Shipwright Archive
Thread: Firespray disk hunting tips
While he is not being particularly nice about it, everything that Marzuk147 has said is completely right, and everything you've said in rebuttalPetaBytehas been, from a scientific/mathematical standpoint, completely invalid. Every argument you have posed would be immediately dismissed by any scientist or statistician (or MIT professor, /rolleyes ), as anecdotal and therefore consisting ofinsufficient evidence to lead to any conclusion whatsoever.
Shoot the entire content of your second rebuttal consisted of nothing but boasting (about how many parts you have) and name dropping (mentioning MIT). You actually offered no argument whatsoever.
You'd be wise to stop argueing at this point. If that's all you can come up with you've clearly got no understanding of the things you are talking about. Marzuk is being rude. That is true. But he's right. And all you are accomplishing in your rebuttal is making yourself look like a fool.
Nothing wrong with making observations about your personal anecdotal results, but trying to argue that they really proof something and then bringing random number theory up in defense of your arguements when people point out that your results don't really demonstrate anything....that is silly.
Stark-Fuji wrote:
do u have to RE 2 or more of the same items at the same timeor can u just RE 1 componet at a time to get a fragment of the firespray?
i've gotten the schematic pieces from REing RE level 1 items (1 component at a time). I've also gotten them from REing level 2 items (2 components at a time).
All evidence is that it's completely random.Just RE everything you can and eventually you'll get the pieces. It might very well take a while though.
Trebs wrote:
Haven't done a ton of RE - but have gotten one disk so far - lol, 6/8 (from level 2 components if anyone is interested).
Now I have guildys putting up houses to store their stuff by level so I can RE it - will go through them this weekend... (um, hopefully)
Same here not a lot of RE 1 disk 6/8 from a level 1 componant
It would just overcomplicate the process and make it harder to debug, for no good reason.
Marzuk147 wrote:
Also, lets assume that you are correct and they cant even make a PNG that is "random enough" for this purpose in a game, you still have yet to prove WHY the devs would tie the process in to what you have in your inventory, what purpose would it serve.
It would just overcomplicate the process and make it harder to debug, for no good reason.
Unlike you I am at least trying to find out a few things. You havent RE'd even one little piece of loot so you cant even begin to sit there and tell me what you think. Maybe after you have RE'd 10k pieces of loot then you can begin to even have a slight clue as to what is happening. As for me I have RE'd over 10k parts and can tell you it doesnt feel random. When you can actually start to predict finding disks your not lucky, the system isnt random. So you want to talk about the disks and how to find them? Put your money where your mouth is. Until then dont even begin to discuss this with me as you have 0 (I repeat zero) experiance in regards to getting disks. I have RE'd over 10k parts. More along the lines of 12-15k now. I am seeing a pattern. I just need to figure out what it is. And yes that takes time. All I am giving is my preliminary views on this.
And if I wanted your insults I would have rattled your cage. You have insulted me from the very beginning without even knowing me. In fact your insults and flames have finally made me decide your not even worth the intelligence it takes to even acknowledge your existence. You want to have a nice conversation about randomness then go ahead. I am all for good discussions. But if your going to talk down to me and call me a moron and such then dont bother replying as I wont reply to you anymore.
As for the devs tieing it into your inventory that just might be the entropy their rand generator uses. You must create entropy to make a generator pseudo random. And though alot of games use system clocks to create the effect, people are starting to figure that pattern out.
Lastly and this will be the final reply from me to you if you keeping talking to me like a child. All science begins with fantasy and ideas. You dont just snap your fingers and have 10 million results to make a response on. This takes time. If you cant handle someone making opinions based on what they have done so far then I suggest you stay indoors alot and dont talk to alot of people. Maybe you do that already.
These are just that. Opinions. Based on what I have done so far. Based on the experiance I have gained. And based on the results from REing over 10k parts. I am giving my opinion on what brings me better chances to get disks. This is a forum and that means its to exchange ideas.
Tyranus
LOL whatever. All I can say is I am confident that I am correct, and thats good enough for me.
