Incline Battle Brothers + Beasts & Exploration, Warriors of the North and Blazing Deserts DLC Thread

[razvedchiki]

the human brain cannot intuitively grasp probabilities.

​

 

[Serus]

the human brain cannot intuitively grasp probabilities.

​

Apparently some human brains cannot grasp it non-intuitively either. You need some basic education for that.

 

[sser]

I've played probability-based board games for years (Blood Bowl, A&A, simulacrums like Mordheim, etc.) and even I get tilted and conspiratorial toward #'s now and again. Battle Brothers does have that pinned 5% chance element, and 1/20 is in actuality not rare at all. For comparison, the typical 'worst' roll you can get in Blood Bowl is a 1/36 and I see that almost every single game at least once, and the vaunted 1/1296 quads turns out not to be as rare as you think if you play enough matches.

Quite simply, probabilities are rarely seen in total, but instead perceived via each individual outcome. Blood Bowl can create amusing examples of people failing to understand this. You'll have someone take a play that has 10+ individual dice rolls and a 1% chance of succeeding. If they fail the first dice roll, the response is typically to go well yeah, expected outcome. However, if they fail the last roll, some people get pissed and think they've been screwed. It's quite fascinating. An emotional attachment is made to the outcome of these dice rolls such that, inevitably, an emotional attachment is made to them before they're ever even rolled to begin with -- a belief in guarantees, if you will. There is a reason why some game devs secretly tilt numbers in the player's favor (XCOM). There's also a reason why casinos hire psychologist to prey upon a person's inability to grasp probability, and especially to navigate them toward chasing low-% outcomes.

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

i've never felt openly cheated by blood bowl. i won plenty of games despite being a mediocre player at best (i guess so).
but when you start a mission and you go
60 miss
60 miss
60 miss
60 miss
enemy turn
40 hit
40 hit
(especially easy to check if you bring dogs)
and this behaviour replicates over tens of battles over different saves and games, something smells like pussy. i have an archer with 75-80%, and it rarely lands both hits. all my 50-60% men spend most of the battles missing. on the other hand, enemy 30 are more like 50 and 50 are terminators, worst offenders seem to be the animals, i've had my 8 men try almost 20 times against 3 snakes, which were supposed to go down in 3-4 hits and had about 40% chance to hit me, because i couldn't land any while they always were.
as i already said, i hadn't these issues with 1.0 at all, i even "finished" the game.

 

[Sarissofoi]

Pretty much how MadMax says. Battle Brothers have this weird RNG when rolls often come in clusters(and its both for a player and enemy). Of course if you are player and get cluster of 40(+/-5) rolls then you would probably not notice if you are not aware and don't pay attention to it - all you see is that your masterful plan worked, there was risks calculated but you were good at math etc. Of course when opposite happen to you and you cluster of 80(+/-5) and can't land a hit in whole turn and then enemy roll cluster of 30(-/+5) and you just see your defense breaking when things get funny.
Of course somebody did the math and its all right folks, number don't repeat too often and they are mostly equal to roll and its used to disprove all funny RNG business somehow even if really don't disprove anything and data have nothing on low range clusters.
I played BB consistently for long time and had fun so I am not much biased against it. Just saying how it is.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Repent, sinners!

 

[Reinhardt]

and 1/20 is in actuality not rare at all.

yes... not bb, but gud example >

 

[Tyrr]

and 1/20 is in actuality not rare at all.

yes... not bb, but gud example >

From what I understand, computer generated random numbers (compared to rolling a real dice for example) are more prone to have strings of the same number consecutively.
It's still random overall, but can feel less random if you only pick a small sample size.

 

[rojay]

i've never felt openly cheated by blood bowl. i won plenty of games despite being a mediocre player at best (i guess so).
but when you start a mission and you go
60 miss
60 miss
60 miss
60 miss
enemy turn
40 hit
40 hit
(especially easy to check if you bring dogs)
and this behaviour replicates over tens of battles over different saves and games, something smells like pussy. i have an archer with 75-80%, and it rarely lands both hits. all my 50-60% men spend most of the battles missing. on the other hand, enemy 30 are more like 50 and 50 are terminators, worst offenders seem to be the animals, i've had my 8 men try almost 20 times against 3 snakes, which were supposed to go down in 3-4 hits and had about 40% chance to hit me, because i couldn't land any while they always were.
as i already said, i hadn't these issues with 1.0 at all, i even "finished" the game.

