It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

- 132 Announcements
- 9.4K FIFA 23 Ultimate Team
- 591 FIFA 23
- 21.7K FIFA 22 Ultimate Team
- 952 FIFA 22
- 34.5K FIFA 21 Ultimate Team
- 3.9K FIFA 21
- 916 Community
- 4.4K FIFA Generations
- 1.2K Public Archive

## Comments

I've made anther thread about my pack luck this week. Over 100 opened and had 2x 84 and 3x 82 and evething else i 81 or less. I'd say 60% of my packs are 78 or below.

You are correct good sir.

A more realistic version is 100 glasses of water 1 has a drop of poison in it, each time you drink a glass if you don't die refill it shuffle them and take another glass, if you said that then yes I would confidently do that 100 times as I have done that experiment (with strawberry flavor not poison) and would happily do it again. I only got water every time.

This guy is right. If the chance on a TOTY is 1%, theres a 99% chance of not packing. If you open 100 packs, you have a chance of 0,99^100 = 36,6 percent chance of not packing a ToTY so basically 63,4% of packing a toty if you open 100 of said packs

Finally someone who did not missed class

Sorry but I disagree. The chance of packing a toty is not 1%. It's less than 1% which is intentionally extremely vague. We can't just round it off to 1% because the difference is massive.

There are 2 sides to a coin, 6 chambers in a revolver, etc. The possibilities are limited. EA doesn't tell us how many totys are available in unopened packs so the possibilities are limitless as far as we know. If we knew that there were say 100k KDBs available in the world then we could make some kind of calculation as to the chances of packing one.

Notice how promo packs are limited by time and not by amount available. Again, intentionally extremely vague.

As the op suggests, the <1% part is the biggest problem. It's just a game of chance and if it wasn't we would be the winners, not EA.

The 1% I took is just an example. We all know <1% means probably smth like 0,1%.. EA should state the REAL chance in stead of <1%.. dont even know if this is allowed

I mean, good on you for cutting out bad habits, but couldn't you have just played something else?

Or, did you honestly feel that as long as you had a way to play games you'd be unable to avoid Fifa?

It just dosent work that way, sorry but if that was the way it worked every time you played the lotto your chances of winning increase, your saying if you played 15 weeks in a row you have more chance of winning than someone who played once (which im sure you all know just isen't true) I just dont know how else to explain it to you, errrm if you enter a raffle and there are a 1000 tickets every ticket has the same chance but you woud argue that any number above 100 has a better chance as the winning number will probably have 3 numbers. In probability theory i would begrugingly agree that could be seen as correct but all tickets have a equal chance of wining in pure statistics,

Opening a fresh pack is like entering a new raffle, just because you entered the last one, do you think you have a better chance of winning this one, the thing you are not seeing is that previous results dont matter - in your examples the ones who enter the lotto evey week are most likly to win, its just not real.

If something is truly random then isn't it just as likely you'll get 10 heads in a row as you would 10 tails, or any permutation thereof?

I can tell you it’s 100% probable that this argument will be had again on these forums

if i use your example, the chances to win the English lotto is 450057474 to 1 or 0.00000022%, by your own example if i play for a 100 weeks my chance is now 0.009% this is by your math....... it just dosent seem right that just by playing every week for a hundred weeks increases my chances so much but thats what you believe.

I can statistically agree with this statement.

No, it is not. Just get a coin and flip it ten times in a row. If you get 10 heads or 10 tails in a row I will gift you a fresh TOTY Mbappe.

If you look at each coinflip or dice roll on its own then yes the probability is static - 1:2 or 1:6 but if you do them a 100 times, your likelihood of hitting heads or 6 at least once vastly improves.

The only valid argument here is that EA hides the minuscule probability behind the phrase <1% which prob means 0.01% or something meaning you’ll need a huge amount of attempts to actually hit your target at least once. Furthermore no one except probably the innermost circle in EA can actually prove that chance is even there in reality.

This is how this thread should end. Well said, nothing to add. !

If you think it does that's probability theory and i'm afraid that's just wrong.

If previous pack luck had any influence then there would have to be a set number of toty players avalible, EA have set pack luck so even they do not know how many will be avalible.

If EA have a set number of players avalible then we are trying to get players from a pool and therefore probability is correct.

I can’t believe they can argue for this simple math for so long😂😂😂

all the best

EA stilll set abysmal odds

I did my thesis of statistics vs probability at odds under 3 billion! simple maths!! its one of the hardest fields

Hahaha Castro and Bateson buy all the lightning packs! Not us

He spent over $15,000 when I watched him.

Jesus... I watched him the first day, bet he put another 15k in the next day then. Idiot!

Lol, I don't see how you having absolutely no self control is the fault of EA

EA are just lying slithering sneak and disgusting with trying to find legal loop holes with not showing actual pack probabilities.