (HH/ HM) which would be 50%. However, we're just told that one of them is a crit, which gives three outcomes (HH/ HM/ MH) which gives 1/ 3 possibility of both being crits.
There is however a fourth possibility, which is that you're a fucking retard.
THERE ARE TWO HITS, EACH WITH 50% CRIT CHANCE
THE ODDS OF GETTING ZERO CRITS IS 50% TIMES 50%, WHICH EQUALS 25%
THE ODDS OF GETTING TWO CRITS IS 50% TIMES 50%, WHICH EQUALS 25%
SINCE THE ONLY POSSIBLE OUTCOMES ARE ZERO CRITS, TWO CRITS, AND ONE CRIT, THE PROBABILITY OF GETTING ONE CRIT MUST BE 50%, BECAUSE 25% + 25% + 50% = 100%
SO TO RECAP
ZERO CRITS = 25%
ONE CRIT = 50%
TWO CRITS = 25%
LETS CONVERT TO FRACTIONS
ZERO CRIT = 1/4
ONE CRIT = 2/4
TWO CRIT= 1/4
OKAY SO GIVEN THAT OP SAYS ZERO CRIT IS NOT POSSIBLE, WE ARE LEFT WITH
ONE CRIT = 2/4
TWO CRIT = 1/4
SINCE ONE CRIT IS TWICE AS LIKELY AS TWO CRITS, AND THERE ARE NO OTHER POSSIBILE OUTCOMES BESIDES ONE CRIT OR TWO CRITS, THE PROBABILITY OF TWO CRITS GIVEN THAT THERE IS AT LEAST ONE CRIT MUST BE 1/3 OR 33%
>>673085562
and this is why you will never be good enough to be an engineer or anything
The mistake you guys with 33% and other bullshit values are making is that you're treating this as if the hits happen simultaneously and two non-crits are actually an option. They're not. If the first hit doesn't crit, the second MUST crit as specified in the OP, so order matters. Draw yourself a tree diagram.
>>673086281
Yes, there are only three outcomes but they don't have the same probability, so 1/3 is bullshit.
>>673085805
You're right, I hadn't thought about conditional in a long time, now that I settled and thought a bit about it I can see where I failed. It is indeed 1/3, sorry about my stupidness
>>673085904
You don't just divide the number of outcomes, from a logical standpoint there is always one that is guaranteed, and to assume that the question of which one is guaranteed affects the answer is retarded. One is guaranteed, the other is not. That means the probability that they both crit is 50% because there is only one variable left to chance
>>673086045
i cant read your writing but it looks correct
the bottom line is that the odds of getting 1 crit are twice as high as the odds of getting 2 crits
everybody who believes the answer to OP's question is 50% must account for that fact or accept that they are wrong
lol at the faggot posting shit about conditional probability and STILL getting the answer wrong.
This is the exact same problem as:
You flip two coins. At least one is heads. What is the probability that both are heads?
You CANNOT combine (Tails, Heads) and (Heads, Tails) as one outcome.
There are three outcomes in this problem, and only one will give the desire result. That is conditional probability, and to the massive faggot spouting READ ABOUT CONDITIONAL PROBABILITY and then claiming the answer was 50%, I salute you. You are the fucking dumbest poster in this thread.
1/3.
>>673086556
You're just as wrong as the 50% people though, since your example is not actually the same. You flip one coin, and then you flip the other. See >>673085253
>>673084233
>NC=CN Order doesn't matter
NC and CN are not the same thing. They are two separate possible results, each with a 25% probability of happening. Sure, you can combine them, but you also have to combine their possibilities.
