Fishing Science

[Tinkercat]

I have been reading these threads and I am fascinated by how people think about fishing. I am not anyone's expert, I hate to fish, but my weird catch got me thinking.....

#1 Toontown is a MAN MADE computer program. If something is more likely or less likely it is because someone programmed it that way most likely intentionally, but I suppose a likelyhood could be a result of a sort of "glitch" in the programming.

#2 When they were dreaming up this programming what did they decide about fishing?

From reading this is what I think. I think someone made an analogy to lotto. I think it was good. I think the variables are your rod and the pond. I think they have programmed it that any toon with a certain rod in a certain pond ( and I doubt the dock or district is a variable ) has exactly the same odds everytime of catching a given fish.

To explain, if you flip a coin ( assuming it has an even weight distributed and is flipped the same way everytime ) and you come up heads 10 times in a row are you more or less likely to have it come up heads again? The odds are the same everytime, no matter what happened before. It is 50/50 everytime.
This is something people have trouble wrapping their brains around. For example, if a woman has four baby boys, is she more likely to have a girl the next time? No, her odds are about 50/50 just like they were the last four times ( that is assuming there is not some variable which makes girls more likely ......and I know this is g rated so I guess I will abandon this analogy ).

I LOVE the argument, because it makes sense, that people are creating artificial ideas about odds because of these fishing reports. I imagine a toontown developer reading the fishing reports sending this email to a colleague " **** read ttc they think it is more likely you catch the stinky flounder in Tinks Fairyland because they are all fishing there, what idiots"

Now of course I could be wrong. Someone could have said, I really want to make those toons nuts....instead of the odds being the usual 1:2000 or Tenor in Bouncyville I am going to make it 1:1500. It is totally possible. In that case, they would be saying " gosh darn it will they ever figure out it is more likely in my secret pond"

Or maybe some programmer who is enjoying this social experiment goes in and says " the odds are usually 1:2000 but on every third Wednesday from 1-2 pm PST I am going to make them 1:1000!, take that toons!"

Or, they could say, " think I will program it so after a toon has fished for a total of 20 hours in Pumbaland the odds of catching the Fairygodmother fish will go from 1:5000 to 1:2500. Or should I I make it 1:50 for the first hour?"

I got to thinking about this last night when I caught three new species in 30 minutes or so after not catching ANYTHING new for months. I am not a big fisher. I have probably never fish longer than 1/2 hour straight. I hate it. But could someone have programmed this...." when a toon reaches 115 for the first 1/2 hour afterward her odds of catching the Siamese, AllStar and Baby Grand go from 1:100,000,000 to 1:50, but only if she happens to be in bouncyville on the dock to the far right"

I doubt it. I think it was a random fluke of luck. But I am suspicious. The odds probably ARE 1:100000 that you would catch 3 in 30 minutes. Hmmmmm.

I think that they are most likely programmed by pond and rod only and there are no other variables. I think we are chasing our tails and they are cracking up....if they read this.

Hi Disney! Am I right?

[Baron Von Mizzenjinks]

Anything that involves luck is going to cause people to make up crazy superstitions and theories to try to beat the luck. Toontown fishing is no different. But people have to remember that this is just a series of computer code and the toontown developers are not going to spend days and days making a bunch of code to have various theories of fishing be true (the theory of you are more likely to catch a new species if you catch a new record first comes to mind, this is COMPLETE bull).

Also, the different districts are EXACT copies of toontown. The odds of catching fish are EXACTLY the same in each district. Whatever code was programmed for fishing is the SAME in each district. People that change districts in hopes of bettering their chances to catch fish are STUPID and NAIVE.

This is just my opinion but this is based on facts and realism and not a stupid superstitious fantasy world that a lot of you people seemed to be living in.

[Kehawin]

Tink

You know about my less than perfect abilities with math... However, I did grasp probabilities a little better than algebra...

