GOLD, Jerry - GOLD!!SuicidalSnowman wrote:...a whole bunch of stuff that cut RADAGA down...
But then again, I lost a whole bunch of 3x1's this morning, maybe I'll change sides...
Moderator: Community Team
GOLD, Jerry - GOLD!!SuicidalSnowman wrote:...a whole bunch of stuff that cut RADAGA down...
Oh man......that took me back to my 2nd semester of college in our Critical Thinking gen ed class. So glad that class was only a 1 hour course.urbansloth wrote:GOLD, Jerry - GOLD!!SuicidalSnowman wrote:...a whole bunch of stuff that cut RADAGA down...![]()
But then again, I lost a whole bunch of 3x1's this morning, maybe I'll change sides...
Night Strike wrote:Oh man......that took me back to my 2nd semester of college in our Critical Thinking gen ed class. So glad that class was only a 1 hour course.urbansloth wrote:GOLD, Jerry - GOLD!!SuicidalSnowman wrote:...a whole bunch of stuff that cut RADAGA down...![]()
But then again, I lost a whole bunch of 3x1's this morning, maybe I'll change sides...
2 out of 3... not bad.The Neon Peon wrote:sigh... what did I say about using logic in this thread?
Now he's gonna come back, say something to the effect of "you're an idiot," ignore most or all of what you said, and repeat something he's said before.
Do you even realize that you aren't the only one who rolls on this site? I mean, seriously, this site doesn't revolve around you. Have you ever thought that while you're making all these rolls that you like to complain should only happen once every 200 rolls, that there very possibly WERE 200 rolls going on at that time?RADAGA wrote:I wont elaborate anymore, I will just list here whenever something that should happen less than once every 200 or more rolls happens. Lets see how common it really is? Then we might show this for those who say it is random. What is the use of it being random, state-of-art, perfect when, every day, one or two of your rolls get terribly wrong.
Once in a while, lets say, four times out of 100 for something that should happen only once every 100% is ok, bad luck. But lets see...
I changed computers at the office and lost my history, but I will post the total of the appropriate type of roll, so we can measure the interval.
1) Nov., 25 - G. 5960075 R. 11 - lost 5 3x1 in a row odds = 0,4% / 3x1 count> 2269 / since last: -----
The Neon Peon wrote:2 out of 3... not bad.The Neon Peon wrote:sigh... what did I say about using logic in this thread?
Now he's gonna come back, say something to the effect of "you're an idiot," ignore most or all of what you said, and repeat something he's said before.
RADAGA wrote:Game 6097101>>>>
2009-12-14 15:19:56 - RADAGA: French West Africa Vs Liberia: 1;5;3 vs 6;6 / second attack 1;4;4 vs 6;6
2009-12-14 15:20:11 - RADAGA: India Vs Burma: 1;5 vs 6
2009-12-14 15:20:16 - RADAGA: second attack 6 vs 6
2009-12-14 15:20:33 - RADAGA: defence gets SIX sixes in a row.... perfect
this have a 0,00214% chance of happening.
ONE IN FIFTY THOUSAND
thats 1/50000
but I am sure you will say that this is absolutelly common, heck, you should expect to see it twice a day....
RIGHT?
the game engine reads a line from the file and discards it
(by discarting a value, they eliminate the chance of getting the exact same value twice in a row, which is not random, because in theory, it's randomly possible to get the exact same value twice in a row (just highly unlikely) but, in effect, by discarting values, the values are in fact less 'streaky' then real dice, and therefore this only proves that everyone who is complaining about dice is wrong, even more wrong then wrong, because real dice are more streaky/unfair then the generated ones.in order to have true randomness, there must be an infinite expansion of the information space
Well actually they discard the values once they are used not just for the sake of it.(by discarting a value, they eliminate the chance of getting the exact same value twice in a row, which is not random, because in theory, it's randomly possible to get the exact same value twice in a row (just highly unlikely) but, in effect, by discarting values, the values are in fact less 'streaky' then real dice, and therefore this only proves that everyone who is complaining about dice is wrong, even more wrong then wrong, because real dice are more streaky/unfair then the generated ones.
And the valuies can repeat, so even if you discard it, the next set may be exactly the same as the discarded. Or, like what did just happened AGAIN, the next 6 sets may be exactly the same .... At least concerning the "6" fr the defence dice...max is gr8 wrote:Well actually they discard the values once they are used not just for the sake of it.(by discarting a value, they eliminate the chance of getting the exact same value twice in a row, which is not random, because in theory, it's randomly possible to get the exact same value twice in a row (just highly unlikely) but, in effect, by discarting values, the values are in fact less 'streaky' then real dice, and therefore this only proves that everyone who is complaining about dice is wrong, even more wrong then wrong, because real dice are more streaky/unfair then the generated ones.
Random now have "trends" And random alows one to "know" something about them...2010-01-19 23:08:15 - RRSGenl: dice are really random.
2010-01-19 23:08:38 - RRSGenl: U need to play conservatively till you know dice are on your side
2010-01-19 23:08:53 - RRSGenl: Then go crazy till the trend shifts back
2010-01-19 23:09:13 - RRSGenl: Then go easy again till next shift
So if one day I get a streak of 20 failed 3x1 I cannot post about it?Timminz wrote:Please stop cherry-picking results. If you're going to post your rolls, post them all, not just the turns you didn't like.
Basically, no. You don't post here every day, but you play once a day. And it just so happens that you only care to notify us of every bad roll you get.RADAGA wrote:So if one day I get a streak of 20 failed 3x1 I cannot post about it?Timminz wrote:Please stop cherry-picking results. If you're going to post your rolls, post them all, not just the turns you didn't like.