Daily Gold Rolls

[Fedora1]

Nope. Their minds were blown that I was able to figure out at a glance who had and who hadn't done the homework. Because 100 is a decent sample size for a simple thing like a coin flip.

My mind is blown that you are saying a random distribution has a pattern to it. Which makes it not random.

Funny part is that the kids you think DID the homework would tell you "Nope, you're wrong, I didn't do the homework I just made these up". So you have no real way of knowing how accurate your little party trick is.

[HungarianRhapsody]

My mind is blown that you are saying a random distribution has a pattern to it. Which makes it not random.

Funny part is that the kids you think DID the homework would tell you "Nope, you're wrong, I didn't do the homework I just made these up". So you have no real way of knowing how accurate your little party trick is.

Random distributions can have sections that appear to have patterns in them. That's a fact. Try it yourself. Flip a coin 100 times. Write down H/T/H/H/T, etc. as you get each Head or Tail results. You will have a series of at least 6 H in a row or 6 T in a row.

The fact that there APPEARS to be a pattern doesn't mean that there is an actual pattern. You can't predict where in the set of 100 flips that streak of H or T will appear. But it will be in there. The probability of streaks is well established by both the math and also by experimentation. But people who think they know what "random" series of events are supposed to look like will refuse to put more than about 3 H or T in a row because they (incorrectly) believe that "random" things aren't supposed to have streaks. That lack of awareness of streaks is why we keep seeing these threads show up even when the numbers are entirely reasonable.

And when you tell the kids that they got credit for the homework ahead of time, the party trick is impressive enough to the 9th graders that they were pretty much universal in their "HOW DID YOU DO THAT?!?!" reaction instead of trying to lie to me about whether they did their homework or not.

[Fedora1]

Random distributions can have sections that appear to have patterns in them.

CAN have is not the same as WILL have.

You will have a series of at least 6 H in a row or 6 T in a row.

WILL have or MIGHT/SHOULD have?

The fact that there APPEARS to be a pattern doesn't mean that there is an actual pattern.

And yet the absence of the appearance of a pattern is what you are using to guess whether it was, in fact, true randomness? lol

But it will be in there. The probability of streaks is well established by both the math and also by experimentation.

So "probability" becomes "definitely" in your little trick?

I mean seriously, if you told me you were "usually right" or "almost always right" that would be fine. The language you are using to explain your math doesn't add up. Maybe the issue is not your math knowledge, but your ability to communicate it to others (me).

instead of trying to lie to me about whether they did their homework or not.

As far as you know anyway....

[HungarianRhapsody]

blather

It's okay that you don't get this. It is counterintuitive.

I really don't have the time or patience to teach someone who is convinced that they're right even when everything they're saying is nonsense. So instead, I'll wish you a good weekend and hope that you have fun playing DDO.

[Dnarth]

Computers don't roll dice and they don't generate random numbers. They simulate the generation of random numbers. Very good random number generators are unpredictable and statistically balanced. Crappy random number generators tend to repeat results (predictable) or get "stuck" on extremes too often trying to balance their distributions. Equating DDO's random number generator to a roulette wheel is a false comparison. The fact of the matter is, some random number generators can and do know about and keep track of past results to help influence future rolls.

So you are saying it is rigged. That is what that is. It's also a game of chance. Sure every roll wins but nobody rolls for the 80% trash rolls. Or you are saying they are hacks that built their RNG off the server timing. lulz. What you are suggesting is cheating.

[Fedora1]

It's okay that you don't get this. It is counterintuitive.

I really don't have the time or patience to teach someone who is convinced that they're right even when everything they're saying is nonsense. So instead, I'll wish you a good weekend and hope that you have fun playing DDO.

I never claimed I was right about anything. I said your explanations were bad and contradictory. If you do teach math, you ought to be able to explain it better.

Insults ended with wishing me a good fun weekend are about the same as your "math" explanations, so yeah, you too.

[Zretch]

So you are saying it is rigged. That is what that is. It's also a game of chance. Sure every roll wins but nobody rolls for the 80% trash rolls. Or you are saying they are hacks that built their RNG off the server timing. lulz. What you are suggesting is cheating.

