Activity for dustytrashâ€
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #280310 |
After some thinking on this, I'm almost certain 3 10%'s would be better than 1 30%, but if the goal is to get the highest upgraded weapons possible, 100% would be best (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280310 | Post undeleted | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280310 | Post deleted | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280310 |
Post edited: clarified note |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280310 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280310 |
The real benefit would be saving 100 or 200 coins, for the purpose of this question at least. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280310 |
Post edited: clarity / language used |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280310 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280310 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280310 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280310 | Initial revision | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Question | — |
Are 3 10% chances better than one 30% chance (when penalized by a variable for failures)? I'm playing a computer game in which you can spend `100 coins to be given a 10% chance` to upgrade a weapon, or spend `200 coins for a 20%` chance, or `300 coins for a 30%` chance and so on, up to 1000 coins for a 100% chance. There is no penalty for failure, only that you lose the coins spent. ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |