Random Numbers
Moderator: Forum Moderators

 Posts: 4
 Joined: September 23rd, 2009, 4:49 am
Random Numbers
I am working my way though Bad Moon Rising capaign 2 on Wesnoth 1.6 and it occurred to me that I was seeing very irregular odds patterns.
In one scenario, on a whim, I decided to see just how bad a 70% hit rate was. By attacking and reloading after the first strike attempt I have been going for the past 10min unable to hit. If I let the combat play out neither side hits very much, maybe 30%. No, it's not my perception. I have also noticed that at different times the game will go through rashes with stellar hits, even for 30 and 40% odds. Sometimes several attacks in a row just can't miss.
I realize that odds have been discussed and complaints debunked before, but come on. This looks like a bug in the random number generator or the game is inaccurately reporting odds.
In one scenario, on a whim, I decided to see just how bad a 70% hit rate was. By attacking and reloading after the first strike attempt I have been going for the past 10min unable to hit. If I let the combat play out neither side hits very much, maybe 30%. No, it's not my perception. I have also noticed that at different times the game will go through rashes with stellar hits, even for 30 and 40% odds. Sometimes several attacks in a row just can't miss.
I realize that odds have been discussed and complaints debunked before, but come on. This looks like a bug in the random number generator or the game is inaccurately reporting odds.
Last edited by Iris on September 26th, 2009, 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Moved to Users' Forum
Reason: Moved to Users' Forum
Re: Random Numbers
What a coincidence! This sounds exactly like how probability works in the real world!fuzzykitty wrote:In one scenario, on a whim, I decided to see just how bad a 70% hit rate was. By attacking and reloading after the first strike attempt I have been going for the past 10min unable to hit. If I let the combat play out neither side hits very much, maybe 30%. No, it's not my perception. I have also noticed that at different times the game will go through rashes with stellar hits, even for 30 and 40% odds. Sometimes several attacks in a row just can't miss.
Proud creator of the :whistle: smiley  I prefer the CC0 license.
Re: Random Numbers
Gambler's Fallacy: "I have also noticed that at different times the game will go through rashes with stellar hits, even for 30 and 40% odds. Sometimes several attacks in a row just can't miss."
If there's a 30% chance to hit and it has hit 4 times before therefore it must not hit the next time? Incorrect, as the next roll is always another 30% chance to hit.
If there's a 30% chance to hit and it has hit 4 times before therefore it must not hit the next time? Incorrect, as the next roll is always another 30% chance to hit.
Wesnoth Bestiary ( PREVIEW IT HERE )
Unit tree and stat browser
Canvas ( PREVIEW IT HERE )
Exp. map viewer
Unit tree and stat browser
Canvas ( PREVIEW IT HERE )
Exp. map viewer

 Retired Developer
 Posts: 1086
 Joined: September 16th, 2005, 5:44 am
 Location: Hamburg, Germany
Re: Random Numbers
Replays, please . If you want us to listen any further, that is.
Smart persons learn out of their mistakes, wise persons learn out of others mistakes!
Re: Random Numbers
... and how it should not happen during the game!Zarel wrote: What a coincidence! This sounds exactly like how probability works in the real world!
only 2 turns with big RNG unbalanced can screw the game...
"Of course His Majesty is a pacifist. When I told him that to initiate war was a mistake, he agreed.Thus, gradually, he began to lead toward war."Emperor ShÃ²wa (Enlightened Peace)'s chief cabinet secretary
Re: Random Numbers
hiro hito wrote:... and how it should not happen during the game!Zarel wrote: What a coincidence! This sounds exactly like how probability works in the real world!
only 2 turns with big RNG unbalanced can screw the game...
Troll much?
I suspect having one foot in the past is the best way to understand the present.
Don Hewitt.
Don Hewitt.

