57 replies to this topic

[Tolos]

GeoMonster, on Jul 11 2019 - 23:57, said:

And Ron Copeland will be here shortly to spout more BS and Diarrhea on RNG, so heed his words!

 

My god it's creepy how you are with him. Like boarding on obsessive. 

[Flarvin]

tod914, on Jul 11 2019 - 22:40, said:

Without seeing their source code, how do you know that's the case?

 

You do not need to see the source code to determine softwares’ behavior. 

 

Black-box testing is one way.

[Flarvin]

Tolos, on Jul 12 2019 - 04:40, said:

My god it's creepy how you are with him. Like boarding on obsessive. 

 

Like some celebrity’s crazed stalker. 

 

I wonder if he sorts through GP’s garbage? lol

[Hellsfog]

tod914, on Jul 11 2019 - 22:40, said:

 

Without seeing their source code, how do you know that's the case?

 Without seeing their source code, how do you know that isn't the case? Because some angry [edited]on a forum told you?

[ez_money]

GeorgePreddy, on Jul 11 2019 - 20:43, said:

 

 I, and others, have tested RNG thoroughly, keeping track of thousands of battle results, and that research has showed that what WG publishes about RNG needs not TO ALWAYS be doubted.

Are you on WG's payroll? Anyways, FTFY.

 

[NiteDog]

heavymetal1967, on Jul 11 2019 - 21:06, said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bros c'mon.  We're buds and all, but I'm really starting to wonder about possible mental issues.

 

Spoiler

 

Five posts and I drop in and have to pick up the slack.  At least Klaatu got close.  C'mon guys...

 

Two for NiteDog.

 

GTO...

 

 

Pontiac...

 

 

Two for Tod.

 

Broken...

 

 

No source code, how does he know...

 

Man look at all that green Paul is counting.

 

 

One for Klaatu. 

 

GP RC pilot of the past.  EJ DD pilot of the FUTURE

 

 

And a couple more...

 

Random as the title of this one...

 

 

OK folks gotta do some explaining.

 

LP states Beverly Copeland.  Beverly later transitioned into a man named Glenn Copeland.  So there are recordings out there by Beverly Copeland, Beverly Glenn Copeland and Glenn Copeland.

 

 

 

[Captain_Dave]

As an improving player, I find RNG to be very, very frustrating  I'm not getting the full benefit for improving my tactics and proficiencies.  

 

I vote to drop it down to 15%. 

[tod914]

Captain_Dave, on Jul 12 2019 - 09:10, said:

As an improving player, I find RNG to be very, very frustrating  I'm not getting the full benefit for improving my tactics and proficiencies.  

 

I vote to drop it down to 15%. 

Well said Dave.  I feel that it puts the new players at a real handicap.

[Flarvin]

tod914, on Jul 12 2019 - 09:36, said:

Well said Dave.  I feel that it puts the new players at a real handicap.

 

If what Dave said was true, than RNG gives experienced players a handicap. And new players would benefit from it. 

 

But what Dave stated is not true. Else there would be no improving one’s tactics and proficiencies in poker, given each hand is 100% RNG. 

[Mad_Dog_Seabee]

Devil__Anse, on Jul 11 2019 - 16:38, said:

it's all random...believe them (and the 12 shills on this forum) say so

It really isn't random it just appears that way since we don't have the seed for the rng. Only humans can be truly random; programs use a complicated equation and appear random but aren't truly random.

[Flarvin]

Mad_Dog_Seabee, on Jul 12 2019 - 11:08, said:

It really isn't random it just appears that way since we don't have the seed for the rng. Only humans can be truly random; programs use a complicated equation and appear random but aren't truly random.

 

Only humans can be truly random? What? 

 

Humans are not random.

 

Physical phenomena can be be random. But even those would not be random, if we had the data and knowledge to predict them. 

 

RNG code provides enough randomness to satisfy the need for random in video games. And military sim use the same RNG library functions as video games. For many of the same reasons. 

 

 

[Astralite]

Tolos, on Jul 12 2019 - 10:40, said:

 

My god it's creepy how you are with him. Like boarding on obsessive. 

 

Whats creepy is you choking on the shills [edited]. I'd trade him out for Gseries any time, at least he was entertaining. 

[spud_tuber]

Mad_Dog_Seabee, on Jul 12 2019 - 10:08, said:

It really isn't random it just appears that way since we don't have the seed for the rng. Only humans can be truly random; programs use a complicated equation and appear random but aren't truly random.

It is questionable whether humans even are truly random rather than just a different form of pseudo random, but perhaps that is a philosophy question.  Similarly, there are lots of things in nature that humans can't predict yet.  Cosmic background radiation, which way that squirrel in the road is going to run, etc.

