Was: Claw Poll - Now: Dice vs RNG

[Daht]

The real difference in RNG and actual dice is actual dice are actually random, RNG is not. No human brain is going to precisely know a 4 quadrillion long string of results well enough to predict a given sequence in the RNG, so it's apparently random, and where you fall in the string can affect how many 1's and 6's you get in a given game..

Dice are as deterministic as any physical process. With enough information and computational power you could predict real dice rolls quite easily. Nothing outside of the quantum is "really random," and even that is far from certain.
If you can't predict it (and you can't), and the distribution is as expected (and it is), then there is, in terms of using it as a substitute for dice, at least as good as dice. If I were to present you pairs of strings of numbers, one string die-rolled, the other RNG produced, you would not be able to tell the difference. Differentiating between two things which you cannot actually tell the difference between based on some undefined notion of what is and is not random is splitting Schrodinger's cat's whiskers.

Not really.. if I roll 3 1's in a row on a die, the odds of another 1 are 1 in 6 still.. in a RNG it may not be, depending on how many 1's were already rolled since the beginning of the current string.

Now with real dice you can also add wear on the dice, and suspect rolling techniques, and rolling surface to skewer things as well... but even then whatever the odds are of a given roll, it remains the same on every throw.

This isn't meant to be a slam on RNG, they do their job well.. as well as anyone has been able to figure out using a computer that doesn't actually control a robot arm to use a dice cup with precision dice dispensing on a perfectly level and pristine felt surface. (I have just added this to my list of "things to buy when i win the lottery"..)

But it's still different

[dode74]

Not really.. if I roll 3 1's in a row on a die, the odds of another 1 are 1 in 6 still.. in a RNG it may not be, depending on how many 1's were already rolled since the beginning of the current string.

True, but the difference is not only indetectable (3 in 715,827,899 in the case of this RNG), but it is also far less than the deviation from the standard distribution which you see in dice anyway, and the wear etc which you see is far more relevant to giving a fair (i.e. close to the normal disctibution) roll than such small deviances. The periodicity of he RNG must be sufficiently high for the change to the probabilities to be undetectable, and the 4 billion possibilities this RNG gives you is more than enough to cover the ~300-400 rolls you make in a game of BB.

But it's still different

If you can't tell that it is, is it?

[Daht]

Still Different. I'm not saying the RNG can't do the job effectively.. it's not the same thing.

Do you use miniatures when you play, or cardboard markers.. why play with miniatures, markers do the same job, equaly effectively and its' cheaper and more efficient.

Different question on the same subject.. do you believe everything we do is predetermined? Dice are chance, RNG is destiny....

[dode74]

Still Different.

Pure obstinance. Of course it's not the same thing as dice - you seem to be making your definition of "an effective RNG" to now be "they're dice". That's circular reasoning.

Do you use miniatures when you play, or cardboard markers.. why play with miniatures, markers do the same job, equaly effectively and its' cheaper and more efficient.

I fail to see the relevance of your comment, but I do see the obvious comparison and rather snobbish put-down of RNGs in it

Different question on the same subject.. do you believe everything we do is predetermined? Dice are chance, RNG is destiny....

As I said before, dice are not chance. With enough information and sufficient computational power you can predict dice. The only thing which may be random is quantum effects, but they always result in deterministic physics one you get above a certain scale, and dice are most assuredly on that scale.

If you can't tell what the next number is, and there is a 16.6667% chance of it being one of each of 1-6, does it matter how it is produced?

A good analogy is that instead of rolling dice you are picking cards numbered 1-6 from a pack of cards. There are the same amount of cards of each number. What makes it seem like each draw has a significant effect is that what we have trouble grasping is that the thickness of that pack of cards will actually take it around the world almost 40 times! Picking the 200-300 cards you need from a location within that pack will result in the same pack being drawn one in 13 million times - roughly the same odds as winning the national lottery. If you think that's significant then you are clearly far luckier (and richer!) than me.