When did I say anything about the specific random number generator used by DDO? I just said that no computer is actually rolling dice or flipping coins or spinning a roulette wheel. They're all simulating random events, and there are different methods for doing so. Some are "better" than others. This is why video poker and slot machines need to be vetted by regulating agencies and they need to post their payout percentages, because there's more than one way to program it, and some of these ways can violate the very premise of "what happened in the past is irrelevant to what will happen next".

[Dnarth]

When did I say anything about the specific random number generator used by DDO? I just said that no computer is actually rolling dice or flipping coins or spinning a roulette wheel. They're all simulating random events, and there are different methods for doing so. Some are "better" than others. This is why video poker and slot machines need to be vetted by regulating agencies and they need to post their payout percentages, because there's more than one way to program it, and some of these ways can violate the very premise of "what happened in the past is irrelevant to what will happen next".

Yeah and I have roll 10000 shards worth of gold rolls on Lam. Quite a few times actually. I don't think it's as bad as what people say it is. It's a psychological thing. It's not the rolling 1-40 it the ******** lets make a deal you got a goat sound when you roll 1-40. Especially when you add in the money factor. Nobody feels good when they lose money gambling.

psst. I have been psychologically telling you bafoons you are gambling and the odds are against you.

[Ganak]

I purchased 500 Astral Shards...

Thank you for supporting the game!

[Brutuscass]

Call it Luck, Fortune, random chance or just pure fluke call it what you will, but it is what it is.
I admit that those who are often if not constantly unlucky feel the need to question and complain.
I just came here to add a comment, I personally have no complaints with my rolls, which have rewarded me very nicely on the odd occasion.
we tend to pay more attention to the bad rolls, ignore the mediocre results and the luckiest of rolls only feeds our desire for more and our sense of dissatisfaction when we don't get the uber prizes.

Get a horseshoe, rabbits foot or step in a dog turd if feel that you need more luck, but it will have no positive effect.

the odd's are in favour of lower level prizes, there is no fix. no one is being conned. the statistical data of a coin toss may indicate that at some point you will land on heads, it does not rule out the possibility of you always getting tails though the chance is low, it is still chance!

Some people may be just be darned unlucky. but luck can change (or simply put one day you may get a result or number of results that please you)

[Talon_Dragonsbane]

Is there a hidden Luck stat? Cuz I swear my luck stat is "3". C'mon SSG show us the hidden stat!

[Brutuscass]

this what I got today, draw you own conclusions

[IMG][/IMG]

[Groucho48]

I grabbed the daily gold dice rolls last year. Did gold and siver rolls daily on 4 toons on different servers. Kept track of the rolls for about 3 and a half months. So, about 800 rolls all together. The average of all the rolls was 48.6. The silver rolls had more 91+ rolls than 1-9 rolls, the gold was reversed but neither by much. I stopped tracking because those numbers were enough to convince me the random number generator was working pretty well.

[DYWYPI]

Like was mentioned above when you go on Lamannia, you can acquire free unlimited 'DDO Points' so it's quite easy to obtain enough Astral Shards for 1000+ rolls (increased replication) there, etc.

Also the Dice roll rewards have different size ranges for example the: 100 reward, is a single figure whereas: 81-90 covers ten figures. Basically there is no need for the roll itself to be skewed or unfairly loaded because the reward ranges already have different sizes.

The statistical term 'normal distribution' doesn't mean "ordinary" it represents real-valued random variables whose distributions are not known.

In [Post #10] sample of [1274 rolls] the 'mean' of the "sample size" was close to 12.74 and the 'medium' 13 and the 'bimodal' 13 reoccurrences of a single number. Therefore its fair to say; it seems to suggest its close to Normal distribution. If you split the (1-100); into 'five equal ranges' of 'twenty' you get: 265, 219, 260, 263 and 267 rolls respectively. The 21-40 range has a slightly lower midpoint (13.25, 10.95, 13.0, 13.5, 13.35) than the expected: 13... I'm not going to bother to analyse any of the values - I've just highlighted the minimum basics. (Assuming I read and then copied ALL the raw data rolls from [Post #10] correctly, i.e. I hopefully didn't make any typos).


My statistics ability is badly rusted but at university I had to study it during my second year of Applied Biology. We used dedicated Statistical software packages occasionally (speed reasons with large data sets). It was degree level statistics basically so we covered things in longhand like; Pearson's chi-squared test, Binomial Distribution, etc.

