Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Board and Card Games > Ogre and G.E.V. > Ogre Video Game

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-25-2018, 09:52 AM   #11
dwalend
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Default Re: Update incoming: Please finish any Multiplayer games you have running

Quote:
Originally Posted by GranitePenguin View Post
I think this is the third time now where Steam has told me it's my turn, but I don't think David has gone yet. Still on turn 3
It's still relatively clean - we're able to play the game.

There are a lot of little, creepy bugs around what words are displayed - lots of "Unknown Player"s and the like.

Steam seems to think I have two other games in progress.

My chief complaint at this point is crappy luck on both sides. I've landed 3 hits of 25 shots, and GP isn't doing much better. He's able to ram at least. I can work with 1 hit in 4, not 1 in 8.
dwalend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2018, 10:53 AM   #12
GranitePenguin
 
GranitePenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Plainfield, IL
Default Re: Update incoming: Please finish any Multiplayer games you have running

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwalend View Post
My chief complaint at this point is crappy luck on both sides. I've landed 3 hits of 25 shots, and GP isn't doing much better. He's able to ram at least. I can work with 1 hit in 4, not 1 in 8.
At least it's evenly crappy; still makes it an interesting game. Even my rams aren't that great; lot's of disables that I follow up with missed shots. :-)
__________________
GranitePenguin
MIB #2214
GranitePenguin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2018, 11:23 AM   #13
AurochJake
Moderator
 
AurochJake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Bristol, UK
Default Re: Update incoming: Please finish any Multiplayer games you have running

Just so everyone knows as we initially said today, we'll most likely be updating the game tomorrow now.

There's a bit more testing to do before we're set to go live.

We'd like to thank Onwaaard for the suggestion of making custom scenarios exportable at high enough resolutions to print out and make your own custom game boards. This should be implemented by tomorrow too :)

Thanks!
AurochJake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2018, 01:49 PM   #14
offsides
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cheltenham, PA
Default Re: Update incoming: Please finish any Multiplayer games you have running

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwalend View Post
My chief complaint at this point is crappy luck on both sides. I've landed 3 hits of 25 shots, and GP isn't doing much better. He's able to ram at least. I can work with 1 hit in 4, not 1 in 8.
Given the number of complaints about low rolls, I have to wonder if the RNG is indeed skewed, jut evenly skewed downwards in some way. From my own experiences and what others have posted, I don't think it's skewed towards one player or another, but the doesn't mean it isn't consistently rolling lower than it should.

Given that everything is stored on the server, might it be possible for Auroch to audit just the die rolls (and I mean all die rolls) and do a statistical analysis of how they land? If there's a skew in there, that should show it fairly readily over time...
__________________
Joshua Megerman, SJGames MIB #5273 - Ogre AI Testing Division
offsides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2018, 04:13 PM   #15
GranitePenguin
 
GranitePenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Plainfield, IL
Default Re: Update incoming: Please finish any Multiplayer games you have running

Quote:
Originally Posted by offsides View Post
Given the number of complaints about low rolls, I have to wonder if the RNG is indeed skewed, jut evenly skewed downwards in some way.
That's all they are; complaints. There have been just as many good rolls, they just come an inopportune times and too late to salvage bad rolls. You hear the complaints because nobody complains about good rolls. I doubt there's anything to fix.
__________________
GranitePenguin
MIB #2214
GranitePenguin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2018, 07:18 AM   #16
offsides
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cheltenham, PA
Default Re: Update incoming: Please finish any Multiplayer games you have running

Quote:
Originally Posted by GranitePenguin View Post
That's all they are; complaints. There have been just as many good rolls, they just come an inopportune times and too late to salvage bad rolls. You hear the complaints because nobody complains about good rolls. I doubt there's anything to fix.
While that's probably true, I just wondered if it was worth Auroch's time to verify with an audit, assuming it wasn't too difficult. But I agree that chances are there's nothing there to fix.
__________________
Joshua Megerman, SJGames MIB #5273 - Ogre AI Testing Division
offsides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2018, 06:27 PM   #17
dwalend
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Default Re: Update incoming: Please finish any Multiplayer games you have running

Quote:
Originally Posted by offsides View Post
While that's probably true, I just wondered if it was worth Auroch's time to verify with an audit, assuming it wasn't too difficult. But I agree that chances are there's nothing there to fix.
Oh, it'd be pretty obvious in the code if they did it intentionally.