You are saying that the possibilities are:
1. CC = 1/3 chance -- THIS IS WRONG
2. CN or NC = 1/3 chance -- THIS IS WRONG
3. NN = 1/3 chance -- THIS IS WRONG
If you want to combine CN and NC the actual probabilities are:
1. CC = 1/4 chance
2. CN or NC = 1/2 chance
3. NN = 1/4 chance.
Again, any result of NN is discarded and we reroll our hits. This leaves us with
1. CC = 1/3 chance
2. CN or NC = 2/3 chance
Your claim is the same thing as saying rolling two 6 sided dice, the chance of getting a 7 is the same as getting a 2 or 12.
>>673086538
Your bottom line is wrong as well though. The odds of getting 1 crit are thrice as high(3/4 = 3*(1/4)) as the odds of getting 2, which is how we arrive at 1/4 probability.
>>673086860
There is no difference. You hit the enemy once, and then you hit the enemy a second time. It is literally a reskinned version of the coin question, solved in this manner using conditional probability.
If AA is the event that the first coin lands heads, and BB is the result that the second coin lands heads, then what we're looking for is P(A∩B|A∪B)P(A∩B|A∪B). The probability of both AA and BB is 1212, so A∪BA∪B is 3434. The probability of A∩BA∩B is P(A|B)P(B)P(A|B)P(B), which is 1/2(1/2)=1/4*1/2(1/2)=1/4. Therefore, the probability is (1/4)/(3/4)=1/3
>>673087257
Conditional probability, to me, seems inherently flawed
Again, the problem statement does not clarify enough information. It would be 1/3 if order mattered, 1/2 if order doesn't matter.
>>673087454
>mathematical law seems flawed
gg m8
>>673086533
both variables are up to chance friend
this is our equation as OP describes it
If X=1, the first hit is a crit
If X=0, the first hit is not a crit
If Y=1, the second hit is a crit
If Y=0, the second hit is not a crit
given that X+Y>0 (at least 1 crit occured), what are the odds that X+Y=2
there are three scenarios such that X+Y>0
X=1 and Y=1, X=0 and Y=1, X=1 and Y=0
only the first scenario out of three results in X+Y=2, therefore the odds of two crits given at least 1 is 1/3
>>673086281
Nope. Getting a 50% no crit on first roll and then 100% crit on the second roll violates the rule that crit/no-crit are 50/50.
To guarantee one crit from two hits, OP must be discarding any result of no-crit/no-crit and rerolling.
>>673082293
I'm not the dude you're arguing with but dam son you probably should have skipped class so much back in high school
>>673087496
no, order always matters in this case, there is no universe in which the probability of getting two crits given at least one crit is affected by whether or not the hits occurred at the same time or whatever it is that youre implying we dont know
>>673087257
This is the correct answer, and the correct way to use conditional probability, even though this anon's formatting is garbage. Stats major here.
>>673087257
>(1/4)/(3/4)
so you're agreeing that one in four throws/hit chains would land double crits then? How is that not a 1/4 probability then? what's the point in diving them by each other?
>>673065180
1x0.5 = 0.5
50%, anyone who thinks otherwise is a retard
>>673087923
What I'm trying to explain is that if order matters, then you'd have to include both scenarios of crit-miss and miss-crit
But if order doesn't matter, those two scenarios are essentially the same since one crit is always guaranteed.
The question is vague, if you assume that if you roll a noncrit on the first one the second is a guaranteed crit the answer is 1/4. If it is impossible to roll two noncrits then the answer is 1/3. The latter answer would be impossible in any scenario where the probabilities for each hit are rolled independently.
>>673065886
I hope you didnt hurt your little faggot brain trying to figure that out
>>673087939
maybe you can explain where the last step comes from then. How do you go from 1/4 chance for the target outcome to happen to diving it by the other outcomes' chance and ending up at 1/3? Far as I see, we stop at the 1/4 - 3/4 results
>>673087963
You're correct, P(Two Crits) = 25%
However, we assume at least one crit. Which narrows down the remaining three outcomes of
(Crit, No Crit)
(No Crit, Crit)
(Crit, Crit)
Of those three, we are looking for (Crit, Crit).
