Community Opinion: Are "Intensity Cubes" random enough?

[Moran555]

It's time for you to vote and voice your opinions on "intensity cubes," the results and a summary of your opinions will be published in the second conquer club newsletter. Please vote and if you wish you can state your opinion, it's as simple as that, just please keep any flamming or off topic discussions in the proper forums and if you have any complaints please post in the complaint topic

Dice analysis thread

thanks

moran555

[AndyDufresne]

You may want to consider linking to this old topic also. viewtopic.php?f=6&t=66103&hilit=+dice


--Andy

[Timminz]

9-1 so far. Those are the odds I'll give on the fact that the OP is the one "No" vote.

[Phlaim]

Damn if the dice were more random we'd see more of those losses of 27v1 etc...

[owenshooter]

sooooo, associate anything with the new Newsletter and avoid an obvious merge? another
pointless vote, considering all the data has been hashed, rehashed and can be found at random.org....
i don't think the fact that this is for the newsletter should let this escape an obvious merge. i mean, hell,
it is for the newsletter, why not make it a sticky?!!! the black jesus has spoken...-0

[wakka]

How can something be ''random enough''
Something is random, or something is not random. It's impossible to say that the cubes are random 'enough' because then the won't be random at all...

Btw, I think the dice are random.

[Joodoo]

How can something be ''random enough''
Something is random, or something is not random. It's impossible to say that the cubes are random 'enough' because then the won't be random at all...

Btw, I think the dice are random.

of course it's random

[whitestazn88]

i still call them dice...

[e_i_pi]

I particularly like the fact that this thread both embraces and fosters the idiotic minority public opinion of the dice not being random, while also ignoring the fact that an ungodly amount of analysis has been done into the dice showing that they are random. Bravo.

Can this be merged with the Elvis is not Dead thread pls?

[obliterationX]

i still call them dice...

I just call them rolls.

[samuelc812]

I particularly like the fact that this thread both embraces and fosters the idiotic minority public opinion of the dice not being random, while also ignoring the fact that an ungodly amount of analysis has been done into the dice showing that they are random. Bravo.

Can this be merged with the Elvis is not Dead thread pls?

Actually Moran555 did provide the link to the dice analysis thread so people could make an informed decision, at the request of Andy. Therefore we are not ignoring the analysis that you did we in fact acknowledge it And by creating this poll we have no control over who votes, this poll is aimed at gathering a general opinion of the community based on the votes we get. It may not be accurate, but it gives the community a general idea of what others think. 77% of the community think the intensity cubes are random enough according to the current poll, so i'm not sure what you mean when you say that this thread embraces the dice not being random when the majority of people who have voted say that they are indeed random enough.

[e_i_pi]

What I mean, sam, is that it once again gives a sounding board for unfounded claims based on what certain people believe, and that is simply untrue.

I further dispute the term "random enough". How on earth is this defined? Maybe the dice are a little random on Sundays, or perhaps they are way too random backwards through the snow five miles... I mean... never mind, what a waste of a thread

[nazlfrag]

Having rolled thousands upon thousands of RL Intensity Cubes playing tabletop wargames, I'd say yes, they can be just as frustrating and sweet as real dice.

[azezzo]

Elvis isnt dead.

[Timminz]

I further dispute the term "random enough".

Why dispute it? It's just as valid as, "pregnant enough", or, "pitch-black enough".

[jship]

also one must look at the memory effect of computers, this has been studied and proven. the memory effect is that if you do alot of small attack (2-1, 1-1, 3-2 etc.) then one expects to lose alot on those rolls(basic probability) then when you go to attack with higher numbers the computer remembers what you rolled before and will try to do the same. its the problem with windows and similar programs, is it the problem? I don't know. I do know if you run a random generator program it will spit out relitively random #, but if that same program spits out a predetermined number of random numbers over and over again than those numbers start to show a pattern.

[Timminz]

also one must look at the memory effect of computers, this has been studied and proven. the memory effect is that if you do alot of small attack (2-1, 1-1, 3-2 etc.) then one expects to lose alot on those rolls(basic probability) then when you go to attack with higher numbers the computer remembers what you rolled before and will try to do the same. its the problem with windows and similar programs, is it the problem? I don't know. I do know if you run a random generator program it will spit out relitively random #, but if that same program spits out a predetermined number of random numbers over and over again than those numbers start to show a pattern.

No. The numbers are not generated by a computer. http://www.random.org. Read all about it.

[reggie_mac]

The dice are NOT random, they are however pulled from a string or pre-determined random numbers. So there you have it. Simple eh?