Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
But there might still be a bug reducing the catchrate per capture level instead of increasing it. It is not confirmed yet though. I have maxed it, but wouldnt at this point until that is addressed.
Their results lined up perfectly to the YouTube video about the same dig, which to quote them, "There is no chance this happened due to randomness (actually, the chance is about 1 in 100 trillion): the catch chance on that video does NOT match his actual catch chance."
The memory wiping medicine bug has been fixed, but this has not.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Palworld/comments/1ahk01e/a_statistical_analysis_on_the_lifmunk_effigies/
I had a quick read of his analysis and he states that he "simulated" the data.
So no actual raw data was collected to prove or disprove the theory.
I am not saying that there isn't a bug, but when you don't actually collect any valid data it is very easy to prove or disprove anything you want.
EDIT: to use his exact words.
"With the experiment ready, I copy/pasted the randomized number of catches to a side table a thousand times - essentially, running the experiment a thousand times in a few seconds (I made a macro for that, of course). "