So the answer is 1/3
>>673065180
50%
>one's guaranteed
>50% for a crit
>crit
>50% to crit
The end
>>673088296
but the three don't have the same probability to occur
>>673073563
one of them wasn't a nickel
but the other one was
>>673088553
Yes, and?
>>673088676
and that means the probability is not 1/3. If we had three possible outcomes, all with the same likelyness to occur, 1/3 would be fine, but we don't. We have two with 1/4 each and one with 1/2. One of the 1/4 outcomes is the one we're looking for, so the chance is 1/4.
>>673065180
you have the conditions
1.you have 2 hits
2.at least one MUST be a crit
3.the chance for the other one is 50%
Then the chance of both being crits is 50%
>>673088975
You're retarded. Each of the outcomes have 1/4 chance
>>673088295
I'm not >>673087939
What's happening is that any results of no-crit/no-crit are being discarded and rerolled.
Think about it this way: if you flipped two coins a few thousand times and threw away all results of Tails/Tails, what percentage of what you had left would be Heads/Heads?
PLEASE STOP ARGUING
I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE
>>673088553
They absolutely have the same probability to occur.
Think of the coin toss problem. The four outcomes and their probabilities are
1. (Tails, Tails) = 25%
2. (Heads, Tails) = 25%
3. (Tails, Heads) = 25%
4. (Heads, Heads) = 25%
Then we are given the assumption that we need at least one Heads. So for the sake of the problem, we are now in a universe where it is physically impossible to obtain the outcome (Tails, Tails).
So that makes the remaining three outcomes occur with an equal 33% probability.
>>673089228
out of three outcomes, all have a 1/4 chance? rethink that one for me, will ya
>>673089369
yeah but I'm a faggot so you're wrong
It's 50%. since one of the crits is guaranteed the second one will have a 50% chance to crit.
>>673089263
>>673089369
both you guys are making the same mistake of treating this like the first and second hits are exactly the same/occuring independent of each other, but they're not. We're not rolling random hits/coins and discarding the sets with two fails, we're rolling two hits/coins in sequence, and if the first one fails we don't roll the second but instead take the second as success, because the OP specifies that at least one has to be a crit -> if first doesn't hit/lands on heads, second must be crit/heads
>>673089716
Read >>673087257 and educate yourself as to why you are incorrect
^^^^^ATTENTION IDIOTS^^^^
The question is worded ambiguously on purpose. There are two answers depending on how you read it, 1/3 and 1/2.
If you answered 1/3 you read the question as:
'What are the chances that both hits are a crit, discounting a scenario with no crits'
If you answered 1/2 you read the question as:
'What are the chances that the second hit is a crit if the first hit is a guaranteed crit'
If you answered 1/4 or anything else you misread the question.
>>673071543
you're wrong, go to school
>>673089483
No crit-no crit = 1/4
No crit - crit = 1/4
Crit - no crit = 1/4
Crit -crit = 1/4
Order matters
>>673089833
>We're not rolling random hits/coins and discarding the sets with two fails
actually thats exactly what we are doing
>we're rolling two hits/coins in sequence
nowhere does OP specify a sequence
>and if the first one fails we don't roll the second but instead take the second as success, because the OP specifies that at least one has to be a crit
this is completely unfounded
OP does not claim that anytime two hits occur sequentially in this hypothetical videogame, at least one is a crit
all he said was in the case of these two specific hits, at least one is a crit
>>673090277
no crit-no crit is 0 since the question explicitly forbids it
>>673089263
There are two outcomes per roll, one outcome where half the results are h, and the other where all results are h. The order does not represent the proportion
>>673065285
First post best post.
>>673090277
Order DOES NOT matter because OP did not STATE that it matters. You cannot just assume the order matters.
>>673089880
yeah except its not really ambiguous
here's what OP said
>You hit an enemy twice. At least one of the hits is a crit.
in what universe does it make sense to interpret that as
>You hit an enemy twice. The first hit is a guaranteed crit.