PS. I wouldnt tie the seed for the random number generator into anything the player can effect, its just stupid. That means inventory, location, time, money, ect.
Message Edited by Marzuk147 on 11-07-2004 12:15 AM
Marzuk147 wrote:
"That is Firespray schem number 2 for me. How many have you got? I rest my case. Next page please."
It doesnt matter how many I have, Im not even a shipwright, I just know a moron when I see one.
"By the way the thing about computers arent random isnt me saying it. Its MIT. Since they have about a thousand times more years experiance dealing technology and modern science then you have, who do you I think I am going to believe."
Dont go throwing around names just because you think its good for your side of the arguement. I admitted that computers are not totally random, but then gave information that demonstrates that for this purpose they are RANDOM ENOUGH. Feel free to ask MIT about this.
"Oh and you want one more definate fact there college boy? 80% of the disks I got were from Incom and KSE"
Great, you get what, 20 disks, and you hold that as proof? Please man dont even waste my time. Thats flipping heads three times in a row while facing south, means that facing south makes the coin show up heads.
As far as finding less of 6/8, if your own theories are correct, you should not have had this problem, having had your inventory full of other REd loot, and having had all the other schematic parts in your inventory.
Your proof is all baseless. Try again.
Also just an FYI - there are random number generators that are good enough cryptograhic strength applications, so dont tell me they cant make one good enough for a simple game. Using the standard rand() operator with a good seed would yeild a random enough result that there would be no feasable way to exploit it.
Message Edited by PetaByte32 on 11-06-2004 02:22 PM
DVad wrote:
PS. I wouldnt tie the seed for the random number generator into anything the player can effect, its just stupid. That means inventory, location, time, money, ect.
No but it could be tied to the interval the user takesinbetween clicking his mouse or whatever. Now that is simple.....and totally random (unless you have computers that can read peoples mind AND predict the future).
Yeah. you could tie it to the time interval between mouse clicks. but then it wouldn't be random anymore. using something like that would give you a gaussian distribution rather than a random one. and would be far, far less random than even the most simplistic of pseudo-random number generators.
Yeah. you could tie it to the time interval between mouse clicks. but then it wouldn't be random anymore. using something like that would give you a gaussian distribution rather than a random one. and would be far, far less random than even the most simplistic of pseudo-random number generators.
No.
You seem to be missing the point here.
The random number generator can be used on the base of the time interval....
i.e 1 second *rand()/whatever to get the number required
with 1 second being the random user input (maybe closer to like 1.2343847464637363363 of a second?)
This then has 2 random numbers.
Try and predict that.
DVad wrote:
No.
You seem to be missing the point here.
The random number generator can be used on the base of the time interval....
i.e 1 second *rand()/whatever to get the number required
with 1 second being the random user input (maybe closer to like 1.2343847464637363363 of a second?)
This then has 2 random numbers.
Try and predict that.
Now I no longer know what you are talking about. The discusion was about how to seed the random number generator. you said in response to that discussion "it could be tied to the interval the user takes inbetween clicking his mouse...". now you are saying that you weren't talking about the seed, but instead are talking about multiplying the random result by this time interval. why? thatserves no purpose. the results of rand() arefairly random. the time interval between consecutive mouse clicks isn't, at least not in the way that the computer can measure. the fact that I can't predict it doesn't make it random. but to tell you the truth, computers are not really verygood at measuring time at which an event from a mouse arrivesany more accurately than a millisecond or so. they tend to round off any attempt to measure intervals of time from an inputdevice to the nearest millisecond (roughly speaking).You may think in your head that the time interval you speak of is1.2343847464637363363, and it may beso. but when the computer attempts to calculate that time interval, because of round off error at the input device, it is going to be something like: 1.2344. A human being is actually capable of clicking with enough precision that the interval you want to calculate will come out exactly the same 100 times in only a few hundred mouse clicks because of that round off error on the input.
No. Real time user input is a horrible way to try and get a random number. For two reasons. 1) human beings are creatures of habit. and 2) the input deviceshumans use to communicate with the computer are only as accurate as they need to be to keep up with a human's reflexes.