Well, I am confused. I have only interjected two things to this discussion: statistical support against claims made by other players and one personal example that is parallel to those. So I am confused by this course of events:None of it is unclear. You're trying make the point of the discussion unclear by talking about tangential thoughts that are irrelevant. Thus, obfuscation. Because you're wrong about sample size in the context of the point of the discussion and can't bring yourself to admit it.
Marduino makes two separate claims: Galata Tower has ruined plundering and the game is rigged elsewhere.
Algona tells him to prove the latter.
Marduino provides their data about florins and lanterns.
Pirate challenges him to prove Inno Games is cheating players specifically with the Galata Tower odds?
Several players make comments about the sample being too small or that is was bad luck.
Pirate references Algona’s 10K WW experiment.
JBG specifically references the florin and lantern data and says the sample size is too small.
Pirate references his own RQ data.
I provide the statistical rundown of everything that has been posted by other players, the only person actually showing the Inno Games RNG is working as statistically expected, but when I do that it is now off-topic?
I have made no comments on the sample size of Galata Tower validation, as nobody in this discussion has suggested that the Galata Tower is not repelling at the published rate, nor has anyone published any results to validate.
And I am also supposedly an alias of a player that has returned to further prove myself wrong and provide supporting data for my “oppressors”.