>>673065180
The answer to the question is 1/4
since it asks what is the chance instead of what are the odds you have to look at both hits together, this means that you add 50% to 50% which is 1/2+1/2=1/4
>>673068738
This is the correct answer.
>>673065180
One hit is always a crit, there are 4 outcomes, 2 of which result in both critting, therefore it is a 50℅ chance
>>673089833
You've successfully summarized why using conditional probability to obtain the answer 1/3 is correct.
In your scenario, let's say the first hit missed, so we assume the second must be the crit. There's one.
Another outcome is the first hit crit. Now we look to the second in an unbiased fashion because we've already got our one guaranteed crit. Let's say it missed. There's a second outcome.
Now let's say the first hit crit. Great, now let's look at the second. That one crit as well. There's the outcome we were looking for.
Using your scenario, you've explained why there are three outcomes, and one is the desired outcome.
1/3 is the answer
>>673065180
33.33r.
>>673090336
if you wanna see it that way, fine, I get that you'd arrive at 1/3 that way, but the way I see it, the thing that's happening is crystal clear from the question and we're talking about a sequence where the second hit's probability is dependant on the outcome of the first hit. I find it highly unlikely that the scenario the OPs text describes is a high-sample size list of hits that we just pick two out of at random. We're talking about videogames here. In fact, this "crit chance increases the longer you don't get one", very sequential and definitely ordered way of doing it is probably implemented exactly this way in countless games and slot machines.
Miss/hit and hit/miss are two sides of the same metaphorical coin, making them one probability
>>673089880
>the first hit is a guaranteed crit
Can never read the question like that. So the following calculation using that logic does not count here.
1/2 * 2 = 1/4
Basic fractions
>>673090863
Correcting myself, there are technically 3 scenarios since no crit isn't an option, so its 2/3
>>673091023
They are not the same outcome, for this reason >>673089369
Same exact problem as a coin toss.
>>673072001
>can't do it without ti-84
This can literally be figured out by 10 seconds of clear thinking, you don't need a shit calculator that you probably don't know how to use correctly anyway
>>673090885
and you too are forgetting that in the ordered scenario, the three outcomes do not have the same probability to occur so it's not simply 1/3
see
>>673088975
>>673085253
>>673065180
At the start, the 50% crit chance makes four possibilities (c is not crit, C is crit):
cc: 25%
cC: 25%
Cc: 25%
CC: 25%
The piece of information that "At least one of the hits is a crit" just rules out cc, so the probability that we get CC is P(CC) - p(cc) = 0.25 - 0.25 = 0, so the probability of getting a crit twice is 0.
>>673091299
They are one outcome because they represent the guarantee of one hit being a crit
P(x=2) when p(1) = .5
.5*.5 = .25
Let's assume 0 = normal, 1 = crit
50% crit per shot
First shot, two possible outcomes equally as likely
1, 0
Second shot, same
1, 0
1, 0, 0, 1 = 50% chance both are crits...
>>673091411
this is possibly the stupidest answer yet, wow
>>673065180
all the possible outcomes, C for crit, N for normal
>CC
>NC
>CN
>NN
throw out NN since the question states there was at least 1 crit
>CC
>CN
>NC
1/3 of the possible outcomes contain 2 crits.
>answer is 1/3
>mfw plebs think CN and NC are the same event
>mfw I have no face
>>673089880
>>673090677
ATTENTION IDIOTS!
HE SAID THE CHANCE OF CRIT IS 50% ON A STRIKE.
THIS MEANS THAT IF THE CHANCE FOR 2 CRITS WERE 1/3, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE OUTCOMES CRIT-CRIT NOCRIT-CRIT AND CRIT-CRIT WITH EACH A CHANCE OF 1/3.
THIS MEANS THAT OUT OF SIX STRIKES, 4 WOULD BE CRITS. AND THAT'S A 66% CHANCE OF CRIT.