[Steam Ball]

Even a RNG seeded from a real dice or quantum noise is not random enough? No worries, someone built a dice roller to make happy those that want their imperfect dice.

The issue with some games (BB by Cyanide, eg) was that the generator was run in the client, thus giving the option to peek (and then people starting to say nonsenses). Proper coded ones use the server, making it impossible to guess (they can use a PRGN, lava lamps, webcams in black boxes, dice rollers, diodes or whatever they want).

[besters]

Isn't the problem not that the RNG isn't fair, but that you just don't see it in action like you do with dice. leaving people feeling cheated when they have had a run of bad luck or the opponent has a run of good luck.

I once lost a TT game to an opponent who rolled 6 sixes in a row on the way to the winning TD, then he still needed a four to score. I felt wronged by this, but at least I saw it happen, I know the guy wasn't cheating, but this element is missing in computer generated games.

For me the PC game is something I play when I can't get a TT game, it's the best substitute you can get (I include FUMBBL, PBeM etc. here), if you don't like the RNG don't play.

But we are a long way from the Claw Piling On Mighty Blow issue here.

[Darkson]

But we are a long way from the Claw Piling On Mighty Blow issue here.

Probably because there isn't one.

[Daht]

Still Different.

Pure obstinance. Of course it's not the same thing as dice - you seem to be making your definition of "an effective RNG" to now be "they're dice". That's circular reasoning.

Do you use miniatures when you play, or cardboard markers.. why play with miniatures, markers do the same job, equaly effectively and its' cheaper and more efficient.

I fail to see the relevance of your comment, but I do see the obvious comparison and rather snobbish put-down of RNGs in it

Different question on the same subject.. do you believe everything we do is predetermined? Dice are chance, RNG is destiny....

As I said before, dice are not chance. With enough information and sufficient computational power you can predict dice. The only thing which may be random is quantum effects, but they always result in deterministic physics one you get above a certain scale, and dice are most assuredly on that scale.

If you can't tell what the next number is, and there is a 16.6667% chance of it being one of each of 1-6, does it matter how it is produced?

A good analogy is that instead of rolling dice you are picking cards numbered 1-6 from a pack of cards. There are the same amount of cards of each number. What makes it seem like each draw has a significant effect is that what we have trouble grasping is that the thickness of that pack of cards will actually take it around the world almost 40 times! Picking the 200-300 cards you need from a location within that pack will result in the same pack being drawn one in 13 million times - roughly the same odds as winning the national lottery. If you think that's significant then you are clearly far luckier (and richer!) than me.

I never said RNG's weren't effective.. they are the most effective way to simulate dice. Well, maybe not after the above post, but definitely effective. What determines the next result is different between the 2. One is a reset with similar conditions generating a result, the other is selecting the next predetermined result.

Whichever one of those you consider the 'card board cutout' or the 'pro painted mini' is a matter of taste.

Your last paragraph shows a strong leaning to predestination.. if you believe all (or even most) everything that will happen is already predermined and can be predicted with enough data, then a RNG is a far more efficient way to achieve a predetermined result that appears random to an unassisted human brain.

The majority of the difference is visceral, more a matter of preference than results. The rest is more philisophical .. when you roll the dice do you hope you roll a 6 or accept that whatever number comes up is the only number that could have come up? Was that double skull a bit of bad luck, or your destiny?

[The Dazzler II]

Was that double skull a bit of bad luck, or your destiny?

i knew it, i bloody well know it i shouldn't have attempted that 2D surf with a Slayer without a RR when i should just have scored

BTW if no-one hears a tree fall in a forest .....













... does anybody care

[dode74]

What determines the next result is different between the 2. One is a reset with similar conditions generating a result, the other is selecting the next predetermined result.

And it is impossible to tell the difference within the context of a game of BB using this RNG. So what justifies loonie's comment of "The MAJOR difference of TT v/s computer is the dice"? Because that's where this conversation started. As far as I can see it makes no discernible difference whatsoever.