But those of us who don't experience this AI cheating are just fooling ourselves?

You're going to use the word "sheeple" soon, aren't you?

 

[Serus]

Pretty much how MadMax says. Battle Brothers have this weird RNG when rolls often come in clusters(and its both for a player and enemy). Of course if you are player and get cluster of 40(+/-5) rolls then you would probably not notice if you are not aware and don't pay attention to it - all you see is that your masterful plan worked, there was risks calculated but you were good at math etc. Of course when opposite happen to you and you cluster of 80(+/-5) and can't land a hit in whole turn and then enemy roll cluster of 30(-/+5) and you just see your defense breaking when things get funny.
Of course somebody did the math and its all right folks, number don't repeat too often and they are mostly equal to roll and its used to disprove all funny RNG business somehow even if really don't disprove anything and data have nothing on low range clusters.
I played BB consistently for long time and had fun so I am not much biased against it. Just saying how it is.

You are not saying "how it is". You are saying "the way i subjectively perceive how it is". There is a crucial difference. To be able to say "how it is" you'd need to make research, and not a "research" of the kind our friend some posts above did.

However, you might be right about clusters. Computer RNG is not perfect, there is no "true randomness" in it, so to speak. Hell, in newtonian model of physics randomness doesn't even exist. RNG used in computer programs may lead to some weird occurrences. But that is very far from saying:
a) it is "biased"
b) biased - against the player
c) it is done on purpose
Some of the above was claimed, including in this thread. Basically we have different claims by different people.

The claim about clusters might actually have some value. However without any solid proof - other than "My perception is bestest!" it is still just about your FEELINGS against those of other people. If you want it to be about something else then the burden of proof is on you. BTW, I played 100s of hours of BB and haven't felt any clusters of numbers whatsoever, certainly not in combat. Does it mean that they are not there? No, just that my feelings are different than yours. Those are all based on subjective perceptions and all i know about perception bias makes me sceptical. Without proof i will remain so and any rational and educated person should be too. That's all i'm saying.

Also what what Tyrr and rojay said.

 

[Serus]

and 1/20 is in actuality not rare at all.

yes... not bb, but gud example >

Four 1 (on a 20 sided die, 5% chances) are expected to happen from time to time if the sample is big enough. In a combat heavy rpg with a system like any DnD or BB there are probably 10s of thousands* rolls made in a single long game. And that assuming it is your game. Because if not it means absolutely bupkiss. There are millions of hours and billions of rolls made among all players.

*Just guessing here, more likely 100s of thousands?

 

[Reinhardt]

Four 1 (on a 20 sided die, 5% chances) are expected to happen from time to time if the sample is big enough.

6

 

[Serus]

Four 1 (on a 20 sided die, 5% chances) are expected to happen from time to time if the sample is big enough.

6

No, it's 4 in a row. Magic missiles damage is random as well. I think they were actually all 2s on d4 (magic missile being d4+1) which sort of makes it look funny. 1/20 - 1/20 - 1/20 - 1/20 - 2/4 - 2/4 - 2/4 - 1/20 - 2/4 - 2/4 - 1/20.
See my previous post about that.

As a side note, let's not dump all on RNG. There are different bugs to be considered. I remember someone posted a screenshot of a Pathfinder game looking like: 1d6 (roll 6)=7. The point was it created a math where 6=7. Those are calculations made after the RNG created numbers before they appear on the screen. First they are processed to determine final result and what you see the screen (which can also be two different things). Those calculations can be bugged as well although i doubt it is the case here. Someone just made a screenshot of a weird string of numbers. Of curse we don't even know the source code so we don't know if the game makes 1 pool of random numbers or a different pool for every type of dice or even for every type of action. Someone with a programming knowledge about rng generations in games could perhaps shed a light on this.