When you said about the coin being flipped, 10 times coming up with heads then what are the probabilites of the next flip coming up heads...

yes, the probability of the 11th toss coming up heads is still 50/50, given that there are only 2 choices, one or the other. However, when taken in context of likelihood, we have to add them all together.

So, if the probability of getting the first toss to be heads is 1:2, the next one is 1:2 TIMES 1:2, and the third is 1:2 TIMES 1:2 TIMES 1:2...

so the probability is still 1:2 for the individual toss on the eleventh toss being heads, but the likelihood is (1:2)x(1:2)x(1:2)x(1:2)x(1:2)x(1:2)x(1:2)x(1:2)x(1 :2)x(1:2)x(1:2) which means the actual probability is 1 in 2 to the 11th power, or 1 in 2048. So, if you tossed a coin 11 times, then tossed it 11 times again, and so on for 2048 sets, there is a PROBABILITY that one of those times you will get heads all 11 times, not a guarantee.

The likelihood or odds get even higher in numbers when you add more choices.

Given this, and given all the fishing done by all the toons that have fished, I am sure some mathematical genius (or a computer program...) COULD figure out actual probabilities for any given fish (if he were given the number of casts and the number of fish caught.) This I believe was the idea behind the TUFS program (Toontown unofficial fishing statistics), however the results are unreliable because so few people actually participated.

What I am trying to say here, is that an individual toons probability of catching any certain fish MAY NOT BE what is programmed. It could possibly be programmed for each cast, regardless of who casts it. In fact, when I hear "I caught the devil ray/allstar/holeymackerel/insert rare fish here on my noob/midlafftoon/toon I rarely fish on etc in the FIRST BUCKET!" it points me to idea that it has more to do with all casts on that server rather than an individual toon.

Who knows?

But, if it is true that the probability is assigned to each cast rather than individual toons, the fact that some people claim that fishing in a certain district is more profitable for them, or that fishing at the same district same pond, or fishing all the ponds in all of toontown for 3-4 buckets each, or some of these other theories, the theories start to make sense as to why they might work.

I am sure very few people except Tink actually followed that! HAHA. So thanks in advance for understanding me Tink, since you always do!

[Kehawin]

Originally Posted by Baron Von Mizzenjinks

This is just my opinion but this is based on facts and realism and not a stupid superstitious fantasy world that a lot of you people seemed to be living in.

Wow, he posted this as I was typing mine! LOL

not yet 20 years old and already so jaded.

This discussion has been going on since fishing was introduced. I suggest looking at the post called "some gold rod statistics" found here Some Gold Rod Statistics
And the TUFS discussion found here
TUFS: Toontown Unofficial Fishing Statistics
For thoughts of others on this topic.
Keep in mind the comments made in these posts are based on the fact that previously, gold rods cost much more per cast, and also these posts were started when there were 40 fish total (quite a few updates ago) and some of them had NEVER been caught.

[Tinkercat]

I like this discussion.

I just want to address the coin flipping because I am thinking about it and only have a sec.

I think we are saying the same thing, see if you agree-

Lets say the odds are the same ( programmed that way ) in FishedTooMuch Pond with the Marshmallow Rod

Toon A walks up with Marshmallow Rod and cast once- odds 1:2000

Toon B walks up with Marshmallow Rod and cast once, but has cast 3000 times before- 0dds 1:2000

They have same odds of catching on THAT cast.

But, obviously odds are better if you cast 3000 times too catch than if you cast only once. But on an individual cast they are the same.

Usefulness of the point is that you can come and go for 8 hours over a month or do eight hours over a day-odds are the same.


I like the post that says this is how all superstitions develop.

Be back later!

[Tinkercat]

If it did not appear so it was because sarcasm doesn't always come out over the keyboard.

[Kehawin]

Originally Posted by Tinkercat

Lets say the odds are the same ( programmed that way ) in FishedTooMuch Pond with the Marshmallow Rod

Toon A walks up with Marshmallow Rod and cast once- odds 1:2000

Toon B walks up with Marshmallow Rod and cast once, but has cast 3000 times before- 0dds 1:2000

They have same odds of catching on THAT cast.

