New "Intensity Cubes"

[carlpgoodrich]

So, there is a theoretical calculation you can make to figure out the exact odds of winning a 3 vs 2. This is what assault odds does (I assume). However, if you take a given sample of random numbers and only pick from that sample, then due to random fluctuations the odds will be different (this is a post hoc statement). I have no way of knowing how they will be different until I see the set of numbers, but they will be different. Also, I don't know the hardware lack uses, but I can generate a billion random numbers in less than a second on my 4 year old laptop... Generating these things should not be whats tripping us up, and if they are then just generate a new file of 50,000 (or 500,000) every day, and use that!

[Dako]

I guess the normal random generator doesn't comfort lack. Or for some other reason.

Yes, you can calculate average 3v2 win% if you have a set of numbers, but that statistics will not correlate with your rolls. It is just average and it doesn't mean bad or good luck will have no presence anymore.

[Foreverman]

All I have noticed is an increase in the frequency with which I get screwed by the dice. Thanks for making my CC experience more miserable.

[carlpgoodrich]

So, I just wrote a script that generates a list of 500,000 random numbers. It take 0.09 seconds to run on my laptop and uses a generator that comes standard on c++ compilers and is used by much of the scientific community. It would be very very easy to have this run once every hour (or whatever) to replace the list with a new list. You have to give it a seed number, and if you use a "true" random number from Random.org then I cannot imagine Lack would have a problem with that.

I would be more than happy to work with Lack, Dako, etc. to set this up. Please contact me if interested.

[Dako]

Well, do you know that random.org takes fee for their "true" random numbers? I don't know how much lack uses them and what CPU capacity he has so it is better to wait for his reply.

Generally, I like the idea of storing numbers in memory and changing the, from time to time.

[lackattack]

Very interesting comments (except for people who blame this for their recent bad luck lol). I am hesitant to use a pseudo-random number generator because the numbers we use from random.org are truly random and that seems like a step backwards.

To close the door on any attempts at "dice predicting" I will replace our series of 50k random numbers with new numbers from random.org as often as their quota allows!

[bedub1]

Very interesting comments (except for people who blame this for their recent bad luck lol). I am hesitant to use a pseudo-random number generator because the numbers we use from random.org are truly random and that seems like a step backwards.

To close the door on any attempts at "dice predicting" I will replace our series of 50k random numbers with new numbers from random.org as often as their quota allows!

I was under the impression the dice were "random". IE I want to attack, CC asked Random.org for 3 numbers for my attack dice. CC asked random.org for 2 number for the defenders dice.

Now I find that we are actually taking a list of random numbers, and picking numbers out of there with a defined parameter? Is that still considered random? Why not pick a random start point in the list to start reading numbers sequentially? But is that random if you read them sequentially? Why not randomly pick spots from the list of random numbers to get a random number?

What is random?

Egh, if it saves money, just give me theoretically average dice and forget all the randomness.

[natty dread]

is that random if you read them sequentially?

You want them read freestyle?

Nah, it's still random. The numbers are random no matter what order they are read in.

[sherkaner]

Very interesting comments (except for people who blame this for their recent bad luck lol). I am hesitant to use a pseudo-random number generator because the numbers we use from random.org are truly random and that seems like a step backwards.

To close the door on any attempts at "dice predicting" I will replace our series of 50k random numbers with new numbers from random.org as often as their quota allows!

Nice, this looks like a very good solution. And it should be easy to get 50k random dice throws from them, they offer it for free on their site
Ok, strictly speaking they're only offering 10k numbers, but by choosing 0 until 6^5 - 1 and using modulo and divide properly, you could make this into 50k 'intensity cubes' (max is 80k if you're pushing it):
http://www.random.org/integers/?num=100 ... ml&rnd=new

[Ace Rimmer]

Very interesting comments (except for people who blame this for their recent bad luck lol). I am hesitant to use a pseudo-random number generator because the numbers we use from random.org are truly random and that seems like a step backwards.

To close the door on any attempts at "dice predicting" I will replace our series of 50k random numbers with new numbers from random.org as often as their quota allows!

I was under the impression the dice were "random". IE I want to attack, CC asked Random.org for 3 numbers for my attack dice. CC asked random.org for 2 number for the defenders dice.

Now I find that we are actually taking a list of random numbers, and picking numbers out of there with a defined parameter? Is that still considered random? Why not pick a random start point in the list to start reading numbers sequentially? But is that random if you read them sequentially? Why not randomly pick spots from the list of random numbers to get a random number?

What is random?

Egh, if it saves money, just give me theoretically average dice and forget all the randomness.