From outside - we'd have to play a few hundred games, then only have some squishy Bayesian comparison of bias.
dwalend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2018, 10:58 PM   #18
offsides
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cheltenham, PA
Default Re: Update incoming: Please finish any Multiplayer games you have running

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwalend View Post
Oh, it'd be pretty obvious in the code if they did it intentionally.
Definitely, but I was thinking more along the lines of an unintentional skew. For example, some rand functions provide a floating-point number between 0 and 1. So to simulate a d6, you multiply by 6, add 1, and drop any fractions (truncate). If, say, you multiplied by 6 then rounded to the nearest whole number instead of adding 1 and truncating, you'd skew slightly towards the low end (50% greater chance for a 1, 50% lower chance for a 6). Not a huge difference, and once that should be easy to spot with a large enough sample size, but easy to miss with a small enough sample.

ETA: Or, if rand gives a random int (like C apparently does - it's been a while since I dealt with it apparently!) and you take (rand() % 6) to get a value between 0 and 5, unless (RAND_MAX-1) is divisible by 5, you're going to skew downwards a teeeeeeny bit because of the non-uniformity of possible values. And that one is going to take a much larger sample to spot because its so small.

Another possibility is that the random seeding is off, and that if seeded improperly it skews the results, but I don't know enough about that to say more than just pulling a guess out of thin air. But if it's easy enough to do, auditing the die rolls would make for both proof either way, not to mention some interesting data to graph :)
__________________
Joshua Megerman, SJGames MIB #5273 - Ogre AI Testing Division

Last edited by offsides; 06-26-2018 at 11:04 PM. Reason: Bad memory of rand
offsides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2018, 01:39 AM   #19
TokyoDan
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Default Re: Update incoming: Please finish any Multiplayer games you have running

Quote:
Originally Posted by offsides View Post
Definitely, but I was thinking more along the lines of an unintentional skew. For example, some rand functions provide a floating-point number between 0 and 1. So to simulate a d6, you multiply by 6, add 1, and drop any fractions (truncate). If, say, you multiplied by 6 then rounded to the nearest whole number instead of adding 1 and truncating, you'd skew slightly towards the low end (50% greater chance for a 1, 50% lower chance for a 6). Not a huge difference, and once that should be easy to spot with a large enough sample size, but easy to miss with a small enough sample.

ETA: Or, if rand gives a random int (like C apparently does - it's been a while since I dealt with it apparently!) and you take (rand() % 6) to get a value between 0 and 5, unless (RAND_MAX-1) is divisible by 5, you're going to skew downwards a teeeeeeny bit because of the non-uniformity of possible values. And that one is going to take a much larger sample to spot because its so small.

Another possibility is that the random seeding is off, and that if seeded improperly it skews the results, but I don't know enough about that to say more than just pulling a guess out of thin air. But if it's easy enough to do, auditing the die rolls would make for both proof either way, not to mention some interesting data to graph :)
I'm all for the auditing.
TokyoDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2018, 08:30 AM   #20
dwalend
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Default Re: Update incoming: Please finish any Multiplayer games you have running

Quote:
Originally Posted by offsides View Post
Definitely, but I was thinking more along the lines of an unintentional skew.
They aren't going to mess that up. It's Ogre. The standard library's (nextInt() % 6) +1 equivalent is fine by many orders of magnitude. They're likely using some variant of Mersenne Twister, possibly not even conscious of it.

I'm more concerned with changing the narrative of the game "to make it more interesting" instead of letting the dice fall fairly. I've played two games of MkIII Attack where both players had a hard time landing hits south of the craters. It's just anecdotal, but not rolling a single six, and only 3 fives - out of 25 attempts is really strange. GP wasn't doing any better.
dwalend is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.