But, obviously odds are better if you cast 3000 times too catch than if you cast only once. But on an individual cast they are the same.

Yes, that's my belief.

Sometimes it seems a little different, like when I hear 4 friends tell me that they caught the Grand Piano and the Concord on the same day.

Sure, it could be coincidence. I mean, of the hundreds of toons who have both those fish, it could be just coincidence that 4 of them caught them both on the same day after searching for both for months.

BUT... I don't know allllll the hundreds of toons. I know less than ten of those toons well enough to have this info. And the fact that more than half of them caught them on the same day seems not coincidental. But without more data, it could be misleading.

So knowing the science of how it works will only help so much. I mean, is it going to make a difference to KNOW you have to catch 50,000 fish to get the last 4, or to only GUESS that you will need that many?

However, if some programmer came on and said, "I programmed the fish, and this is how I did it... and here is what that means to you..." you can bet there will be more 117s running around... but they will still need to FISH for them. Just maybe not as randomly.

/babbling and thinking out loud.

[Tinkercat]

I just read a post that Kehawin directed me to and I am SUCH a noob. I am just a NOOB and I am humbled by your incredible explanation. I love it. I am going to read it again.

Can you tell I think statistics are interesting?

Here is what I loved so much.....

01-28-2004, 09:46 PM
Fumblefingers
Fishing Fool Join Date: May 2003
Location: Loonyville, Toontown
Posts: 198

Quote:
Originally posted by Loosy Goosy
Well written. Thanks for sharing your statistics Fumbles. I wanted
to suggest that you do your own guide (not that Batleth's is
insufficient) just to have a different collection of data to ponder.
This was almost exactly what I thought you would come up with



The problem with a good statisical guide is ease of presentation. Basically, it's a lot of spreadsheets. I have tons of data waiting to go into a database, but have been waiting to get a new version of MS Office. Another person (Loopy Violet) has created a database and done a ton of fishing of her own. Once I have MS Office installed, I'll be having a look at her DB format and trying to combine results. Then, we can present data and conclusions, if we can figure out a way to do so succinctly. As for doing a separate guide, I don't think it's worth it for two reasons: (1) a general guide to rarity and location -- Batleth's Guide -- is much more useful. Almost nobody cares about 99% of the statisics -- the percentage of Clown Fish on Silly Street is not exactly important except for profitablility calculations. (2) The 1% of the statistics that are actually interesting can be combined into Batleth's guide if he wishes -- things like expected profitability by pond and rod. I'll certainly be sharing all my data with him once I have it in a presentable format. This would give forum users 'one stop shopping' for fishing info.


Quote:

The reason you want to try to bag as many mega-rares (those
that can spawn at less than 4 pounds) is once you add weight
capacity to your pole, you add more species to the pool of
possible fish you can catch.

Each cast with a twig can catch from 19 species, a boot,
and beans (21). Each cast with a gold rod can catch from
50 species, a boot, or beans (52). Further, certain fish have a
built-in rarity. If you didn't catch a Captain Cutthroat with a twig,
when there were only 21 possible items available, you'll have a
heck of a time bagging it when there are 28 with the bamboo, 40
with the hardwood, 45 with the steel and 52 with the gold rod.



We've had this discussion before. I still think you're looking at it the wrong way. You're still thinking in terms of a lottery instead of a distribution table. You're also making the assumption that all fish can be caught in all ponds -- clearly not true. When programming something like this, you set up a distribution table. Let's use a simplified example, in a theoretical pond:

Test Pond
-------------
Boot: 5.0% (50/1000)
JB Jar: 1.0% (10/1000)
Starfish: 50.0% (500/1000)
Clown Fish: 25.0% (250/1000)
Pool Shark: 18.9% (189/1000)
Devil Ray: 0.1% (1/1000)

This is the base table for all rods in our test pond. Everything in our simplified example can be caught by any rod, except for the Pool Shark, which requires a hardwood rod. If you're using a twig or bamboo rod, you'll have a boot substituted. Note that we ARE NOT ADDING the pool shark to the mix with the hardwood rod -- it's ALREADY THERE, you just don't see it with the twig or bamboo. This is the first key distinction between the lottery and distribution table models.