AND HE SPECIFICALLY SAID THE CHANCE IS 50%.
SO, THE ONLY REASONABLE EXPLANATION IS THAT IF ONE OF THE HITS IS A CRIT, THE OTHER ONE MUST NOT BE A CRIT. SO, YOU ONLY HAVE THE SITUATIONS CRIT-NOCRIT AND NO-CRIT-CRIT, WITH EACH 1/2.
AND THE CHANCE OF BOTH CRITS IS 0.
BECAUSE HE SAID AT LEAST ONE IS CRIT, AND CHANCE OF CRIT IS 50%.
YOU ARE RETARDS.
>>673089369
not knowing the difference between chance/odds and probability.
odds are 50%
probability is 25% since you're now calculating the odds of an event with the same odds reoccuring.
for example:
If you toss a coin 100 times and it's heads 100 times in a row the odds on it being heads again is 1/2 but the probability is 100/1
>>673065285
>>673065494
1/2 chance each time assuming they're independent, probability of hitting a crit twice in a row is (1/2)*(1/2) or 1/4, .25 or 25%
>>673091019
actually its crystal clear from the question that 1/3 is the answer
nowhere does it specify that we are calculating the odds of the second hit being a crit given that the first is a crit.
that would be a stupid, pointless question to ask, because whether or not the first hit is a crit is irrelevant to the probability of whether or not the second hit is a crit. the crit chance is 50% and thats all that matters
the only reason we're talking about two different hits is because the question is asking about the probability of two crits given at least 1 crit
>>673090614
Try looking at it this way.
You can miss the first hit, and crit the second. That is a viable outcome given what we know in the problem.
You can also crit the first time, and miss the second. That is another viable solution given what we know in the problem.
However you CANNOT combine those as one probability because both of them have a 33% chance of occurring, because we know it is not possible to obtain the outcome that both hits do not crit.
>>673065180
1/4
1/2 chance for hit 1 to crit, 1/2 chance for hit 2 to crit, so, 1/4 for both to crit
we learned this in middle school, come on /b/, you're better than this
...probably not considering it's /b/
>>673091600
CN and NC are the same event because the order does not matter and thus they are the same because they can be rearranged to be equal to each other.
>>673065494
it's 25% for getting 2 crits in a row, not just one. stop being dumb
>>673090677
It makes sense because you either account for a scenario where there are no crits (you answer 1/3, because of the four outcomes (HH HC CH CC), one is discounted by the question) or you don't account for a scenario with no crits (you answer 1/2 because of the three scenarios left (HC CH CC) only two (hence 1/2) have 'at least one crit').
I hope that made sense
>>673091600
CN and NC are actually one chaotic outcome.
For example, the only way to find out which one always crits you would flip a coin, thus leaving one final coin to be flipped making the odds 50%
>>673091756
holy shit this is some next level trolling
>>673091820
I didn't say we were calculating the odds assuming the first is a crit, I said we're calculating the odds taking into account whether or not the first was a crit when the second is being rolled, since we know the necessary outcome of the second hit IF the first was a non-crit, but not if it wasn't.
50%
Your first crit is guaranteed, thusly leaving you a 50% chance with a second crit.
If you miss, it goes down to 50%
If you hit, it stays 100%
>>673091385
Once we've eliminated the no crit possibility, the remaining three DO have the same 1/3 possibility of occurring. You've explained the difficult part to understand in the problem, and yet you are hung up on this? I'd like you to explain your logic here because it does not make sense.
>>673091756
>>673078938
TFW you have no face
>>673091979
no that doesnt make sense at all
of the three scenarios left, ALL THREE have "at least one crit"
or did you forget that two crits is at least one??
The probability of getting a crit twice is 0 because if you crit on the first hit, you already OHKO'd the enemy and so you don't get to make a second strike.
/thread
>>673065180
Fucking zero. I never crit twice in a row.
