Fighting over Dice Math II - The revenge of the nerds
Jan 12, 2018 22:03:59 GMT
robbleyourworld and greenjello like this

### Post by Trollock on Jan 12, 2018 22:03:59 GMT

Since i started a heated debate over dice math in the Madrak 1 thread, i figured id move that discussion over here, so innocent bystanders who wish to read about actual warmachine can skip the discussion in this thread

So in the ancient tradition of "arguing on the internet with strangers of things that do not matter", here we go

But assertions with nothing to back them up are okay? Not trying to pull any fast ones, just seeing a lot of people making claims, and not really having anything to back them up. So I'm providing some links and the like.

As for your excel test, it really depends. Really. I also won't play against somebody who uses any sort of computerized random number generator because they're SO easy to get wrong. Like really wrong. And not have it be obvious. Excel isn't any different, and is probably worse than usual. There have been entire scientific papers written on how to get a truly random number out of a computer. To summarize, you don't, though it's really easy to appear like you have. What you will get is something close to random, generally called pseudo-random.

Okay, based on what please? I see you making a lot of direct assertions here, and not really providing anything to back them up. You've basically gotten one result for 1/3 of your rolls. Seems like a skew to me, and not an insignificant one. A lot of people would call over a judge at that point, and maybe ask for a bucket. So you are arguing that the random number generator in excel is to blame. It is incapable or generating a number that is "random" enough for this test? I have a rudimentary understanding of how a computer generates a random number, and i can buy that there are some advanced applications where the number is not "random enough" but this cant possibly qualify...

As for your second question im not sure i understand what you mean. My point was that i used a proper random number generator that is not biased (for the record i plotted the average result of the same random number generator and it moves closer and closer to 3.5 the more times you "roll", so it should be correct enough for this discussion) and got an outlandish streak of sixes. My point is that the math in the article is solid, but doing the test with only 30 rolls of the die is simply not enough. Further down in the same article they write about an example with a d20 that is so biased that it NEVER rolls a 1 and has twice the normal chance to roll a 20. Even then, you would had to roll the die 400 times to be "sure" that it was biased. A normal die will have a bias that is WAY WAY less obvious than a d20 with 2 sides that read "20" and no side that reads "1". The whole point of my argument is that even if normal gaming dice are biased (and they are since it is impossible to manufacture an exactly cubic piece of metal with exactly even density) the bias is very small. There is simply no way that one is able to tell if some one has a bunch of dice that roll slightly high just by playing games against them. You would need to record thousands of rolls and preform statistical analysis to detect those tiny variations. Assertions like "that guy always rolls high" are confirmation bias unless the player actually uses weighted dice that are REALLY biased. Those dice exist, and there exist ppl who will use them to cheat even if i have never encountered one of them. Im talking about the minuscule bias of a dice where you tried to make a fair die.

So in the ancient tradition of "arguing on the internet with strangers of things that do not matter", here we go

OK, so i had decided that i would drop the subject (since it way off topic by now, sorry every one...), but this is basically foul play here, quoting math and hoping no one will read or understand it

As for your excel test, it really depends. Really. I also won't play against somebody who uses any sort of computerized random number generator because they're SO easy to get wrong. Like really wrong. And not have it be obvious. Excel isn't any different, and is probably worse than usual. There have been entire scientific papers written on how to get a truly random number out of a computer. To summarize, you don't, though it's really easy to appear like you have. What you will get is something close to random, generally called pseudo-random.

If i rolled 6 12/30 times on a gaming night, that would be a good reason to call me lucky, but if you use such a simplistic test to call my dice crooked you would be plain wrong.

As for your second question im not sure i understand what you mean. My point was that i used a proper random number generator that is not biased (for the record i plotted the average result of the same random number generator and it moves closer and closer to 3.5 the more times you "roll", so it should be correct enough for this discussion) and got an outlandish streak of sixes. My point is that the math in the article is solid, but doing the test with only 30 rolls of the die is simply not enough. Further down in the same article they write about an example with a d20 that is so biased that it NEVER rolls a 1 and has twice the normal chance to roll a 20. Even then, you would had to roll the die 400 times to be "sure" that it was biased. A normal die will have a bias that is WAY WAY less obvious than a d20 with 2 sides that read "20" and no side that reads "1". The whole point of my argument is that even if normal gaming dice are biased (and they are since it is impossible to manufacture an exactly cubic piece of metal with exactly even density) the bias is very small. There is simply no way that one is able to tell if some one has a bunch of dice that roll slightly high just by playing games against them. You would need to record thousands of rolls and preform statistical analysis to detect those tiny variations. Assertions like "that guy always rolls high" are confirmation bias unless the player actually uses weighted dice that are REALLY biased. Those dice exist, and there exist ppl who will use them to cheat even if i have never encountered one of them. Im talking about the minuscule bias of a dice where you tried to make a fair die.