 

But anyway, back into the nitty gritty of it.  To the best of my knowledge,  the vast majority of RNG algorithms pull numbers from a pre generated list in sequence starting from a selected point.  The reason for this is speed.  It is easier and faster to read a list than to try to mathematically generate the number as needed. 

 

The starting point is selected via a process called seeding, and often attempts are made to make this seed value itself as random as possible. For instance, using the last few digits of the time variable on a system is a fairly common method.

 

The methods for generating the list itself vary.  Some are indeed produced using complicated equations.   At least one was made using the amplitude of background radiation.   Other methods exist as well.  Many of these methods leave the list well short of truly random, but only if one applies significant statistical analysis to the list.   For the most part, this is only important to scientists and engineers trying to run simulations. 

 

It is possible that a poor seeding method could cause RNG to favor a player or team I suppose, but usually seeding errors are relatively easy to spot and correct, so this seems unlikely.  I'd need to see some pretty serious evidence to believe even WG was that incompetent, but I won't rule it out as a possibility without some serious evidence either.

 

I strongly suspect the list of the pRNG they're using is, statistically, far from truly random.  As said above, the vast majority are.  However, as you correctly point out, we as players can't predict it, so in practical terms, the list is close enough to random for the purposes of a video game.  It might not even be possible,  especially in the normal course of gameplay, to collect enough data to show that the list isn't truly random.   

 

TL;DR:  whatever pRNG WG uses isn't truly random, but it is unpredictable to the players, and unless very improperly seeded, it does not favor or disfavor any player in the long run.  As such, it serves its intended function within the game.

[Tolos]

MILF_Spec, on Jul 12 2019 - 16:31, said:

 

Whats creepy is you choking on the shills [edited]. I'd trade him out for Gseries any time, at least he was entertaining. 

 

So me saying it's creepy that one guy is basically stalking another on the forums, and from that you said im ' choking on his d1ck '. Brother you need to get outside more, its kinda sad. 

[Goat_Rodeo]

Tolos, on Jul 12 2019 - 09:40, said:

 

My god it's creepy how you are with him. Like boarding on obsessive. 

But was he wrong in his prognostication?...

[diesel__1]

GeoMonster, on Jul 11 2019 - 17:03, said:

 

Shot accuracy has gone to pot in SPGs.  Part of the hidden stats for each tank.  All arties were given a secret nerf in addition to the announced ones.

Good

[diesel__1]

tod914, on Jul 11 2019 - 20:40, said:

 

Without seeing their source code, how do you know that's the case?

I wish blocked users wouldn't even show up in quotes from others.....

[Pipinghot]

ez_money, on Jul 12 2019 - 08:37, said:

GeorgePreddy, on Jul 11 2019 - 20:43, said:

 

 I, and others, have tested RNG thoroughly, keeping track of thousands of battle results, and that research has showed that what WG publishes about RNG needs not TO ALWAYS be doubted.

Are you on WG's payroll? Anyways, FTFY.

Are you on the payroll of AW or WT, sent here to spread garbage on these forums, or do you just hate reasoning and critical thinking because that's how you roll?

[Pipinghot]

Mad_Dog_Seabee, on Jul 12 2019 - 11:08, said:

Devil__Anse, on Jul 11 2019 - 16:38, said:

it's all random...believe them (and the 12 shills on this forum) say so

It really isn't random it just appears that way since we don't have the seed for the rng. Only humans can be truly random; programs use a complicated equation and appear random but aren't truly random.

This isn't the 1940's, the randomizer algorithms in computers systems are as close to truly random as anyone needs them to be. The argument that computers are not perfectly random displays ignorance of how much randomness is needed. That's like saying that your reading light is not as bright as the sun, while it's a true statement it completely fails to understand how much light you actually need to read. Computers are not perfectly random, but they are random enough that neither you nor anyone else could ever tell the difference without deep, deep statistical analysis.

 

Coin tossing is not truly random, but it's random enough.

Rolling dice is not truly random, but it's random enough.

Roulette wheels are not truly random but they are random enough.

And of course.. computers are not truly random, but they are beyond the needed threshold to be random enough, especially for the needs of a game.

 

p.s. No, humans cannot be truly random. We are much more likely to fall into patterns than any current randomizer algorithm.

[ColonelShakes]

tod914, on Jul 12 2019 - 02:14, said:

Being I don't have the RNG issues on SA or RU test, it's safe to say the problem is the crap NA server... or routing to it.  It's been beyond broken lately. 

 

Odd.  I play on the same NA server.  I don't experience any of these 'issues' you speak of. 

 

Maybe stop assuming ?  Try to own , and fix your own issue?  

 

Wishful thinking I know.