The second key distinction is that a lottery such as you are describing implies equal percentage chances for each fish. Think of megabucks with fish -- equal chance to get any fish in the hopper. In that case, there's no doubt that as you add more fish your chance at each individual one goes down. However, to program something where the chances are NOT equal on each fish, you basically have to use a distribution table.

How does the process go when you fish? First, the computer checks to see if you hit the spot. If so, it generates a random number (between 1 and 1000). It then uses that number to refer to a spot in the distribution table (if the number is 50 or less, you get a boot; 51 to 60, you get a JB jar; 61 to 560, you get a starfish, etc.). It then checks your rod. If the fish is of a type catchable by that rod, it generates another random number in order to assign a weight to your fish, from the possible weight range (this is actually a slightly more complicated process, because it's clearly a probabalistic distribution -- a bell curve; and it also needs to take into account rod break points). If the fish is not catchable by that rod it changes the fish into a boot. Either way, it then gives you the result (translating weight into JB value from another table).

The end result of this is a slightly different distribution for each rod, completely due to boot substitution. Now the actual situation is a bit more complicated, because there is clearly some fish substitution going on as well, along with a few other things. However, the same comment applies for the mega-rares: it doesnt matter what rod you use (as long as it's big enough, and is actually in that pond). In our example, the devil ray is 1/1000 no matter what. Note that, because boots are discarded, you WILL have more mega-rares in less BUCKETS with the twig and bamboo -- however, it will be the same number of CATCHES (you're just catching less boots and filling up your buckets faster with the heavier rods).

Now, all this being said, I will grant the possibility that there is a DIFFERENT distribution table for each rod/pond combination. In this case, you could program for changes in rarity to the mega-rares by rod type. You'd also eliminate any substitution processes. However, this is unecessary programming, would be a sloppy way to handle it, and I've seen no hard evidence that this is the case. Also, if there's a different distribution table for each rod/pond combo, there's then NO excuse for the gold to be bugged or to be unbalanced in any way. All you'd have to do is crank up the percentages of some better JB fish. Getting it right with a single distribution table is more difficult, but much cleaner programming.

Anyway, until I see hard data that indicates something other than equal chances on the mega-rares on any given rod (which would indicate separate distribution tables); or until someone explains the programming steps involved to achieve that (which would be a completely different process, but not a lottery), I'm going to stick with my contention that it doesn't matter what rod you use, as long as it's heavy enough, and the pond you're fishing in actually has the fish.

thanks Kehawin for directing me to this, it really helped answer my fishing science question. I know nothing about programming, and that I believe is the key to understanding the most likely fishing scenario.

That or large bribes to someone who works for Disney and get get in there and secretly change the odds for your toon.

[Tinkercat]

Oh boy Kehawin I have been sitting here reading away all this fishing stuff. First of all I am so impressed by the posts. To be quite honest, some of them get to be over my head ( though I want to cling to the belief it is over my education ) and I tend to look for the take away conclusion of the person who appears to have the most logical thinking.

It appears that Fumblefingers quit when Disney wrote to say that yes it is less likely to catch the ultra rare on the gold rod? And someone pointed out that it was called the "golden rob" for a reason. I would imagine, that part of what may have frustrated Fumble, as I felt when I read it, was who exactly was answering the letter and did that person talk to the people who would really know the answer. I know I had a quesion once about toontown and the person was emailing with did not appear to know what s/he was talking about or get my point. I forced the issue until I got a real answer. But with something like fishing they could very well delight in NOT giving a real answer.