>>673092109
how do you look at my tree diagram and not see what I'm talking about? one of the non-2crits options(1st hit non-crit & 2nd hit crit) is double as likely to occur as the other non-2crits option(1st hit crit & 2nd hit no crit) because the first one can occur at the initial 50/50 split and the second has to win two 50/50 splits to happen
If the first hit is crit (1/2):
50% Chance to crit again (1/2 * 1/2)
If the first hit isn't crit (1/2):
Second hit is crit for sure but no one gives a shit
TL;DR 1/4
>>673089833
This would give us the three possibilities and probabilities of:
1. CC = 1/4 (50% for crit first roll, 50% for crit second roll)
2. CN = 1/4 (50% for crit first roll, 50% for non-crit second roll)
3. NC = 1/2 (50% for non-crit first roll, 100% for crit second roll)
So CC would be 25%.
Since possibility 3 has a 100% chance for the crit roll, this violates the rule that the crit chance for a roll is 50%.
So instead we have to conclude that we're only being presented with a subset of possible results. Which is in fact exactly what is happening with the Boy/Girl problem referred to here >>673068033
To all you fucking idiots thinking it's 1/3, the OP is asking about the COMBINATION of Crit-Crit, not the PERMUTATION of Crit-crit.
Read:
https://www.mathsisfun.com/combinatorics/combinations-permutations.html
Essentially, since we're dealing with combinations, NotCrit-Crit and Crit-NotCrit are the SAME EVENT.
Let's answer this question with a majority of the masses. For each possible answer, I CTRL+F this thread and find the majority opinion. That must be correct.
0: 1990 hits
1/4 or 1/2: 77 hits
1/3: 63 hits
So 0 is correct, 1/4 or 1/2 are both acceptible alternative answers, and 1/3 is WRONG AF.
>>673093476
>0: 1990 hits
You're fucking retarded
>>673068033
Individually the chance is 50%
You cannot gain the chance of a crit by already having a crit
>>673092116
>>673092047
You are idiots. OP specifically said the probability of a hit to be crit is 50% and said that within 2 hit, at least one is a crit. This leaves you with exactly the events I described.
Let me modify the problem. The chance for crit is 60% and between to hits, at least one of them is a crit.
Then, the chance of double-crit is x. We know that (2*x+1-x)/2=60% So, x/2 +1/2=60% so x=1/5
in one fifth of the chances, you'd get double crit.
>>673093757
EXACTLY! THANK YOU!
HEY MORONS >>673092116
>>673092047
READ THIS AND WEEP
>>673094069
Shit, wrong post.
See >>673093363
>>673092409
You're right, I got myself mixed up.
The real fact of the question is that the unclear language used leads some to believe that;
'At least one of the hits is a crit' means:
'In the scenario where you have at least one crit' - Here, since there's gotta be a crit, the chance that the other hit is a crit is simply the crit chance (50%)
OR
'At least one of the hits is a crit' means:
'When it so happens that one of the hits is a crit' - Here, since it's possible to have no crits, we take only the three (of four) scenarios where there is at least a single crit and end up with 1/3.
>>673093363
again, it doesnt matter whether you are looking at permutations or combinations
PERMUTATIONS:
crit-crit = 25%
crit-miss = 25%
miss-crit = 25%
miss-miss = 25%
COMBINATIONS:
0 crit = 25%
1 crit = 50%
2 crit = 25%
the odds of 1 crit are twice as likely as the odds of 2 crit, therefore, when we remove the scenario of 0 crits from the equation, we know that the odds of 1 crit plus the odds of 2 crit must equal 100% because they are the only two possibilities
so we know X is twice as much as Y, and we know X + Y = 100% or 1
therefore X is 2/3 and Y is 1/3
>>673092920
it doesn't violate the rules if the specific case that violates the rule is in itself another rule that's being followed perfectly fine(the "one has to be crit) rule
>>673094069
I don't know what he meant by saying
>1990 hits
İdiots.
