Randomizer routine

Have a suggestion or some feedback? Dont keep it to yourself - share it!

Moderators: AlexS, Run5 Staff, SSG Staff

Postby Joel137 » Fri Feb 20, 2004 12:02 am

Keith wrote:For what it's worth, the standard deviation for a 307-roll sample of a six-sided die is just under 0.1 (about 0.0976 if I've done the math correctly). Using a normal approximation, therefore, we expect to see something in the range 3.4-3.6 about 2/3 of the time. And we expect something in the range 3.3-3.7 about 95% of the time.

Fantassin's result is a bit more than 1 1/2 standard deviations below the expected theoretical mean. Such an outcome is certainly bad luck. But it's far from completely out of the norm or even weird. It's worth a complaint or two, but probably not worth trying to "fix" your computer.


And certainly worth "bitching" to your opponent about the unfair bad luck that ruined your perfect plan. I've certainly had that happen to me. :wink:
User avatar
Joel137
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:19 am
Location: Brookings, South Dakota

Postby Pawlock » Fri Feb 20, 2004 3:56 am

Joel137 wrote:
Keith wrote:For what it's worth, the standard deviation for a 307-roll sample of a six-sided die is just under 0.1 (about 0.0976 if I've done the math correctly). Using a normal approximation, therefore, we expect to see something in the range 3.4-3.6 about 2/3 of the time. And we expect something in the range 3.3-3.7 about 95% of the time.

Fantassin's result is a bit more than 1 1/2 standard deviations below the expected theoretical mean. Such an outcome is certainly bad luck. But it's far from completely out of the norm or even weird. It's worth a complaint or two, but probably not worth trying to "fix" your computer.


And certainly worth "bitching" to your opponent about the unfair bad luck that ruined your perfect plan. I've certainly had that happen to me. :wink:


I bitch all the time about my bad luck, it eases the pain somewhat and makes me feel better. All said and done, IMO the longer the scenario, the more chance you luck will even out. This is one of the reasons I prefer longer games, less luck , more strategy.
Pawlock
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Bristol, England

Postby Joel137 » Fri Feb 20, 2004 5:14 am

In addition to easing the pain, some strings of good luck or bad luck make for good heroic stories. The thread on the exploits of the German para unit in TAO are an excellent example.

Besides what grognard worth his/her salt won't comlain about the die rolling. 8)
User avatar
Joel137
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:19 am
Location: Brookings, South Dakota

Postby Fantassin » Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:52 pm

Keith wrote:Fantassin's result is a bit more than 1 1/2 standard deviations below the expected theoretical mean. Such an outcome is certainly bad luck. But it's far from completely out of the norm or even weird. It's worth a complaint or two, but probably not worth trying to "fix" your computer.


I'm not very good at statistics but what I find curious is the number of each die rolled, not the average.

For 307 rolls the average number of die rolled would tend towards 51. Here with 71 '3' and 36 '6' I was respectively 40% over and 30% below the expected result. Globaly I get 173 rolls under 3.5 and 134 above it.

Effectively the deviation in terms of average isn't very important, but to achieve this deviation you have to roll a great number of under average die.
User avatar
Fantassin
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 9:54 pm
Location: Paris, France

Previous

Return to Feedback/Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron