Alle rapporten
Mini Rogue rapporten
#127481: "above average number of X rolls"
rejected: De ontwikkelaars denken dat dit geen goed idee is of dat de kosten/batenratio te hoog is
1
Waarover gaat dit rapport?
Wat is er gebeurd? Selecteer uit het onderstaande
Suggestie: volgens mij zou het volgende de implementatie van dit spel enorm verbeteren
Gedetailleerde beschrijving
• Gelieve jouw suggestie precies en beknopt uit te leggen zodat het zo makkelijk mogelijk is om te begrijpen wat je bedoelt.
This game seems to pull a higher than average number of x's. In this game there is an example where I rolled 2 x's, and I rerolled them twice and rerolled 2 x's again.• Welke browser gebruik je?
Google Chrome v125
Rapportgeschiedenis
15 jun 2024 23:32 • Thee Cormorant • De ontwikkelaars hebben deze suggestie nog niet geanalyseerd:
this problem appears several games through
16 jun 2024 1:25 • Kayvon • De ontwikkelaars denken dat dit geen goed idee is of dat de kosten/batenratio te hoog is:
Here's an analysis of half a million random numbers generated by BGA:
boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=15811&p=59122&hilit=bga_rand#p59122
The dice are weighted exactly as expected. Sorry about your bad luck.
boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=15811&p=59122&hilit=bga_rand#p59122
The dice are weighted exactly as expected. Sorry about your bad luck.
22 jun 2024 4:51 • mightypica • De ontwikkelaars denken dat dit geen goed idee is of dat de kosten/batenratio te hoog is:
Disagree, I roll more X than others in 2p game. I rolled 2 X, at one point and then 3 X and a 1 ( black dice) all in a row. I own the game and playing it live vs this, the average is way off with this game. Not sure if it’s 2 player issue or. It but needs to be resolved.
22 jun 2024 5:45 • Kayvon • De ontwikkelaars denken dat dit geen goed idee is of dat de kosten/batenratio te hoog is:
There's nothing to resolve, but you're welcome to disagree all the same.
I'd invite you to share your thoughts in the forums where it's a common topic. You'll find several people who agree with you.
I'd invite you to share your thoughts in the forums where it's a common topic. You'll find several people who agree with you.
23 jul 2024 18:26 • Kevisch • De ontwikkelaars denken dat dit geen goed idee is of dat de kosten/batenratio te hoog is:
i m sorry, but a ratio like that isn t possible.
23 jul 2024 18:29 • Kayvon • De ontwikkelaars denken dat dit geen goed idee is of dat de kosten/batenratio te hoog is:
Not only is it possible, but it's actually likely to happen once in a thousand games or so. Given the thousands played on BGA of just this game, we expect to see exceptional coincidences from time to time. That's the very nature of statistics.
24 jul 2024 3:32 • Ditto11 • De ontwikkelaars denken dat dit geen goed idee is of dat de kosten/batenratio te hoog is:
So I was curious . and went over your game log ... I put every roll ... EVERY roll for both players into an excel and calculated their average .. # of 1's rolled (ie x's), and # of 6's rolled ...,
Here's the results:
Average of all rolls by each player:
Thee Cormorant: 3.519
Slaad nero: 3.219
# of rolls made total:
Thee Cormorant: 135
Slaad nero: 155
# of 1's (and x's) rolled:
Thee Cormorant: 25 (~ 18.52% of all rolls)
Slaad nero: 33 (~ 21.29% of all rolls)
# of 6's rolled:
Thee Cormorant: 26 (~19.26% of all rolls)
Slaad nero: 25 (~16.13% of all rolls).
Conclusion:
1) Averages are pretty spot on . in fact, looks like the other player rolled worse than you did.
2) you rolled about the same # of 1's and 6's ...
3) I noticed your "double x" turn .. and yes it sucks ... however, the turn before, AND the turn after, you rolled 3x 6's or 2x 6s and a 5 .. or such ... so those kinds of things happen both ways, and balance each other out.
4) game seems to be working perfectly fine within standard deviation probability statistics ... you had ONE unlucky round ... but failed to mention the really GOOD rounds you had ...
I would advise next time if you think you are being "cheated" .. to gather the evidence yourself and see what that statistics actually say ..., ;)
Good luck and have fun!
Here's the results:
Average of all rolls by each player:
Thee Cormorant: 3.519
Slaad nero: 3.219
# of rolls made total:
Thee Cormorant: 135
Slaad nero: 155
# of 1's (and x's) rolled:
Thee Cormorant: 25 (~ 18.52% of all rolls)
Slaad nero: 33 (~ 21.29% of all rolls)
# of 6's rolled:
Thee Cormorant: 26 (~19.26% of all rolls)
Slaad nero: 25 (~16.13% of all rolls).
Conclusion:
1) Averages are pretty spot on . in fact, looks like the other player rolled worse than you did.
2) you rolled about the same # of 1's and 6's ...
3) I noticed your "double x" turn .. and yes it sucks ... however, the turn before, AND the turn after, you rolled 3x 6's or 2x 6s and a 5 .. or such ... so those kinds of things happen both ways, and balance each other out.
4) game seems to be working perfectly fine within standard deviation probability statistics ... you had ONE unlucky round ... but failed to mention the really GOOD rounds you had ...
I would advise next time if you think you are being "cheated" .. to gather the evidence yourself and see what that statistics actually say ..., ;)
Good luck and have fun!
24 jul 2024 4:59 • Kayvon • De ontwikkelaars denken dat dit geen goed idee is of dat de kosten/batenratio te hoog is:
Excellent analysis, Ditto! I wish there were a way to sticky your comment for all similar threads that appear with some regularity. Truly top-notch work.
Dit rapport aanvullen
Gelieve hier alle informatie toe te voegen die relevant is om deze bug te reproduceren of jouw suggestie te begrijpen:
- Andere tafel ID / zet ID
- Loste F5 het probleem op?
- Kwam het probleem meerdere keren voor? Altijd? Willekeurig?
- Als je een schermafbeelding van deze bug hebt (goede gewoonte), kun je Imgur.com gebruiken om deze te uploaden, de link kopiëren en hier plakken.
