Hally hit damage and hit % have been nerfed

[Robbbb]

This whole topic is silly...the chance to hit is based on MATH people...it doesn't matter what type of "random" hit equation they use as long as the end result is always a 50% chance to hit it will, in the long run always equal 1 hit 1 miss...Math does not lie and is never wrong so having a discussion about how the randomness is wrong is just plain stupid.

[Malaikat]

Math does not lie and is never wrong so having a discussion about how the randomness is wrong is just plain stupid.

Someone's never heard of Godel's Incompleteness Theorems...

Godel -1
Math - 0

[Robbbb]

Math does not lie and is never wrong so having a discussion about how the randomness is wrong is just plain stupid.

Someone's never heard of Godel's Incompleteness Theorems...

Godel -1
Math - 0

LOL...ok well you flip a perfectly clean, preferably new, penny 10 million times. Then divide Heads/Tails and if your percentage doesnt equal 50% - 50.9% I will give you everything I own in UO...

Video proof is required on all 10 million flips =)

[Victor Cassella]

Using a coin example is a terrible comparison.

Using a coin is a perfect comparison.

A coin has a 50% chance of turning heads or tails every time it is flipped. A weapon swing is a 50% chance to hit or miss every time swung against an opponent with an equal amount of melee skill. The chance of hitting 4x in a row is 6.25% (or 1 in 16 strings), you say this occurrance is an example of "bad code". No... it's something that WILL happen given enough swings or coin flips. 10, 20, even 100 misses in a row will eventually happen given enough time.

Try flipping a coin for a little while and see how long it takes you to get 4 heads or tails in a row... it is the statistical equivalent of swinging your weapon.

Rather then agruing with you, because I know for a fact how bad runUO random code is, I'd just perfer a simple answer. Does this shard use runUO's default random code, or has it been rewritten?

[SethTersius]

You know, I read the entire text of this thread and I don't see anything that could be considered evidence of your research.

Strange, considering you mention percentage as though you had some actual data to go along with this assumption you're making.

It's not really teh internets ca 1998 anymore. You can lose that whole shtick already. It got old in the dial up days when I was young and cared about online epeen.

[Blaise]

You know, I read the entire text of this thread and I don't see anything that could be considered evidence of your research.

Strange, considering you mention percentage as though you had some actual data to go along with this assumption you're making.

It's not really teh internets ca 1998 anymore. You can lose that whole shtick already. It got old in the dial up days when I was young and cared about online epeen.

lolwut and/or kthxbai

[chumbucket]

Math does not lie and is never wrong so having a discussion about how the randomness is wrong is just plain stupid.

Someone's never heard of Godel's Incompleteness Theorems...

Godel -1
Math - 0

Someone has no idea what Godel's Theorems actually mean.

[Light Shade]

Math does not lie and is never wrong so having a discussion about how the randomness is wrong is just plain stupid.

Someone's never heard of Godel's Incompleteness Theorems...

Godel -1
Math - 0

Someone has no idea what Godel's Theorems actually mean.

Is the answer 42?

-L/S

[Malaikat]

Math does not lie and is never wrong so having a discussion about how the randomness is wrong is just plain stupid.

Someone's never heard of Godel's Incompleteness Theorems...

Godel -1
Math - 0

Someone has no idea what Godel's Theorems actually mean.

They have nothing to do with probability or randomness directly, but everything to do with the instability of mathematics in a given axiom...That said, the statement that, "math does not lie", can be disproved using simple algebra. Godel's theorems would be overkill.

I've never worked the proofs, but to say I don't know anything about them would be fallacious.

[the bazookas]

Several computational methods for random number generation exist, but often fall short of the goal of true randomness

Godel's theorem sounds like a bit overkill when discussing this issue... really all you need is an understanding of the limitations of random number generation. Depending on the random number generation algorithm used, it is quite possible that the swing results are far from "true" randomness, and based on a previous poster's comments, whatever RunUO is using could be sub-optimal. Although "math" is used to generate random numbers with a computer, it is only an approximation:

There are two principal methods used to generate random numbers. One measures some physical phenomenon that is expected to be random and then compensates for possible biases in the measurement process. The other uses computational algorithms that produce long sequences of apparently random results, which are in fact completely determined by a shorter initial value, known as a seed or key. The latter type are often called pseudorandom number generators.

A "random number generator" based solely on deterministic computation cannot be regarded as a "true" random number generator, since its output is inherently predictable. How to distinguish a "true" random number from the output of a pseudo-random number generator is a very difficult problem. However, carefully chosen pseudo-random number generators can be used instead of true random numbers in many applications. Rigorous statistical analysis of the output is often needed to have confidence in the algorithm.

[Mikel123]

The chance of hitting 4x in a row is 6.25%

You're being charitable. Since he's talking about 4 hits OR misses, the first flip is irrelevant. You're really just curious how often the next three are the same as the first one, regardless of what that first one is. I'd have said 12.5%.

But 87.5% of the time, he's right every time.

[Brules]

Rather then agruing with you, because I know for a fact how bad runUO random code is, I'd just perfer a simple answer. Does this shard use runUO's default random code, or has it been rewritten?

I suspect it uses the default "random code" that is not so random as certain players have timed the random timer so well they virtually monopolize the rare spawns.......so yeah - the random code sucks horribad. If it was re-written - whoever wrote it failed horribly.

[chumbucket]

Math does not lie and is never wrong so having a discussion about how the randomness is wrong is just plain stupid.

Someone's never heard of Godel's Incompleteness Theorems...

Godel -1
Math - 0

Someone has no idea what Godel's Theorems actually mean.

They have nothing to do with probability or randomness directly, but everything to do with the instability of mathematics in a given axiom...That said, the statement that, "math does not lie", can be disproved using simple algebra. Godel's theorems would be overkill.

I've never worked the proofs, but to say I don't know anything about them would be fallacious.

Sorry, but you have no clue what they mean. That isn't "fallacious" or even false!

[Downs]

Tldr version:

I LOST AT PVP! THIS IS MATHS FAULT

NO IT ISNT MATH IS TRUE WTF

[Malaikat]

Sorry, but you have no clue what they mean.

I know you are, but what am I....

Your post. It is very informative. Perhaps, though, you would like to give it some more substance. You've obviously found my previous statements about obscure mathematical theory to be unsatisfactory, but, to this point, no one knows why.