What we're doing now is getting a grouping of random numbers from random.org (easier than calling their website as needed) and using those numbers until they are used, then getting a new grouping of random numbers from them. Because they are random (and we're not reusing that grouping) there would be no need to start randomly in that list. Basically it's the same as asking for random numbers each attack, we just get a batch at a time instead of getting them as needed.

[Ace Rimmer]

Very interesting comments (except for people who blame this for their recent bad luck lol). I am hesitant to use a pseudo-random number generator because the numbers we use from random.org are truly random and that seems like a step backwards.

To close the door on any attempts at "dice predicting" I will replace our series of 50k random numbers with new numbers from random.org as often as their quota allows!

Please remember to update FAQ 19

[beersurfer]

Re: New "Intensity Cubes"

Postby lackattack on Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:53 am
Very interesting comments (except for people who blame this for their recent bad luck lol). I am hesitant to use a pseudo-random number generator because the numbers we use from random.org are truly random and that seems like a step backwards.

To close the door on any attempts at "dice predicting" I will replace our series of 50k random numbers with new numbers from random.org as often as their quota allows!

its about time someone has up and made a change ... the sour dice file was only corrupt in the fact that the numbers were truncated from each roll ... only allowing the exact same sequences to be repeated ... the sequential file now being used allows for much more randomness because the numbers will most likely never cycle the same reading, if it is replaced as often as you suggest...

however true randomness will never be gotten on any computer or software program ... the design of a random generator has a human programming it to become random (its one of the first things you learn when you take a beginner's programming course)... which, as hard as they may try, it is still only a falsified rendition of true-randomness. the functionality of a computer only allows for people to manipulate the 0's and 1's ---- with enough manipulation it can be reasoned that a program generates "random" numbers ... but to be truly random you couldn't use a computer at all ...

so now we will begin to see all the high ranks that stole the old file and used it to win games--- begin to fall in the ranks with all the other players who never thought to copy it and search for streaks and use them to their advantage

it's a little tooooo late for me though ... im done with this site ... the last 2 months of average rolls being 4 to 10 ratio (me winning 4 to every 10 i lose) has pushed me beyond the reasoning that this site will ever be fairly random ... even with this update (which is way long overdue)

maybe if lackattack tried to incorporate a pointer system to randomly select places in the file to start from instead of sequentially pulling streaks for attacks then we wouldnt have to worry about whether we are in a bad streak of the file or not ... we would pull from a different location of the file each attack ensuring us from avoiding any streaks bad or good ... and if there truly are 1,000,000 attacks per day ... then this file will cycle 20 times a day ... so depending on when you play your turns ... you could easily hit the same streaks 7 to 8 times per day (for the avid player)

i just hope the "QUOTA" is more than once every four years ... even better more than once every four days

GL to all you future conquerors

i'd rather play RISK ONLINE !!!!! The real game

[bedub1]

Very interesting comments (except for people who blame this for their recent bad luck lol). I am hesitant to use a pseudo-random number generator because the numbers we use from random.org are truly random and that seems like a step backwards.

To close the door on any attempts at "dice predicting" I will replace our series of 50k random numbers with new numbers from random.org as often as their quota allows!

I was under the impression the dice were "random". IE I want to attack, CC asked Random.org for 3 numbers for my attack dice. CC asked random.org for 2 number for the defenders dice.

Now I find that we are actually taking a list of random numbers, and picking numbers out of there with a defined parameter? Is that still considered random? Why not pick a random start point in the list to start reading numbers sequentially? But is that random if you read them sequentially? Why not randomly pick spots from the list of random numbers to get a random number?

What is random?

Egh, if it saves money, just give me theoretically average dice and forget all the randomness.

What we're doing now is getting a grouping of random numbers from random.org (easier than calling their website as needed) and using those numbers until they are used, then getting a new grouping of random numbers from them. Because they are random (and we're not reusing that grouping) there would be no need to start randomly in that list. Basically it's the same as asking for random numbers each attack, we just get a batch at a time instead of getting them as needed.

I understand. I guess what I was getting at is that I believe I have the ability to influence the outcome of the dice as I watch them roll in front of me using my mind. I believed I had the same ability to affect the dice on CC. But now you tell me the numbers I will receive are pre-determined. Or can I still influence the numbers/dice that I obtain by the timing that I hit the "attack" button? Did I click it now...or was it now...or maybe now? How many people rolled dice in that time frame and changed the numbers I will receive? Is manual attack better than auto attack since you wont read an entire series of numbers at once...but instead individual groupings? Or is it better with auto-attack since you get a sequential string that could arguably be more random than a random choosing from a static list of random numbers?

Why does my head hurt?