 

[Reinhardt]

Magic missiles damage is random as well.

but they are flaming skull's rolls, not mine. basically it's dm rolling for monster as opposed to me rolling 6 1's in a row.

 

[Serus]

Magic missiles damage is random as well.

but they are flaming skull's rolls, not mine. basically it's dm rolling for monster as opposed to me rolling 6 1's in a row.

So what? You don't know if they are taken from a different pool of rng results or the same one. Either way is possible. We don't even know it is the issue with RNG at all*. Assuming there is an issue in the first place. I don't see one. I see random occurrences that are bound to happen if the sample is big enough.
That's my main point in almost every post i made on this issue. WE DON'T KNOW! We just have feelings and at best poorly educated guess.
*reread my previous post.

Also, honestly, that's not even BB, screw it.

 

[Sarissofoi]

Serus. I never said that it was biased against player. I said that it happen for both sides, its just more visible for a player when it happens against him(for obvious reason). And sure I have no REAL DATA(TM) but the REAL DATA(TM) that is used to disprove it shouldn't be used to disprove it as its methodically wrong(aka somebody try to disprove claim that orange is orange color by bringing data that its round).
That was my whole point.

 

[Jrpgfan]

The Earth is FLAT.

Sure I have no REAL DATA™ to prove it but the REAL DATA™ that is used to disprove it shouldn't be used to disprove it as it's methodically wrong because orange is orange even though some people may say it's not orange.

 

[thesecret1]

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Serus. I never said that it was biased against player. I said that it happen for both sides, its just more visible for a player when it happens against him(for obvious reason). And sure I have no REAL DATA(TM) but the REAL DATA(TM) that is used to disprove it shouldn't be used to disprove it as its methodically wrong(aka somebody try to disprove claim that orange is orange color by bringing data that its round).
That was my whole point.

People are better at remembering negative things.
That's an important survival trait.

 

[Quatlo]

Even taking pseudo-randomness in the account, its skewering into one side or another extremely slightly, it would mean something with 99999999999 coin tosses to find that there is actually some more heads or tails, etc, not when making 3 pseudo random throws. 3 95% throws its still pretty big chance of missing each of them. For example, I've been playing some dnd with my buddies back in the day, boss emerges and my character throws 3x20 and instagibs him. It happens again in another boss fight a couple of months later. Fast forward a couple of years later DM asks me if he can use my character as one of enemies for his other group he is playing with currently, and I agree. After some time he messages me telling me that this character even as NPC is cursed, because it threw 3x20 on the party tank, instagibbing him too.

 

[Old One]

If you're smarter than 95% of people, and you live in a town with a population of 100,000, there are 5,000 people in your town who are as smart as or smarter than you are.

 

[Reinhardt]

there are 5,000 people in your town who are as smart as or smarter than you are.

i don't believe you

 

[Sarissofoi]

there are 5,000 people in your town who are as smart as or smarter than you are.

i don't believe you

And you are right. Because his methodology suck and we don't have enough data or information.
We don't know who he thinks ''people'' consist. or where his 100k town is or what this town is. But lets ASSUME things.
1. We assume that by 'smarter than 95%' he mean being smarter than 95% of genus Homo(sure you can say that all of other branches are extinction but looking outside window I am not so sure) and by smart he mean getting high IQ score(but that is big assumption)
2. We assume than 'a town of population of 100k' he mean some idealized ''average'' town that pretty sure don't exist.
Now if you live in 100k town somewhere in Bumpkina Faso which average IQ for a country is around 70 then you being in top 5% of Humanity would probably make you smartest guy around with nobody smartest than you in miles, on the other hand if you land in some 100k research/high tech city like Siliconoid Valley or some old style academic city(outside of USA and before 90' - which mean before diversity hits) or some Soviet style closed city with population consisting of highly educated and smart people then its probable than you actually are in bottom 20%.
But sure in general if population distributions was uniform over the globe, all cities consist of uniform population samples then sure.

 

[Strange Fellow]

Holy shit dude.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Holy shit dude.

Nah.
Just autism.