macike
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
|
 Posted:
Jan 08, 2006 - 17:10 |
 
|
| Daddy_Thorg wrote: | | Would the use of a Mersenne twister algorithm instead of JRNG provide enough randomness for all of us? Should fumbbl provide truly random numbers for each game? Are these issues important enough to ask SkiJunkie to delay other improvements in the client? |
IMHO if one and only one pseudorandom sequence generated at the start of the game is used then it is not enough (it's syndrom of fate for me). No matter what algorithm is used.
IMHO even algorithm implemented in java.util.Random is of quality enough for fumbbl games if handled with care.
IMHO there is no need to provide truly random numbers for fumbbl game.
How important is it? Well, it depends on the issue escalation. I've seen complaints that randomness threads reappear each monts
Do we need to bother SkiJunkie? It depend's on the solution architecture. A solution doesn't need to be built into JBBC. However JBBC would still be responsible for keeping random number sychronized between opponents. |
_________________
Hold him, thrill him, kick him, kill him!!! |
|
dzonvejn
Joined: Sep 21, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 08, 2006 - 17:44 |
|
And I think Rynkky is all wrong.... Since the random function uses seed, you just can't know what the next roll will be. Even if someone get's double POW, then break your armour and kill you, that doesn't mean that his opponent will roll all the 1's next turn  ..... You just can't know... If one player have good stream, it doesn't mean other will have bad imediattly after him. The "randomness" does want do be 3.5 (for single dice) but it doesn't means that if you roll 6,6,6,3,5,5,6 the player after you automatically must roll 1,1,1,4,2,2,1. It just means that those 1,1,1,4,2,2,1 will occur at some point of the game. Which means that it IS random (since you don't know to whom those rolls are going to come).
So if you roll 6 for GFI it doesn't mean the next roll is going to be 1 (so that it is wiser that you don't roll next GFI). Next, the random function does NOT know how many times it will be used, so it is very unlikely that you will have 3.5 (for single dice) avarage. The function have certain points in stream where it will get to 3.5 but it not like: 6,1, 3.5, 2,5, 3.5...... it can be 4,3,5,2,3,6,1,3,5,6,8,....., 3.5, as well as 6,1,3.5. So it does seem pretty much random to me.
Furthermore, and most important, what if YOU roll 10000000 1's one after another??? What, you will loose a few imaginary models in imaginary game on imaginary place (internet)... so what? If that is the worst thing that is going to happen to me that day, then that day is pretty much good ...... Everybody need to understand that this IS the GAME..... So either have fun, don't cheat (and I think that it not possible (if it was possible, then there would be several 100% win coaches)), and use the GAME to forget about other worries (that's what games are for), or don't play at all if you are idi*t to whom winning in imaginary game on imaginary place is whole life .... |
|
|
macike
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 08, 2006 - 18:39 |
|
@dzonvejn
No comments. |
_________________
Hold him, thrill him, kick him, kill him!!! |
|
Rynkky
Joined: Aug 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2006 - 09:51 |
|
| dzonvejn wrote: | And I think Rynkky is all wrong.... Since the random function uses seed, you just can't know what the next roll will be. Even if someone get's double POW, then break your armour and kill you, that doesn't mean that his opponent will roll all the 1's next turn ..... You just can't know... If one player have good stream, it doesn't mean other will have bad imediattly after him. The "randomness" does want do be 3.5 (for single dice) but it doesn't means that if you roll 6,6,6,3,5,5,6 the player after you automatically must roll 1,1,1,4,2,2,1. It just means that those 1,1,1,4,2,2,1 will occur at some point of the game. Which means that it IS random (since you don't know to whom those rolls are going to come).
So if you roll 6 for GFI it doesn't mean the next roll is going to be 1 (so that it is wiser that you don't roll next GFI). Next, the random function does NOT know how many times it will be used, so it is very unlikely that you will have 3.5 (for single dice) avarage. The function have certain points in stream where it will get to 3.5 but it not like: 6,1, 3.5, 2,5, 3.5...... it can be 4,3,5,2,3,6,1,3,5,6,8,....., 3.5, as well as 6,1,3.5. So it does seem pretty much random to me.