[Batleth]

You do have to understand the time frame that post was taken from. This was before all 70 species were released and prior to a big mistake by TT was corrected. Yes, Fumblefingers quit TT and it's a great loss to the fishing hole. I did have a chance to discuss fishing with him on and off post in great depth as well as Lil', LG, and many, many more people that had a great grasp of fishing and how it actually works. Of course, after all those talks, scientific theories, and data collecting the results have been simplified and are now on display on the fishing guide. Though many have wished I call the fishing guide Batleth's fishing guide, I had far too much help from some very talented individuals and feel it's more of a collective project to claim it as mine exclusively. If I get time, I'll see what I still have hidden away in my inbox and pull some quotes from some of these other fishertoon's and my messages that everyone here might enjoy.

I always felt it was odd that TT would never give us a clear cut answer to any of our e-mails to them about fishing. We (as in LG, Fumblefingers,myself, etc.) clearly showed in our messages to them that we had the above normal understanding and grasp of statistical data on fishing, but was normally answered with a form letter or not at all. I can understand that they wouldn't want to reveal everything about the game to the public, but they could have answered us with some sort of intellegent answer and not a form letter or not even respond.

Here's a couple more theory threads for your enjoyment:
Max. Rod Capacity and Min. Fish Weight
Answer to New Species Becoming Common

I don't really have much to say about the rest of this thread's topics since it seems everyone here is staying in the real world and not fantasyland...lol.

[Green Mouse]

If you go for ultra rares like the concord and the devil ray with a twig rod, is it easier to catch than with a gold rod. I think it is but not sure. Thank You!



Peace! Green Mouse

[Batleth]

Most seem to be being caught with the gold rod, but twig and steel is the next rod to catch the most. Now this could be misleading due to the fact that most don't try to catch the ultras with a twig then they're forced into trying to catch them with the gold rod, if they weren't lucky enough to catch them with the steel or another rod by the time they've reached the gold rod. Frankly, I don't have enough data to tell you one way or another because very few toons catch all 38 species with the twig before moving on to the bamboo. In my opinion, it should be easier to catch them with the twig based on that you have less possible species that you could catch with the twig over the gold rod. With the gold, you have 70 species and end up catching a lot of them while trying to get the ultras. You have 38 species the twig can catch and that should give you a better percentage to catch the ultras because you can only catch about half as many. Though we all know that twig rod produces a lot of boots so TT may have increased percentages that you will catch the boot instead of increasing the percentages to catch an ultra.

I hope that makes sense?

EDIT:merged above post into this thread to open it for discussion to this thread. Since this topic is so debatable, I'd like to hear comments on it as well.

[mikehern]

So are we sayng that rather than trying to max gags and get laffs, we should fish our little toons unitl we have 69 fish? After we have 69 buy the gold for the bulldog?

[Tinkercat]

I would like a history of what the error toontown made with fishing was and what they did about it. I would like to know if we are sure all these boots are actually fish we are not allowed to catch yet.

I am worried we are catching a new species that is frequently caught but rarely recognized.........the red herring.

[Batleth]

Originally Posted by Tinkercat

I would like a history of what the error toontown made with fishing was and what they did about it. I would like to know if we are sure all these boots are actually fish we are not allowed to catch yet.

I am worried we are catching a new species that is frequently caught but rarely recognized.........the red herring.

There were several species that can only be caught on a street pond, couldn't be caught at all. A major bug in their system. After several of us kept sending in reported bugs about this. TT finally looked into the matter and fixed those species. Plus, there were other species that could be caught in playgrounds, but the primary habitat was a street pond, got fixed as well.

The boot is a way for us to loose JBs otherwise fishing would be way too profitable. I don't believe there is any red herrings as far as the boots are concerned. There may still be a few bugs in their system, but most have been worked out.

To answer Mikehern's question, that is one theory. It is a very logical deduction and it might be best to do that, but it's never been proven. The gold is supposed to be the clean up rod for all species, as stated by TT. Many of us have our doubts about this.