1 hit has been already made and is known to be critical. So you might have as well never put that in the equation. The other one being critical is 50 percent.
Its fucking 50 percent.
>>673094470
nah youre the idiot
you idiot
>>673094270
>we know that the odds of 1 crit plus the odds of 2 crit must equal 100%
Yeah, but they don't. Just because you want these things to add up to 100 doesn't mean you can just "expand them proportionally" to add up to 100. The extra space has to come from somewhere, that's the 25% you're ignoring coming from the miss-miss case.
The probability of a crit-crit is 1/4, stop being a sheep and figure things out yourself instead of taking what your teacher says for granted.
>>673094270
You're assuming that there's a 50% chance that you will get 1 Crit when in reality, dealing with combinations, you have a 100% chance to get 1 Crit.
Maybe I just don't understand the way you structured your statement. Because this is the way it is.
PERMUTATIONS:
miss-Crit
Crit-miss
Crit-crit
Which is a 1/3 chance to get both crits
COMBINATIONS:
miss-Crit (same as Crit-miss)
Crit-crit
Which is 1/2 chance to get both Crits.
Any questions?
>>673094651
he's right, the odds of 1 crit plus the odds of 2 crit equal 100% and you're right in that the probability is 1/4 but you're both wrong on the probability of the other options being the same
>>673072001
Your calculator is shit
Casio FX-83GTPLUS all the way, fag
>>673094957
Odds of 1 Crit: 100% (stated in the problem)
Odds of 2 Crits: 50% (proven using combinations, not permutations. Or in lay man's terms, order doesn't matter, not order does matter)
In what universe does 100%+50%=100%?
>>673094914
yes i have a question
given that by your own reasoning, the odds of getting the permutation crit-crit is 1/3
that must mean the odds of getting all the other permutations combined is 2/3, since the total must be 3/3
and since the only other permutations besides crit-crit are crit-miss and miss-crit, i.e. combinations that constitute a single crit
isnt the odds of getting ONLY a single crit 2/3
and the odds of the combination crit-crit must therefore be 1/3
>>673065180
Everybody in this thread is fucking retarded. It is obviously 1/3
So the possibilities are
>CritNotCrit
>NotCritNotCrit
>NotCritCrit
>CritCrit
since it cannot be NotCritNotCrit it leaves the 3 equally possible scenarios.
1/3
>>673095418
the odds of AT LEAST 1 crit are 100%, those are not the odds of getting EXACTLY 1 crit
>>673065285
this
>>673094065
The problem with that is that it makes the chance of a crit for the second roll either 0% or 100%. That is, the result of the second roll must be predicated on the first roll.
You can claim this is an alternate universe if you wish, but this sort of causality doesn't exist in ours. The only way to make it exist is to discard results. We have to discard at least no-crit/no-crit results to meet OP's criteria. Discarding crit/crit rolls is NOT necessary. You've decided to discard 100% of crit/crit rolls, but what if I decide to throw away fewer or none? The chance of crit/crit is now anywhere between 0% and 1/3.
SORRY IF THIS MAKES YOU SO MAD YOU BROKE YOUR CAPS LOCK.
There are two scenarios
>Scenario 1
Event 1: is it a crit? Yes it is given that this is a crit. P=100% chance
Event 2: crit? P=50% chance
P[scenario1] = 100% * 50 = 50%
>Scenario 2
Event 1: crit P=50%
Event 2: given crit P=100%
P[scenario2] = 50%
Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 are mutually exclusive because there are 2 scenarios and only 1 reality. Reality will pick a scenario so the real question becomes, given either scenario 1 or scenario 2, what is the chance you get a second crit?
50%
>>673065180
50%
It would NORMALLY be 25%, but you've began with the presumption that at least one of the hits is a crit
>>673095567
No, you're attempting to combine permutation percentages with the combination percentages. They are different scenarios. Does this help? Not sure if I answered your question because I didn't understand it entirely.
