Login to BatWeb
Forgot your password?
BatMUD Forums > Bs > Re: random()
There are quite many players who have witnessed that in totally random()
things that should not be affected by luck - they get sort of a sine curve on
shifting average - so the question is, is bat's pseudo-random generator
actually per-player seed pseudo-random algorithm (this together with a crappy
algorithm would explain such behaviour) or is it either a) mudwide seed b)
real random that utilises the OS:s /dev/(u)random?
it the answer is not the latter, someone might want to take a look at the
random() function.
things that should not be affected by luck - they get sort of a sine curve on
shifting average - so the question is, is bat's pseudo-random generator
actually per-player seed pseudo-random algorithm (this together with a crappy
algorithm would explain such behaviour) or is it either a) mudwide seed b)
real random that utilises the OS:s /dev/(u)random?
it the answer is not the latter, someone might want to take a look at the
random() function.
Rating:
4
Votes:
5
Kimvais wrote:
There are quite many players who have witnessed that in totally random()
things that should not be affected by luck - they get sort of a sine curve on
shifting average - so the question is, is bat's pseudo-random generator
actually per-player seed pseudo-random algorithm (this together with a crappy
algorithm would explain such behaviour) or is it either a) mudwide seed b)
real random that utilises the OS:s /dev/(u)random?
it the answer is not the latter, someone might want to take a look at the
random() function.
things that should not be affected by luck - they get sort of a sine curve on
shifting average - so the question is, is bat's pseudo-random generator
actually per-player seed pseudo-random algorithm (this together with a crappy
algorithm would explain such behaviour) or is it either a) mudwide seed b)
real random that utilises the OS:s /dev/(u)random?
it the answer is not the latter, someone might want to take a look at the
random() function.
The random function sucks, I don't know why exactly but it does. I have
personally failed a skill 9 times in a row with my test char when I supposedly
had something like a 98% chance of success (I knew the formula and calculated
the exact chance) but anyways I suppose that even with a 98% chance of success
it is possible to fail 9 times in a row!
But I do know for a fact as well, that if you generate a LARGE sampling of
numbers with batmud's random all values in the range are represented equally.
But generating 100k numbers doesn't say anything about the nature of the
sequence of numbers in a smaller range, say like 300 or 400 at a time.
But I also think people tend to pay more attention to when they think the
random is screwing them over, like I don't remember a time ever succeeding a
skill 9 times in a row when I had a 3% chance of success but I am sure it has
happened... well maybe not with me personally as I don't do these types of
tests often but with someone out there I am sure it has happened.
At any rate, even if bat's random does suck (which is my opinion not a
mathmatically fact) at least it sucks fairly for all players and monsters.
Rating:
1
Votes:
1
© 1990-2024 Balanced Alternative Techniques ry. All rights reserved. BatMUD™ is a registered trademark of Balanced Alternative Techniques ry.
The individual comments are the property of their posters, and may not reflect the views or opinions of the administration.