It's 4%, AKA the Go Fuck Yourself Post.

[Lorake]

Now for the fun part:

Probability of a random person in raid getting targetted Y times in a row with X amount of chases

F(X,Y) = 0 when Y>X
F(X,Y) = 0 when Y = 1 *Edit: broke my own equation LOL
F(X,Y) = .04^(Y-1) + .96F(X-1,Y)

So targetted 2 times with 2 chases, F(2,2)

F(2,2) = .04 + .96F(1,2)
F(1,2) = 0 thus F(2,2) = .04


2 times with 3 chases
F(3,2) = .04 + .96F(2,2) = .0784

and it goes from there. If you think I'm wrong break it with a case, otherwise your arguements are invalid and retarded.

[Lorake]

targeted once = 4%
targetted twice in a row = 4%

does not make any fucking sense

Targeted once = don't give a fuck, we don't care who it targets.
Targetted twice = 4% for it to be the original target.

You're holding on to the fact that the very first person has 4% chance to be targetted, when we're not asking for a specific person to be targetted first. Until you realize the first target's probability DOES NOT MATTER in determining a double target event occuring, then this will go nowhere.

[Lorake]

Fuck, let me make it clear in clean specific words.

WHAT IS THE PROBABILITY OF A DOUBLE TARGET (TWICE IN A ROW) EVENT OCCURRING IN RAID.

The above is the question I'm answering, and explained, and it's 4%. If the question you say you're answering is

WHAT IS THE PROBABILITY OF A SPECIFIC PERSON BEING TARGETTED TWICE IN A ROW.

Then the answer is .16% because he needs to be selected first and second. THIS IS NOT THE ARGUMENT I'M MAKING.

[Roj]

WHAT IS THE PROBABILITY OF A DOUBLE TARGET (TWICE IN A ROW) EVENT OCCURRING IN RAID.

The above is the question I'm answering, and explained, and it's 4%.

This statement confirms your ignorance. No point explaining further.

[Lorake]

WHAT IS THE PROBABILITY OF A DOUBLE TARGET (TWICE IN A ROW) EVENT OCCURRING IN RAID.

The above is the question I'm answering, and explained, and it's 4%.

This statement confirms your ignorance. No point explaining further.

This statement confirms that you're a fuckstick. You've yet to disprove the point I'm making, just point out how a specific person has a .16% chance of being targetted. A point which I've factored into my arguement to reach my conclusion in Method B, but you haven't said shit about the methods involved or provided stats 101 material that says my methodology and way of thinking are wrong. You just keep saying I'm wrong.

Would you like some help getting that dildo out of your ass with your "eat a dick"?

[Kaistine]

Roj and geng, you guys are beyond stupid. How can you not understand this?

[Lorake]

Roj and geng, you guys are beyond stupid. How can you not understand this?

I <3 U Kaistine.

[Thorran]

The amount of failure going into this thread is astounding. You are all making the assumption that each member of the raid has an equal chance to be targeted. The Anub'arak pursue is a fixate, which is why he can "randomly" switch due to priest fades and whatnot falling off or being used. Healers have a higher chance to be targeted due to the threat based portion of this.
http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt-o ... ell/67574/
http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt-c ... ell/67574/
http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt-6 ... ell/67574/

[Hitshade]

Would you like some help getting that dildo out of your ass with your "eat a dick"?

NEW BANNER QUOTE IMO!

[Roj]

Roj and geng, you guys are beyond stupid. How can you not understand this?

I <3 U Kaistine.

He's obviously being sarcastic because what you are saying is asinine.