Smuggler Archive
Thread: Is sliceing really as random as they say.
Nicolas_Frost
Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:54 am
#66
Chewnada wrote:
42
The Answer to life.
Didn't ya notice the percentage for my method to damage slices?
Jaguarrr
Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:45 am
#67
ana-mo-cara wrote:
Riddle me this naysayers. If the sliceing were a random number generator why are there some sliceing numbers more prevelant then others. In other words why are you ten times more likely to get a 23 then a 35. After all if the system were is a random number generator. Then shouldnt the coveted 35 happen more often then it does. Would like to point out that the pattern I have posted does completely explain this.
11 2 3 5 8 1 3 4 7 1 1
Notice how many times the formula alignes with 1 as compared to eight. Add in the final five point range and you see exactly why it is so hard to hit a 35.
I suppose I am going to have to detail all the numbers in a couple days. Maybe not slice a thousand but a hundred should do.
Ok... Listen. And listen closely. Throw 2 6-sided dice and add the showing numbers, throw it 1000 times. You get 7 the most, 2 and 12 the least. Viola a bell curve. You can increase the number of dice of course, with this increasing the range and the average number.
The more dice the more unpredictable it gets.
ana-mo-cara
Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:19 am
#68
Ugh its like leading a horse to water. You cannot make him drink. I remember haveing to point one of these patterns out to a friend when it came to crafting T21s. He was utterly stunned when I pointed out the trick was to do it on the firstgo at a station, and lastly forgetting to apply one resource in final assembly then properly applying the resource after the message. He was then able to make a consistently better T21. I hope to god they fixed that thing. No reason 13 percent resources can be bugged up to 18 or 23 percent.
Alas I met the same skeptisism there. With the critical success line. That was supposedly random.
ana-mo-cara
Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:20 am
#69
Ugh its like leading a horse to water. You cannot make him drink. I remember haveing to point one of these patterns out to a friend when it came to crafting T21s. He was utterly stunned when I pointed out the trick was to do it on the firstgo at a station, and lastly forgetting to apply one resource in final assembly then properly applying the resource after the message. He was then able to make a consistently better T21. I hope to god they fixed that thing. No reason 13 percent resources can be bugged up to 18 or 23 percent.
Alas I met the same skeptisism there. With the critical success line. That was supposedly random.
Chewnada
Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:39 pm
#70
Ba Dee Ba Dee Ba Deee dats all folks.
Now he's talkin I think exploits on weaponsmith. Does anyone think this guy needs to sit back drink a beer and enjoy the scenery a tad?
/stops head spinning
ana-mo-cara
Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:20 pm
#71
That was the entire point of this thread. To ask the question do you think there are actually smugglers out there working off of this system. Smugglers who have figured out the pattern and use it to their own benefit. People that are running through crates of items to get to the point in the progression to make it happen.
As I stated earlier yes this is a known exploit the T21 thing. Which I know for a fact a number of weaponsmiths used to corner the market. Yes I also did report the bug and yes I experimented it out.
I started this thread out trying to avoid listing off how the progression went but a ton of people got snide, and derogatory and calling me a bs artist. So I felt compelled to say that aswell.
Like I said I hope they fixed the t21 bug, but at this point I am not going to be overly secretive about it being I do not use it myself. Personally I do think there are smugglers in the game that are useing such a system to bend the rules and get the better slices when it counts. I have come across far too many weaponshops and armorshops that are filled to the brim with perfect or near perfect slices. Now if they are just doing it randomly where the hell is the other 75 percent bad slices going. I am talking about hundreds of items on these vendors, and I got to wonder. Have these people patterned out like I did, and are they useing it to undercut other smugglers.
Which was the whole point of this thread. Do you think there are smugglers that have figured it out and are abuseing it to their own gain. Just like the weaponsmiths that botch the final assembly on T21s.
SpinningCloud
Tue Jan 11, 2005 11:57 am
#72
ana; "In other words why are you ten times more likely to get a 23 then a 35. "
Because its weighted with a bell curve with upper and lower limits.
You can still have a known distribution but not have predictable sequences within that distribution.
Really, how many people aren't you going to believe? Including the devs I might add?
SpinningCloud
Tue Jan 11, 2005 3:49 pm
#73
Yimaz; "Are we still talking about this?"
Why not?
It's either THIS or frog bowls and gaming tables. *retches*
Like I said before, this particular subject is the meat and potatoes of our entire profession...and I don't mean actually slicing, I mean talking about the randomness of it.
Delroh
Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:02 pm
#74
ana-mo-cara wrote:
Its 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 Once you get to thirteen the system reads it as 1 3 4 7 11 which the system reads as 1 1 for 11 and in there you get back to number one. So its actually two fibinchi sequences that loop back and forth. Thats why the doubleing over effect dosent become readily apparant. Depending on where you personally start in your sequence. The speed or damage aspect also runs off a fibinachi sequence, but there is still a third equation that is also running that slightly modifies the results presumably so that each possible number and combination can be met.
35 is really a direvitive of 32.5 which means you can hit 30 or 35 and any number in between. Still trying to unlock what is governing this aspect. Though knowing in which five points and the type of slice is a very good general approximation.
I think you are giving way too much credit to the Devs.
Council Member of the SHJO
ana-mo-cara
Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:18 pm
#75
Too much credit to the devs this is the code teddy rucksbin uses for blinking his eyes. If anything it is terribly unimaginative. By the way guys a computer cannot be random it can just generate the appearance of random. A computer cannot just make up its mind it has to follow a program a mathematical instruction. Not that a dice roll or a coin toss is necassarily all that random. On one hand people say its random and others of you say there is a curve. If the system is selectively chooseing to reduce one number from occuring thats not random. Just a thought.
P.S guys its not like there is anything more pressing to discuss. So why get all hot and bothered unless you are one of the people I am asking about and fear common knowledge ruining you.
Kamileon
Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:53 pm
#76
You're being deliberately dense. I refuse to believe that someone can wrap their brain around any part of the fibonachi sequence AND but completely clueless about random number generation, or at least a damned bell curve at the same time.
It. Is not. Selectively reducing one.
A bell curve is a perfectly valid statistical distrubution of results, ESPECIALLY if it's the outcomes of two random results combined.
Ala the same two damned dice we've been talking about.
And trust me, to generate a seemingly random enough sequence, devs are gonna use a damned psuedorandom number generator that they could go find on frickin' google if they wanted, as opposed to coding some sort of more complex recombining fibonachi sequence, just to fool people into thinking something's random.
Sure, numbers aren't every truly random, even possible to predict if you know the exact random seed and the mechanics used for calculations based off of that random seed.
You, however, DO NOT KNOW these things.
Slicing is random, please pass the mashed potatoes.
It. Is not. Selectively reducing one.
A bell curve is a perfectly valid statistical distrubution of results, ESPECIALLY if it's the outcomes of two random results combined.
Ala the same two damned dice we've been talking about.
And trust me, to generate a seemingly random enough sequence, devs are gonna use a damned psuedorandom number generator that they could go find on frickin' google if they wanted, as opposed to coding some sort of more complex recombining fibonachi sequence, just to fool people into thinking something's random.
Sure, numbers aren't every truly random, even possible to predict if you know the exact random seed and the mechanics used for calculations based off of that random seed.
You, however, DO NOT KNOW these things.
Slicing is random, please pass the mashed potatoes.
Aelik Orrigo: Smuggler, Pilot, and Ranger. Kettemoor
RouterJedi
Tue Jan 11, 2005 8:41 pm
#77
Hold on, I think I've got it...
Cr(SIM | f^sim=x)=x
Cr(DOOM | f^p=1)=1