>>673095652
This is one of the two answers.
What if someone read the question as 'One crit is guaranteed.' This makes order irrelevant and the chance for crit/crit becomes simply the crit chance of the second hit (1/2).
>>673092448
If the hits or coin tosses in question are independent, then this probability tree is incorrect. The question makes no claim to be dependent hits. That is the fallacy here.
>>673065180
conditional on having at least one critical hit already? 50%.
a priori? 25%.
>>673065180
Every hit has a 50% chance of critical. The results of one shot have no bearing in the probability of another.
>>673095921
combination percentages are derived from permutation percentages though
go back to that fucking page you linked about combinations and permutations
i didnt read it but im sure theres a part in there about how to calculate the probability of combinations
hint: you need to know the number of permutations represented by each combination
>>673065180
>2016
>not building 100% crit chance
>>673095952
I agree but that isn't how he stated it. If one blow is certain to be a crit BEFORE the action takes place then you are correct about 1/2.
But if it is simply stated that one of them is a crit without stating if it is the first or second, the result would be 1/3
>>673095817
>That is, the result of the second roll must be predicated on the first roll.
Exactly. So? What's the problem? In fact, you view the problem wrong altogether. OP asked the probability of crit-crit, that's all. And he built in the conditions.
And I discarded first the noCrit-noCrit possibility, as OP requested. The, OP requested that the chance of a crit must be 50%. So, I discarded what I needed to discard to make it so. I had three possibilities, N-C, C-N and C-C And if I don't discard C-C, like I said, the chance for a crit is not 50%. If I let C-C stand, the chance for a crit is 4/6, because I have N-C, C-N and C-C. So, not only I need to discard some Crits, but I need to discard ALL the C-C. So that I am only left with N-C and C-N, so the probability of a Crit is 50%.
>>673095899
STFU PEOPLE
I DID MY THESIS IN HIDDEN FIELDS EQUATIONS AND ISOMORPHISMS OF POLYNOMIALS
LISTEN TO THIS KID
GET EDUCATED FUCK FACES
>>673096298
Okay, I reread your question and the answer is still 1/2. The reason behind this is that Crit-miss and miss-Crit are the same in combinations but count as two different rolls in permutations. In combinations, there is only two rolls, one being the 1/3 and the other being the 2/3 for a guaranteed Crit, however the 2/3 counts as One Roll.
>>673073563
because if you are to swing two times, you won't know if the guaranteed crit will land on the first or the second swing, if we assume that the game would calculate the odds of your crits based on you having the buff mentioned there would be 3 possible selections
>>673096807
this is a broken way of thinking about probability, although i respect your attempt at making it internally consistent
Some of you really should go look at the wikipedia on "boy or girl paradox".
Flip two coins a thousand times and record the results. Given perfect distribution you'll get:
HH: 250
HT: 250
TH: 250
TT: 250
Now throw away any results that are TT because they aren't being considered at all.
Of the 750 results you have left, what % are now HH? (Hint: 250/750 = 1/3)
For you sad people who think that "HT and TH are the same", please note that this means there are 500 instances of the combined "one H with one T", not 250.
>>673096761
Yeah but you can't be sure which question you are actually answering because 'At least one of the hits is a crit,' although it seems so plain and simple, is actually an ambiguous statement. It is deliberately so, in order to create disagreement as is evidenced in this thread.
>>673096889
>The reason behind this is that Crit-miss and miss-Crit are the same in combinations but count as two different rolls in permutations
what do you mean by the term "rolls" ??
if you mean "possible outcomes", then yes, there are only two if we are talking combinations, and yes double crit is one of those two, but that doesnt mean the odds are 1 out of two, because the other possibility has higher odds.
>>673097225
This is assuming the rolls do not happen at the same time which OP did not state in his original problem.
