kduke wrote:
But, with a lot of rolls, you would expect some sort of dispersion. Maybe not 10 of each but at least 5 or 6 of any given number.
If you rolled your dice 60 times and got 25 1s and 25 2s, you would think something was not really going right, wouldn't you?
Having a slow day at work, I wanted to check this "random bug". I've looked at a bunch of active player from a "random" player (yes, kduke, I've looked at your games, I hope you don't mind).
In 20 games (from 76594 to 132414, excluding the ones where you didn't shoot) and 51 die rolls you scored 9 ones, 7 twos, 9 threes, 7 fours, 10 fives and 9 sixs, with an average score of 3.57 (even a bit more than the average).
But, most important, if you rolled a dice 60 times, you would have 60 genuinely random events. It would not be numbers created by a formula, subject to error or modification.
A standard timer based random number generator can be considered a source of genuinely random events for almost every pratical applications. It's surely more random and unpredictable that most dices.
(Imdog already showed us a plan in which "experienced" players would get a mathematical advantage in die rolling. The very idea chills my blood.
That's was almost surely a joke.
Just my two cents, but HTH
bye
PaoloL |
Donate
Leagues
Gonzaga
Blue Max
Cartagena
Wooden Ships...
King Me!
VampiRing