Actually the "coin flipping homework results" reminds me of a class we once had where we were counting: Infection of Rutilus rutilus by Eye-Flukes (Diplostomum spp.).
We did; Two-Sample test (T-Test) on sexed fish, and the entire class wrote their eye-fluke tally counts in the whiteboard. The T-test, is a form of decision-test between differences that can be placed into categories. How the Two-Sample works is it calculates the differences with respect to an average value and mean.

The T-Test suggested that the Null Hypothesis; that there was 'no preference for which sex the eye-fluke chose as its host' seemed to be true.

Note: But, essentially what happened was a handful of my fellow students fabricated their results. By counting fluke that didn't exist (because those clowns thought they should be seeing more). Therefore the statistical analysis ended up showing - highlighting - loads of peculiarities and outliers, etc.

I concluded: it could be assumed that the results given were highly, if not completely corrupted. Because the class was told "what to expect" before the experiment was conducted. LOL

[Fedora1]

Hey, something else interesting about the rolls (gold and silver) that seems to suggest a poorly programmed rng, is the actual prizes won on any particular roll and I am wondering if anyone else has encountered this.

On any particular day, I might roll something where one of the prizes could be Bigby's Hands. On the 9 servers I probably end up with that "range" result on 6 of them typically. Out of the 6 rolls where Bigby Hands could be a prize, it will be the prize on 5 or even all 6. Then the next day I might get several rolls in the range where a collectables box is one of the "possible" rewards. Well again, I will end up with a collectables box on 5-6 of the servers that day. Same goes for every other category. Even though there are several possible prizes for a particular category (essences, collectables box, mysterious remnants, etc.) I will get the same prize (with differing amounts of the prize itself) in that category/range across all or most of the servers THAT day.

Someone posted that the rng rolls might be seeded with a value to create more randomness, but if that seed happens to be something that is always the same based on my character or time of day I roll or whatever, might this be the reason for the results I am seeing?

[Brutuscass]

Hey, something else interesting about the rolls (gold and silver) that seems to suggest a poorly programmed rng, is the actual prizes won on any particular roll and I am wondering if anyone else has encountered this.

On any particular day, I might roll something where one of the prizes could be Bigby's Hands. On the 9 servers I probably end up with that "range" result on 6 of them typically. Out of the 6 rolls where Bigby Hands could be a prize, it will be the prize on 5 or even all 6. Then the next day I might get several rolls in the range where a collectables box is one of the "possible" rewards. Well again, I will end up with a collectables box on 5-6 of the servers that day. Same goes for every other category. Even though there are several possible prizes for a particular category (essences, collectables box, mysterious remnants, etc.) I will get the same prize (with differing amounts of the prize itself) in that category/range across all or most of the servers THAT day.

Someone posted that the rng rolls might be seeded with a value to create more randomness, but if that seed happens to be something that is always the same based on my character or time of day I roll or whatever, might this be the reason for the results I am seeing?

Are you talking about the secondary roll. which we don't see the numbers for?
I mean we get the first roll which gives our reward type and XP value for the blue pill (though if asked all my toon will deny ever taking them) then there is a roll for the loot on the loot table. yup that can be pretty variable. there may even be a 3rd roll for stacking items for the stack size.
By roll I am talking about random number generation, but as it is all random number generation in this game and the D20 is just an image I will continue using the term dice and it involves less typing

[Fedora1]

Are you talking about the secondary roll. which we don't see the numbers for?

Yes.

[Brutuscass]

I may have stepped in something on the way home and not noticed but
[IMG][/IMG]

[Eryhn]

Hey, something else interesting about the rolls (gold and silver) that seems to suggest a poorly programmed rng, is the actual prizes won on any particular roll and I am wondering if anyone else has encountered this.

On any particular day, I might roll something where one of the prizes could be Bigby's Hands. On the 9 servers I probably end up with that "range" result on 6 of them typically. Out of the 6 rolls where Bigby Hands could be a prize, it will be the prize on 5 or even all 6. Then the next day I might get several rolls in the range where a collectables box is one of the "possible" rewards. Well again, I will end up with a collectables box on 5-6 of the servers that day. Same goes for every other category. Even though there are several possible prizes for a particular category (essences, collectables box, mysterious remnants, etc.) I will get the same prize (with differing amounts of the prize itself) in that category/range across all or most of the servers THAT day.

