FFXI Lot Result Can You Get A 0?

I am working on adding the lot results that are stored in memory to windower, this is to better improve addons that utilize lot results.

In doing so I found that it appears to be impossible to actually have a lot of 0, some of the other Devs disagree and swear they have seen it.

Arcon in particular went and ran stats on his log for all the lots he had in them, and the results indicated that 0, 1, and 999 are were never recorded as lots. His data also indicates the kurtosis is -1.193405881 which is a near perfect uniform distribution.

So I put it to the community, prove me wrong, show me a 0 lot is possible.

The reason I believe it is not has to do with that the default value in memory for the lot is `0` so the game would not be able to tell that the lot was rolled. the value can be any that a signed short except +0 and -0, negative numbers do not cause the chat message about the roll but can still be seen in the treasure pool menu.

Arcon's script and results

Summary of the results:
Lots
Rolls from /random

I'm pretty sure that 999 is only possible *if* a 998 is rolled and pending on a given item, i've seen it occur twice personally (i guess you don't have to take my word for it, it'd be pretty hard to reproduce without actively trying to.. byrth might've been there for the one at armed gears on lakshmi?)

but yes, client won't display a 0 lot, so 0 should not be possible

maybe 1 is a similar situation, where a 2 has to be rolled first?

Mostly concerned about `0` as the code I wrote treats it as a `nil` value meaning a lot hasn't been casts, 1 and 999 are just an oddity that Arcon's data of nearly 50,000 lots seems to indicate are not possible.

It seems odd for 999 to be dependent on 998 since you can roll the same number as another player anyway, but that would explain why it is so unlikely to occur.

Personally my working theory is, the range is not 1-999 inclusive but exclusive meaning 1 and 999 cant be rolled, and is likely more of an implementation mistake to remove 0 from the range.

i'm positive i've seen the 998>999 occur before, and given the lack of 999 in your dataset, i'm inclined to believe it's a scripted event (maybe just rerolls a 999 or a 1 unless the prior roll already exists.. perhaps so that a first roll cannot have a decisive outcome for greater engagement)

i suppose it'd be likely to happen within an hour or so if i had 16 characters set up to leave/rejoin and lot everything repeatedly.. maybe if i'm bored enough

but yes i've worked with the same memory location and 0 causes the client to display no lot(0xFFFF for pass)

https://www.ffxiah.com/forum/topic/51734/most-memorable-lot-drop-you-ever-won/2/#3312867

looks like it happened to chiaia too

We're starting to doubt they were actual lots and not just our LSes making us do randoms, so there was no lot issues. We've been talking about it in discord.

Edit: I now see your in discord too, so maybe I'm not nuts.

Randoms suck, you can Random a 0 and a 999.

Imagine rolling 998 on a lot for something you really wanted only to be out lottery with a 999. Oooooof. The LOL’s that must have gone around in the party/LS must have been something to behold.

It's totally possible, friend of mine rolled a 0 and then a 999, IN SUCCESSION one after the other lol.
I might still have the screenshot somewhere, name of the player was "Kaisha" and I have no clue which items they were... I think random ***in Promyvion - Vahzl during the Level 75 era, lotting for shizzle, not for real.

I've seen a randomed 0, but never a lot 0

I'll check for those old screenshots then!

Oh wow, looks like Eiryl was right. It was a /random and not a lot.
Still... randoming a 0 and a 999 in succession, I still call it pretty rare if you ask me!

Siiiigh those memories... 2006! Whoaaaaa!

I someone lot a 4, thinking they certainly weren't going to get the item, then the other person only lotted a 2 so they got it anyway XD

I think people very often conflate the 2 lots and rolls in their memory. And that is where the believe that a lot of 0 is possible comes from.

And like Chia mentioned in some linkshells you would use /random rather than an actual lot to prevent shenanigans further confusing the memories.

I found a 998 -> (53 other lots on items with the same name in 15 seconds) -> 999 in my logs. It was the only example of a 999 lot in the >1 decade of FFXI logs I have on my computer.

No instances of 1 or 0, but if 1 is also conditional on someone else having rolled a 2 then it is actually pretty reasonable that I haven't seen it.

I suspect Thorny is correct about the mechanism here.

i went out and tested it (3 party leaders sitting alone, 15 bots repeatedly joining, lotting entire pool, disbanding unless they got a 1/2/998/999)

got a 999 within 10 minutes, never saw a 1 after a good 10-12k rolls against active 2s

niflheim suggested it may be checking against highest roll, rather than all other rolls, which would make a 1 insanely rare relative to 999 (you'd have to roll a 2 then the very next person would have to roll a 1, making it near 1/1,000,000 given they have to be consecutive.. while mass amounts of competing lots can fight the same 998).. so it may still be possible, hard to disprove

I've rolled a 0 before. No pic, unfortunately, as I was the puller in a Dynamis run.

It was for a pair of Assassin's Armlets...fml

The client doesn't even have the ability to store and display a 0 roll. Either it was actually a random, or you exaggerated and forgot.

I have no evidence for this, but given the corroboration of 998 -> 999 occurring, I wonder if rather than re-rolling when you roll a value that's already rolled, the game simply increments your roll to the next value. This would explain the lack of 1 in the data, as it would theoretically require a third person to roll 998 on the same item. If it were the case, it should be visible in data as it would result in clumping of adjacent numbers at roughly twice the expected probability relative to sane behavior (invisible re-roll).

Seeing how multiple people can have the same Casts Lot and the first person to roll it gets the item as long as they don't drop, dc, warp. Given that it is also the highest lot. That theory doesn't really hold up.

I believe Thory's initial reasoning is spot on, the range is only expanded to ensure that with 2 lots you always have a chance to win and a chance to lose, and that when you rolled does not change that chance all that much.

so if you roll a 2 you can still win if the other person rolls a 1. and if you roll a 998 you can still lose if someone rolls 999. this as Throny put it ensures engagement. The first roll will never give a guaranteed result, win or loss.

Edit: adding link to discord discussion for posterity. going to do so by linking the image Thorny took of a 999 roll he was able to produce. Windower Discord #general