Random number generator - please make it more random

[BurningDownTheHouse]

Look at the combat log in the image below:



Does anything about the rolls there strike you as being less than random?

Now, I'll be the first to admit that the kind of number clustering you see in the image works both ways, and sometimes you get 3 vorpals in a row as well.

Having said that, this is ridiculous. The chances for 3 1's in a row on a d20 is 1 in 8000, it happens way more than that. I've had the same number rolled 10 times in a row on a d100 roll as well. The chance for this happening is lower than the chance of winning the grand prize in the lottery two consecutive times in a row!!!

I know that logical random number generators tend to cluster over short instances, but games like this is the exact place where this kind of clustering is detrimental.

There is a way to have a real random number generator used (the one using atmospheric readings comes to mind). The problem is, that it costs money.
I think that it would be a worthwhile investment none the less.

Your thoughts now.

[Neversignup]

OP... I'm not trying to knock you mate but it sounds like you are after system that offers different numbers everytime. Which ain't random. Which would be exploitable to the brilliant player base that makes up the Eberron community.

[BurningDownTheHouse]

OP... I'm not trying to knock you mate but it sounds like you are after system that offers different numbers everytime. Which ain't random. Which would be exploitable to the brilliant player base that makes up the Eberron community.

Umm, not sure what you mean...
I want the numbers not to cluster, what did you think I wanted?

[TechNoFear]

You assume that each character, mob, chest, pool of lava, etc has their own random number generator, which I do not think is the case.

So your three '1's in a row are not consecutive values from the games/servers random number generator (ie there are lots of other numbers generated by the RNG inbetween each of your '1's so it is not 'clustering').

[BurningDownTheHouse]

You assume that each character, mob, chest, pool of lava, etc has their own random number generator, which I do not think is the case.

So your three '1's in a row are not consecutive values from the games/servers random number generator (ie there are lots of other numbers generated by the RNG inbetween each of your '1's so it is not 'clustering').

I don't think that only one instance of a random number generator will be able to support the games needs.
I would guess that there is one per character, mob, or any other relevant game object. Makes more sense to me.

[Daggaz]

The random generator has been tested extensively, and disregarding external code effects, has been shown to be consistently very random. In fact, random number generators in general are extremely well made these days and do NOT suffer the commonly held misconception of being "not random at all." Go ahead and wiki it...

Stop kicking this dead horse, especially with such an incredibly limited data set, especially when you admit to knowing that your data set is far too limited to be of use.

somebody want to link the appropriate threads.. I dont bother bookmarking that stuff.

[BurningDownTheHouse]

The random generator has been tested extensively, and disregarding external code effects, has been shown to be consistently very random. In fact, random number generators in general are extremely well made these days and do NOT suffer the commonly held misconception of being "not random at all." Go ahead and wiki it...

There are two principal methods used to generate random numbers. One measures some physical phenomenon that is expected to be random and then compensates for possible biases in the measurement process. The other uses computational algorithms that produce long sequences of apparently random results, which are in fact completely determined by a shorter initial value, known as a seed or key. The latter type are often called pseudorandom number generators.

A "random number generator" based solely on deterministic computation cannot be regarded as a "true" random number generator, since its output is inherently predictable. How to distinguish a "true" random number from the output of a pseudo-random number generator is a very difficult problem. However, carefully chosen pseudo-random number generators can be used instead of true random numbers in many applications. Rigorous statistical analysis of the output is often needed to have confidence in the algorithm.

And I did not say "not random at all" I said "tend to cluster over short instances".

Stop kicking this dead horse, especially with such an incredibly limited data set, especially when you admit to knowing that your data set is far too limited to be of use.

Shouldn't be dead if it is...
/cast raise dead

[MrLarone]

i believe the OP is looking for this:

http://gamesbyemail.com/News/DiceOMatic

[KraahgDaAxe]

I don't think that only one instance of a random number generator will be able to support the games needs.
I would guess that there is one per character, mob, or any other relevant game object. Makes more sense to me.