Furthermore, and most important, what if YOU roll 10000000 1's one after another??? What, you will loose a few imaginary models in imaginary game on imaginary place (internet)... so what? If that is the worst thing that is going to happen to me that day, then that day is pretty much good ...... Everybody need to understand that this IS the GAME..... So either have fun, don't cheat (and I think that it not possible (if it was possible, then there would be several 100% win coaches)), and use the GAME to forget about other worries (that's what games are for), or don't play at all if you are idi*t to whom winning in imaginary game on imaginary place is whole life .... |
And where exactly did I say it MUST be following the good stream OR that it MUST be at all? I just said this happens from time to time, and in some games it is very visible. The other player enjoys the high numbers while the other has to suffer the lows. Not always but when it happens.. |
|
|
Fama
Joined: Feb 09, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2006 - 19:49 |
|
Besides, if you roll all 1's, noone will die *cough*
(unless if you count your armor/injury rolls as opponents dice)
Carry on. |
_________________
I love deadlines. I like the wooshing sound they make when they fly by. -Douglas Adams
 Side step this! |
|
MiBasse
Joined: Dec 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2006 - 19:57 |
|
| sk8bcn wrote: | I am the only one here to think but:
I AM A LUCKY COACH
ha ha ha ha ah ha. |
Actually if anyone's a lucker it's me. I find that the vast majority of my matches are won because I'm a lucky git. Good thing too 'cause I suck and I need a confidence boost. |
|
|
dzonvejn
Joined: Sep 21, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2006 - 23:18 |
|
| Quote: | | It would be very easy to make a program that would show you the next 20 numbers. |
This is what I've ment ..... If you could do that, there would be a few other that could do that, and then:
| Quote: | | there would be several 100% win coaches |
Sorry for misuderstanding ..... I just continued to type about 1 follows 6 issue ....
And yes, as it happens in real life tabletop BB game.... from time to time you roll REALLY bad... It's just that table version of this game lasts longer, and you play it more rarely..... which in turn means that on the site the "bad hand" game will happen much more often.... I've played sometimes 5 games in same day on fumbbl, and in real life most rarely 2 games in same day .... |
|
|
Barnlato
Joined: Jul 31, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2006 - 12:01 |
|
Am I wrong if I state that the point in this thread is that some of you don't think the game is balanced enough, or the balancing is done in a wrong place ie. the random dices? And others think the game is allright, just play on? So the question of randomness would not be alive if there wasn't the random factor (or everybody would win all the time, which is impossible, or could loose with a smile on their faces, which is very difficult too).
Let's do a little 'philosophical thinking' for a change. I assume that something is in fact wrong because this thread exists, some people are not enjoying this game as much they should. Is it the losing side, some 50% of us perhaps, or more, since the experienced players tend to win the most of the games regardless of the random dices... which would make this a mostly unhappy community? I can lose myself but for some reason my smile has turned upside down for now... However, may that reason be real or in some ones head, it is not relevant.
How about the game enjoyability? If the random is random enough, is there too many random factors in this game then? Kick off results for example? Do they add to the playability? What about if two dice block would always be a opposition down result (similar to let say Risk for example). How would the game be? Or is it just a question of what do we want to experience when playing this game?
Let's assume that there is a player who thinks that the game is most fun when performing elvish stunts, so he/she needs good amount dice rolls in the game to play that way. On the other hand, his/her opponent is playing a passive defence with dwarves and not throwing too many dices, and hoping to win eventually because of the way the elvish player is using the dice. We can eliminate all the rolls that both players must do like kick offs and assume their FF is the same. So elves are good at doing things and dwarves are good at staying in the field. These also modifies the probability of this game. So which of them benefits from the random factor? Somebody could maybe calculate it too B-)
But is the question here more deep?
What are the most annoying things encountered when playing? Deaths andd niggling injuries maybe if one plays it the rolepalying way? Or the bad dice rolls in general? Lots of them in a row, streaks like you say? Maybe the moment when you're not in charge anymore because the dices won't let you. It is the lost power, the feeling of being mistreated. Like the frustration of a little child who cannot get the world to shape by a will. When nothing works and you thinks all this is a waste of time...
There is of course a solution: to stop playing. After all strategy games are a simulations of war originally. And this game has a good amount of possibilites to injure and kill, not the mention the real life aspects of subordinatin your opponent or insulting and frustrating him/her.
Could any game be just fun then? Someone's win is someone's lose, it is the game of life. What basic insticts we have that does make this game so appealing and addictive, what does it tell about us?