 Posts: 4
 Joined: September 23rd, 2009, 4:49 am
Re: Random Numbers
What a coincidence! This sounds exactly like how probability works in the real world![/quote]
Umm, no. That's not how probability works. Probability should be readily apparent within a reasonable sample size. Some people argue 13 samples are sufficient while others advocate ~20 assuming you are not looking for subtleties.
The reality is that the so called "random number" feature is not really random and as such it will adhere to it's own distribution. If the random number generator were truely "random" then a unit with a 50% hit chance should hit at a rate approaching 50% after 100 tries. Try flipping a coin in a well controlled experiment and you will find that after 100 tries you approach the 50% probability of heads or tails. That's probability in the real world.
What you are describing as probability is the idea that if something has a 1 out of 10^21 chance of happening, seeing it happen every time for the next 10^21 tries is perfectly reasonable. The problem is that you are confusing a theoretical possibility with reality. Probability is an attempt to apply a theoretical outcome to a real world situation. This is why the afore mentioned condition will NEVER happen in the real world.
Umm, no. That's not how probability works. Probability should be readily apparent within a reasonable sample size. Some people argue 13 samples are sufficient while others advocate ~20 assuming you are not looking for subtleties.
The reality is that the so called "random number" feature is not really random and as such it will adhere to it's own distribution. If the random number generator were truely "random" then a unit with a 50% hit chance should hit at a rate approaching 50% after 100 tries. Try flipping a coin in a well controlled experiment and you will find that after 100 tries you approach the 50% probability of heads or tails. That's probability in the real world.
What you are describing as probability is the idea that if something has a 1 out of 10^21 chance of happening, seeing it happen every time for the next 10^21 tries is perfectly reasonable. The problem is that you are confusing a theoretical possibility with reality. Probability is an attempt to apply a theoretical outcome to a real world situation. This is why the afore mentioned condition will NEVER happen in the real world.
Re: Random Numbers
Yes, well, I see a significantly lower sample size.fuzzykitty wrote:Umm, no. That's not how probability works. Probability should be readily apparent within a reasonable sample size. Some people argue 13 samples are sufficient while others advocate ~20 assuming you are not looking for subtleties.
You appear to act as if you understand probability. I'm going to assume you've taken a statistics course (which, by the way, you don't need to understand probability to pass). How's about you run an actual statistical hypothesis test on Wesnoth?
Go do that, and report the results. Remember that to reduce bias, you have to predict the statistical anomaly that will occur before you test for it: You cannot run the data, find a statistical anomaly, and then test the same data for that anomaly (it screws with alpha values by lots).
No, the unit has a fairly high probability of hitting at a total rate of approximately 50%. That "total" is very important  the probability of getting so close to 50% is high only because it is a total over a large sample size. Individually, you're quite likely to see runs like 10 heads in a row, within your 100 tries.fuzzykitty wrote:The reality is that the so called "random number" feature is not really random and as such it will adhere to it's own distribution. If the random number generator were truely "random" then a unit with a 50% hit chance should hit at a rate approaching 50% after 100 tries. Try flipping a coin in a well controlled experiment and you will find that after 100 tries you approach the 50% probability of heads or tails. That's probability in the real world.
Richard Feynman once said:fuzzykitty wrote:What you are describing as probability is the idea that if something has a 1 out of 10^21 chance of happening, seeing it happen every time for the next 10^21 tries is perfectly reasonable. The problem is that you are confusing a theoretical possibility with reality. Probability is an attempt to apply a theoretical outcome to a real world situation. This is why the afore mentioned condition will NEVER happen in the real world.
"I was walking to class today and the funniest thing happened: I saw a car with the license plate ‘ARW 357’. Can you imagine? Of all the possible license plates, what are the chances of seeing that one?"
Further reading: http://cubic.bioc.columbia.edu/~bigelow ... _joke.html
Proud creator of the :whistle: smiley  I prefer the CC0 license.
Re: Random Numbers
There's another popular example. Lets play a game with 32 unique cards. Shuffle. 3 People get 10 cards, 2 remain in the middle (Btw the distribution 3x10 +2 has nothing to with the experiment, just taken from a popular german game called "Skat"). Now look how the distribution turned out. Calculate the chance for this particular outcome. Chances are so low that the distribution you see is practically impossible.
Greetz
HomerJ
Greetz
HomerJ
Six years without a signature!