Actually multiple die rollers would be far more detrimental to the server. Plus it would effectively limit the number of "users" that can roll dice altogether. It has to be from a base source per server.

Kraahg

[Xilraazz]

just a couple nights ago playing PnP i rolled 4 9's in a row on a d20. using the exact same die.
how's that for random...

[Dendrix]

That is random. 1 in 8000 chances happen 1 in 8000 times. the no of dice rolls made in a 4 hour gaming session is tens of thousands

[BurningDownTheHouse]

That is random. 1 in 8000 chances happen 1 in 8000 times. the no of dice rolls made in a 4 hour gaming session is tens of thousands

This was just an example.
Try attacking the ship dummy, and record the clustering.
You'll be surprised.

[Dendrix]

This was just an example.
Try attacking the ship dummy, and record the clustering.
You'll be surprised.

No I won't because I understand mathematics and randomness. Frequent clustering is to be expected in any random distribution.

Here's are two example of randomness
1) How many people do you need in any random grouping to have a 50% chance that two of them share the same birthday?
2) How many people do you need in any random grouping to have a 99% chance that two of them share the same birthday?

Answers below
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23 and 57

[BurningDownTheHouse]

No I won't because I understand mathematics and randomness. Frequent clustering is to be expected in any random distribution.

Look above and tell me that those results make statistical sense.

[MrLarone]

23 and 57

how'd you work those out?

sincere curiosity since it's been a while since i played with statistics.

to my mind it's both questions are answered by the number of people minus one dived by the number of days in the (normal) year. or:

(N-1)/365

which i believe is right as you can only be 100% certain to have two people with the same birthday once you have 366 or more (as then you would have one person to match every day and then one left over to guarantee the duplicate day).

in which case you have a 50% chance at around 182 and a 99% chance around 361 (spreadsheet floating point accuracy not withstanding)

correct me if i'm wrong =)

[Drallac]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

statistics is a funny think that is often weird, like someone else said this is a dead horse. "Clusters" of numbers as you say, are in fact proof it is random, otherwise if there were never clusters randomness could never occur, as Tim Minchin said "as we know things that have a 1 in 64 000 000 chance if happening, happen all the time"

[Keybreaker]

how'd you work those out?

sincere curiosity since it's been a while since i played with statistics.

to my mind it's both questions are answered by the number of people minus one dived by the number of days in the (normal) year. or:

(N-1)/365

which i believe is right as you can only be 100% certain to have two people with the same birthday once you have 366 or more (as then you would have one person to match every day and then one left over to guarantee the duplicate day).

in which case you have a 50% chance at around 182 and a 99% chance around 361 (spreadsheet floating point accuracy not withstanding)

correct me if i'm wrong =)

The "Birthday Paradox" is a well known one and quite extensively explained here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

In probability theory, the birthday problem, or birthday paradox[1] pertains to the probability that in a set of randomly chosen people some pair of them will have the same birthday. By the pigeonhole principle, the probability reaches 100% when the number of people reaches 367 (including February 29 births). But perhaps counter-intuitively, 99% probability is reached with just 57 people, and 50% probability with 23 people. These conclusions are based on the assumption that each day of the year (except February 29) is equally probable for a birthday.

[Draccus]

In over 500 UMD rolls recorded, I am four times as likely to roll a 1 as I am a 20.

My theory is that Turbine uses skewed dice rolls to try to balance the game that they completely unbalanced with ridiculous loot and exploitable monster AI.

[bokaboka]

Screenshot or it didn't....... nvm

[Dendrix]

how'd you work those out?

sincere curiosity since it's been a while since i played with statistics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

It's computed as follows
the chance that the 1st person shares a birthday with any of the other 22 +
the chance that the 2nd person shares a birthday with the remaining 21 +
the chance that the 3rd person shares a birthday with the remaining 20 +
the chance that the 4th person shares a birthday with the remaining 19 +
etcetera down to
the chance that the 22nd person shares a birthday with the last person.