I have tried to figure out a concept of exciting and constructive multiplayer game, without all the flaws we encounter when playing BB, but my ideas haven't carried out yet. Co-operative, but it is like solitaire with two people? MMORPGs? Well basicly the same thing if not PKing. So what does it take? How everybody could act together, measure their abilities against each other and still have fun and be equal?
I'm not amazed of the fact that mathematically gifted people have narrowed the discussion around randomness. Should you want this debate to evolve into a dialogue and lead somewhere you might want to remember that if the door is stuck one generally doesn't try to figure out the amount of water molecules needed to swell up the door. One just pulls the handle until it opens.
To moderators: You are free to remove this post or move it since it doesn't belong here. Or does it? |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2006 - 13:08 |
|
| Barnlato wrote: | Could any game be just fun then? Someone's win is someone's lose, it is the game of life. What basic insticts we have that does make this game so appealing and addictive, what does it tell about us?
I have tried to figure out a concept of exciting and constructive multiplayer game, without all the flaws we encounter when playing BB, but my ideas haven't carried out yet. Co-operative, but it is like solitaire with two people? MMORPGs? Well basicly the same thing if not PKing. So what does it take? How everybody could act together, measure their abilities against each other and still have fun and be equal?
|
You didn't find? Roleplaying games! Not the one on computers but the real ones. It's definitely the game that is the nearest of what you are searching.
ps: for your post I don't feel concerned at all: bad luck don't drive me really mad, I enjoy the game and feel fine with the ratio dice luck/coach skill. |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
Barnlato
Joined: Jul 31, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2006 - 14:35 |
|
| sk8bcn wrote: |
You didn't find? Roleplaying games! Not the one on computers but the real ones. It's definitely the game that is the nearest of what you are searching. |
You are right B-) But I was thinking of computer games really.
Hmm... How I loved the real socializing aspect in RPGs as well as the humour and excitement. Few dices here and there but not the main thing. If we thought we had bad luck we just left the dices on the table 1 facing upwards, sometimes for overnite, hoping that the time consumed with 1s would make them land next time as 6s B-) And as a game keeper I usually threw the dices just to fool the players, no random needed to spoil the flow of storytelling.
Hey old beards, Cthulhu anyone? |
Last edited by Barnlato on %b %13, %2006 - %21:%Jan; edited 2 times in total |
|
macike
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2006 - 14:56 |
|
| Barnlato wrote: | | How about the game enjoyability? If the random is random enough, is there too many random factors in this game then? Kick off results for example? Do they add to the playability? What about if two dice block would always be a opposition down result (similar to let say Risk for example). |
I enjoy playing BB a lot. As I have no chance to play it in RL I do very, very appreciate fumbbl. It gives me a lot of fun.
All of us use the same client. Unless there are no - following the Rynkky's project name - prophets (ie. cheaters) everything is fair. Everyone suffers the same pseudorandomness. Today it is me. Tomorrow it'll be you.
BB is game of tactics. Probability has great impact. So if you know how pseudorandomness works then you may adjust your tactics accordingly. As I did.
However if I see that something can be improved I point that out.
Ask for more, sometimes you'll get it.  |
_________________
Hold him, thrill him, kick him, kill him!!! |
|
macike
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2006 - 14:58 |
|
| Barnlato wrote: | | Hey old beards, Cthulhu anyone? |
That would be a great off-topic topic. Great old one I would say. |
_________________
Hold him, thrill him, kick him, kill him!!! |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2006 - 15:21 |
|
| Barnlato wrote: | And as a game keeper I usually threw the dices just to fool the players, no random needed to spoil the flow of the storytelling.
|
You right, I do the same.
Vampires is great too. |
_________________
 |
|
macike
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2006 - 15:38 |
|
| JanMattys wrote: | | Barnlato wrote: | And as a game keeper I usually threw the dices just to fool the players, no random needed to spoil the flow of the storytelling.
|
You right, I do the same.
Vampires is great too. |
Would you let me storytell you that you lost when we meet on the field? |
_________________
Hold him, thrill him, kick him, kill him!!! |
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2006 - 15:51 |
|
Barnlato. The game you are looking for is called Diplomacy. It is available to play in a variety of manners for free online. It is mutliplayer and has no luck element. It is brilliant and fun, and better in real life, but play online, and enjoy it anyway.
You may also be interested in Evernight, a vaguely Risk-like game, with low luck factor. i.e. 38 troopers might beat 40, but 20 never will. |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
|
|
| |
NBFL Season 32: The ...
Search