[Dako]

Re: New "Intensity Cubes"

Postby lackattack on Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:53 am
Very interesting comments (except for people who blame this for their recent bad luck lol). I am hesitant to use a pseudo-random number generator because the numbers we use from random.org are truly random and that seems like a step backwards.

To close the door on any attempts at "dice predicting" I will replace our series of 50k random numbers with new numbers from random.org as often as their quota allows!

its about time someone has up and made a change ... the sour dice file was only corrupt in the fact that the numbers were truncated from each roll ... only allowing the exact same sequences to be repeated ... the sequential file now being used allows for much more randomness because the numbers will most likely never cycle the same reading, if it is replaced as often as you suggest...

however true randomness will never be gotten on any computer or software program ... the design of a random generator has a human programming it to become random (its one of the first things you learn when you take a beginner's programming course)... which, as hard as they may try, it is still only a falsified rendition of true-randomness. the functionality of a computer only allows for people to manipulate the 0's and 1's ---- with enough manipulation it can be reasoned that a program generates "random" numbers ... but to be truly random you couldn't use a computer at all ...

so now we will begin to see all the high ranks that stole the old file and used it to win games--- begin to fall in the ranks with all the other players who never thought to copy it and search for streaks and use them to their advantage

it's a little tooooo late for me though ... im done with this site ... the last 2 months of average rolls being 4 to 10 ratio (me winning 4 to every 10 i lose) has pushed me beyond the reasoning that this site will ever be fairly random ... even with this update (which is way long overdue)

maybe if lackattack tried to incorporate a pointer system to randomly select places in the file to start from instead of sequentially pulling streaks for attacks then we wouldnt have to worry about whether we are in a bad streak of the file or not ... we would pull from a different location of the file each attack ensuring us from avoiding any streaks bad or good ... and if there truly are 1,000,000 attacks per day ... then this file will cycle 20 times a day ... so depending on when you play your turns ... you could easily hit the same streaks 7 to 8 times per day (for the avid player)

i just hope the "QUOTA" is more than once every four years ... even better more than once every four days ;)

GL to all you future conquerors

i'd rather play RISK ONLINE !!!!! The real game :-({|=

Stole old file? Don't be ridiculous. And about bad rolls - it was your bad luck to roll them at that particular moment. It is pointless to complain because everyone on this site is in the same equal position.

Very interesting comments (except for people who blame this for their recent bad luck lol). I am hesitant to use a pseudo-random number generator because the numbers we use from random.org are truly random and that seems like a step backwards.

To close the door on any attempts at "dice predicting" I will replace our series of 50k random numbers with new numbers from random.org as often as their quota allows!

I was under the impression the dice were "random". IE I want to attack, CC asked Random.org for 3 numbers for my attack dice. CC asked random.org for 2 number for the defenders dice.

Now I find that we are actually taking a list of random numbers, and picking numbers out of there with a defined parameter? Is that still considered random? Why not pick a random start point in the list to start reading numbers sequentially? But is that random if you read them sequentially? Why not randomly pick spots from the list of random numbers to get a random number?

What is random?

Egh, if it saves money, just give me theoretically average dice and forget all the randomness.

What we're doing now is getting a grouping of random numbers from random.org (easier than calling their website as needed) and using those numbers until they are used, then getting a new grouping of random numbers from them. Because they are random (and we're not reusing that grouping) there would be no need to start randomly in that list. Basically it's the same as asking for random numbers each attack, we just get a batch at a time instead of getting them as needed.

I understand. I guess what I was getting at is that I believe I have the ability to influence the outcome of the dice as I watch them roll in front of me using my mind. I believed I had the same ability to affect the dice on CC. But now you tell me the numbers I will receive are pre-determined. Or can I still influence the numbers/dice that I obtain by the timing that I hit the "attack" button? Did I click it now...or was it now...or maybe now? How many people rolled dice in that time frame and changed the numbers I will receive? Is manual attack better than auto attack since you wont read an entire series of numbers at once...but instead individual groupings? Or is it better with auto-attack since you get a sequential string that could arguably be more random than a random choosing from a static list of random numbers?

Why does my head hurt?

You never know, because you don't know the numbers :-).

[natty dread]

however true randomness will never be gotten on any computer or software program ... the design of a random generator has a human programming it to become random (its one of the first things you learn when you take a beginner's programming course)... which, as hard as they may try, it is still only a falsified rendition of true-randomness. the functionality of a computer only allows for people to manipulate the 0's and 1's ---- with enough manipulation it can be reasoned that a program generates "random" numbers ... but to be truly random you couldn't use a computer at all ...

Again... random.org numbers are NOT computer generated - they are picked up from atmospheric noise. How hard is it to understand?