Moderator: Community Team












































maniacmath17 wrote:Is there a less confusing term than odds I should use?





















































hwhrhett wrote:who would want predicatble dice? sounds horrible.....












natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"








john9blue wrote:If the odds can't be predicted, the dice aren't truly random. I would rather have predictable odds and random dice.












maniacmath17 wrote:Exactly! Now if only I can get KLOBBER to understand this.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"








john9blue wrote:maniacmath17 wrote:Exactly! Now if only I can get KLOBBER to understand this.
Your time may be better spent elsewhere.


































































maniacmath17 wrote:he will HAVE to admit he was wrong.




















jpcloet wrote:There was a suggestion around no dice games. Let me find the link. This sounds similar in concept with a defined outcome.
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=43095


































maniacmath17 wrote:I know but I think I've got him on this one.
An actual quote from KLOBBER: "Since the dice are unpredictable, you will NEVER know the "chances" beforehand, under any circumstances, and neither will anyone else. ...and guess what? The dice designers WANTED IT THAT WAY."
So once we can get conformation that the goal is to have dice that are random and thus the odds can be predicted, he will HAVE to admit he was wrong.


















jpcloet wrote:I have a math degree and this is not clear to me. Are you suggesting that the dice need to be changed and are not truly random, or are you arguing for predictable dice over a short series of rolls?












However, many mechanical phenomena feature asymmetries and systematic biases that make their outcomes not truly random.






















jpcloet wrote:Ok, I see what you are saying, but I still don't hear a suggestion or problem really.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_number_generator
Pseudo-random number generators are used all the time, I think it is used so often that it is implicitly implied. Even a person rolling the dice is not random IMO.However, many mechanical phenomena feature asymmetries and systematic biases that make their outcomes not truly random.












maniacmath17 wrote:Unfortunately, by making the poll without using the word random, I think some people aren't understanding the question.
maniacmath17 wrote:What you just said is on the assumption that the attacker and defender are both rolling 6 sided dice. But since the dice are generated on a computer there is no real "rolling" and so there is the possibility that the dice aren't random.
maniacmath17 wrote:Do we want them to be random, thereby making it possible to calculate the odds on an attack, or do we want them to be unpredictable, but non-random so that it would be impossible to calculate the odds of an attack.





Timminz wrote:I think you're going to run into the problem of people not understanding what the word 'odds' really means.














Return to Conquer Club Discussion
Users browsing this forum: ReDBuLLS