If by "leaning towards predestination" you mean that I think that things have causes then yes, you're right. Don't go sending me down cosmological argument lines though, because that just leads back to quantum effects, which I've already said may well actually be random (to the best of our knowledge)

Dazzler - depends on what you mean by "sound". If it's "that which is heard" then the answer is no. If it's "that which is capable of being heard" then the answer is yes

[Daht]

What determines the next result is different between the 2. One is a reset with similar conditions generating a result, the other is selecting the next predetermined result.

And it is impossible to tell the difference within the context of a game of BB using this RNG. So what justifies loonie's comment of "The MAJOR difference of TT v/s computer is the dice"? Because that's where this conversation started. As far as I can see it makes no discernible difference whatsoever.

If by "leaning towards predestination" you mean that I think that things have causes then yes, you're right. Don't go sending me down cosmological argument lines though, because that just leads back to quantum effects, which I've already said may well actually be random (to the best of our knowledge)

Dazzler - depends on what you mean by "sound". If it's "that which is heard" then the answer is no. If it's "that which is capable of being heard" then the answer is yes

I think you are interpreting "different" as "ineffective".. which is not the argument at all. But RNG is not dice, the way it puts out a given result is completely different than dice.. even if both results are a number between 1 and 6.. whether that matters or not depends on what you deem important in the experience.

Everything with the RNG is predetermined, which is why they use massive numbers for a 1-6 result. Dice are not.. without fixing the roll in some way (shave/weight dice, short-drop roll) you can't predict dice better than the odds themselves.. unless a die literally breaks off a corner during a roll, one roll does not affect the result of the next.

RNG do a very good job at simulating the dice, just like 3d graphics and animation do a good job at simulating the field and miniatures. The experience and the methods are completely different.

To bridge this to the main topic... clawpomb balance isn't a matter of clawpomb, that is just a mechanic.. what really matters is the context.. online leagues that tv-match are a big difference to TT leagues with fixed opponents/schedules, which are again different to tt open leagues where you have some control over who you play, how much you play.. how often you have tv discrepencies and what inducements you allow/have access to. All of those have as much effect on clawpomb as any house rule adjustment to the skill itself.

[burgun824]

This is why I've said I wish they made precision block dice. I'd buy them in a heart beat.

Precision dice are overrated, in that once you use them a few times they are no longer precision dice (smallest wear at all strips them of their 'precisionness') most casino dice don't make it thru a single shift of play before going to the trash/recycle bin. They are mostly a product of casinos not letting folks use outside dice, and being 'approved' by the gaming commision for use on gambling tables.

At the price of block dice GW could double their revenue on gamers maintaining sets of precision block dice!

I have no doubt that your right about that being the case in casinos. However, I would argue that a slightly worn precision die is still going to be loads more accurate than a brand new standard die. That slightly worn precission die has still undergone far less damage then the brand new standard die has by the time you even get it in your hand.

Now practically speaking they probably aren't worth producing for a game like this and I hold out no hope of ever seeing it. But I doubt you'd have to replace them as much in a TT gaming setting as a casino has to.

[Daht]

I wouldn't say loads more, but slightly so.. not enough to make a discernable difference.. precision dice are more about the money being bet on every roll and being highly sensitive to cheating or house fixing. If you know how to roll dice well you are a bigger factor than the dice...(why you need to bounce crap dice off the backboard every roll)...

Much like the RNG vs Dice in general argument, it's much more a tactile/preference/"feels better" issue than a statistical one.

It would be REALLY cool to have a set of sharp-edged precision offical GW-style block dice...

[Smeborg]

Way to go... off topic.

[dode74]

Everything with the RNG is predetermined, which is why they use massive numbers for a 1-6 result. Dice are not.. without fixing the roll in some way (shave/weight dice, short-drop roll) you can't predict dice better than the odds themselves.. unless a die literally breaks off a corner during a roll, one roll does not affect the result of the next.

You can't predict the RNG better than the odds themselves either. What's the difference?