 Posts: 4
 Joined: September 23rd, 2009, 4:49 am
Re: Random Numbers
"..You appear to act as if you understand probability.."
Friend, you have no idea. You may think you understand probability but what you show you don't understand is the application of probability to a process and that's essentially what a game like Wesnoth is. If the random number generator cannot show the reported odds within a reasonable sample size then it is broken. Plain and simple. You can't just open a text book and expect to have a solution.
SSI and other hexbased strategy game makers resolved this problem fairly early on to where you don't see this kind of inconsistancy. In Panzer General II, for example, if you are given a prediction of the rough odds you will generally see that kind of performance. There is some variation but total systematic departure for samples >10 just doesn't happen. So I'll restate it: The Wesnoth method of resolving combat is broken.
Friend, you have no idea. You may think you understand probability but what you show you don't understand is the application of probability to a process and that's essentially what a game like Wesnoth is. If the random number generator cannot show the reported odds within a reasonable sample size then it is broken. Plain and simple. You can't just open a text book and expect to have a solution.
SSI and other hexbased strategy game makers resolved this problem fairly early on to where you don't see this kind of inconsistancy. In Panzer General II, for example, if you are given a prediction of the rough odds you will generally see that kind of performance. There is some variation but total systematic departure for samples >10 just doesn't happen. So I'll restate it: The Wesnoth method of resolving combat is broken.

 Posts: 4
 Joined: September 23rd, 2009, 4:49 am
Re: Random Numbers
"There's another popular example. Lets play a game with 32 unique cards. Shuffle. 3 People get 10 cards, 2 remain in the middle (Btw the distribution 3x10 +2 has nothing to with the experiment, just taken from a popular german game called "Skat"). Now look how the distribution turned out. Calculate the chance for this particular outcome. Chances are so low that the distribution you see is practically impossible. "
Sure, I'll agree. But then it shouldn't happen the next three times in a row. But in Wesnoth it can because as I said, the combat system is broken.
Sure, I'll agree. But then it shouldn't happen the next three times in a row. But in Wesnoth it can because as I said, the combat system is broken.
Re: Random Numbers
You realize that that is a very different statement from your claims of the indicated hit chances not being correct, right? If you want to prove those claims a look into a textbook would probably come in handy.fuzzykitty wrote:So I'll restate it: The Wesnoth method of resolving combat is broken.
A more accurate statement would be that you don't like the combat resolution system of wesnoth. You could try the lessluck era or sauron's mod and see if you like that more. They're only for multiplayer though.
"If gameplay requires it, they can be made to live on Venus."  scott
Re: Random Numbers
I ask you again to put your alleged statistical prowess where your mouth is, and conduct a statistical study on what's inconsistent about Wesnoth's RNG. Until then, your assertions don't really mean much.fuzzykitty wrote:"..You appear to act as if you understand probability.."
Friend, you have no idea. You may think you understand probability but what you show you don't understand is the application of probability to a process and that's essentially what a game like Wesnoth is. If the random number generator cannot show the reported odds within a reasonable sample size then it is broken. Plain and simple. You can't just open a text book and expect to have a solution.
SSI and other hexbased strategy game makers resolved this problem fairly early on to where you don't see this kind of inconsistancy. In Panzer General II, for example, if you are given a prediction of the rough odds you will generally see that kind of performance. There is some variation but total systematic departure for samples >10 just doesn't happen. So I'll restate it: The Wesnoth method of resolving combat is broken.
Proud creator of the :whistle: smiley  I prefer the CC0 license.
Re: Random Numbers
Soliton wrote:You could try the lessluck era or sauron's mod and see if you like that more. They're only for multiplayer though.
... and windows system
"Of course His Majesty is a pacifist. When I told him that to initiate war was a mistake, he agreed.Thus, gradually, he began to lead toward war."Emperor ShÃ²wa (Enlightened Peace)'s chief cabinet secretary