Gradual Reduction in MF Effectiveness

[gekko]

Well, I don't think any of us are claiming this is a proven fact, it is merely being put forward as a hypothesis (which is where all scientific knowledge starts).

Putting this forward as a hypothesis immediately subjects it to public scrutiny and criticism. If those who believe in the reduction of MF didn't want to hear criticism or arguments against their ideas, they shouldn've have put them forward.

Concerning that we can't "prove" this either way: the burden of proof falls upon those suggesting the reduction, not the other way. As has been said repeatedly, we can't prove the open, closed and single player games run the same code. However, given that the only code we CAN analyze shows NO reduction in MF; and, given that it makes sense to run the same code wherever possible; AND, given the fact it is highly probable the reduction in MF is simply statistics and fallacies kicking in...

It is not up to the 'no' side to prove the same code is used and that there is no such counter. It is up to the 'yes' side to provide some conclusive reasons, examples, or other backing to support their hypothesis.

It has already been pointed out how unlikely such a reduction is: after all, keeping it secret defeats the supposed purposes of a reduction; no such code can be found in the only avaible code we have to scrutinize; implementing a useful, succesful counter that could not easily be "fooled" or bypassed would be so difficult -- the list goes on. Against these logical arguments, we have only stories of a few individual experiences (and yes, even 1000 runs is only a few in the terms of this type of experiment) suggesting a reduction in the quality of drops, all of which can be explained through statistics and fallacies humans and well known for.

Which is more likely: that burried deep within the guts of a b.net server, some mysterious code exists to secretly "punish" players for mf runs...

Or such code simply does not exist?

gekko