Someone posted that the rng rolls might be seeded with a value to create more randomness, but if that seed happens to be something that is always the same based on my character or time of day I roll or whatever, might this be the reason for the results I am seeing?

this sounds like when you turn in a quest and in the endreward there is a +6 holy long sword of feeding. you turn in another quest, and ... in the endreward there is ... a holy +6 long sword of feeding 0.O

you turn in a third quest, and in the reward there is ... a holy longsword of ... tada ...draining.


you feel relieved as it was draining ...

you turn in 4th quest, and there it is, AGAIN.


some days I get the feeling I have seen this piece of lootgen before, it seems to haunt me ...


I suppose this could be a streak? but, the statistical likelihood to get a streek on weapon type + enhancement bonus + prefix + suffix should be lower than getting a streak between 1 and 100?

is things like this that sometimes make me think not the RNG is tampered with, but has ... well ... prly somewhere in there there is a dead hamster ...occasionally some of the odor gets out ...


edit: also, this NEVER happens with vorpal of feeding below ML5, which is a bummer otherwise I'd have shards to roll with galore ...


edit2: other potential statistical experiments to spend the next lama weekend with: do 1000 gold rolls, note down streaks of 99 and 100.

[DYWYPI]

The 'Poisson distribution' was also another statistics method we used regularly for 'probability theory'. We used another handful of statics models that I cannot recall the names of at the moment - as we are talking decades ago...

Applying (Pearson's chi-squared test) for that dice should be plenty enough to tell you if the dice is likely to be biased. :-)

One of the more interesting "goodness-of-fit" applications of the chi-square test is to examine issues of "fairness" and "cheating" in games of chance, such as cards, dice, and roulette. ;-)

So we need to look to see if the 'observed values' are close to the 'expected values', which I crudely mentioned in the prior post.

Referring to my [Post #34] that casual type of: Mean, Modal and Median observation; you'd expect a 12-year old to be able to do easily. However, they (12-year old) might not think to condense the 100 values into manageable ranges. I chose five ranges as it's a fair and sensible value, three or four would be fine, but one hundred is just silly when plotting a bar chart graph - the d100 wasn't the reason for five ranges.

Since the "Daily dice" has 100 sides; using a simple rule of thumb, you'd need around five times that before it was worth doing any useful statistical analysis on that dice, e.g. 500 rolls.

Robust Statistical Analysis using (Chi-squared test)

Total amount of Observations (dice rolls): 1274
Expected Frequency per any d100 single face occurrence (1274 × 1/100): 12.74

Null Hypothesis (H₀): Dice is fair (unbiased)
Alternative Hypothesis (H₁): Dice is unfair (biased)

Level of Significance, i.e. area in the tail: (alpha) 0.01

Degrees of Freedom (DF); Sample size (total rolls, i.e. distinct possible categories, we used 100 rows to record), minus one (N – 1): 100 – 1 = (DF): 99.

For finding the Critical value (tail of graph and rejection region area). We'll just use 99 for DF, as I don't have specialised statistics software and I'm not calculating it longhand (DF 99 is solid enough) for this dice.

Looking on an official Chi-square table using (DF 99) and (alpha 0.01) Critical value, i.e. P-value (probability): 134.642 rounded 134.64.

Therefore if our dice exceeds the (above) P-value [134.642] "Daily Dice" is likely loaded.



Chi square: X² = sum [(Observed - Expected)²/Expected]

For example using [Post #10] data: Roll 1; Observed value 12, minus Expected value: 12.74 (squared) divisible by Expected 12.74, equals: 0.042983... Then rinse and repeat, i.e. total all the X² for 1274 rolls.

Our Test Statistic equals: 108.4176

We can easily see: 108.4176 is far less than P-value: [134.642].

Therefore we fail to reject: Null Hypothesis (H₀): (we accept) Dice is fair (unbiased)

The roll results and calculations can be found within: [Post #42].

Conclusion

The "Daily dice" DO NOT appear to be loaded. In fact the statistical model shows there is an excellent chance of ~ 99% percent the dice aren't loaded. (That's what the alpha 0.01 value we tested against means basically).