Angband Forums Clusters of rod/staff fails
 Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 February 12, 2018, 00:58 #1 grumbleguts Scout   Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 27 Clusters of rod/staff fails This was discussed in the 90s, but it still seems to be relevant today. If you use a rod or staff which fails on the first attempt it seems more likely to fail on the second and subsequent attempts than the failure chance would imply. So you have this rod with a 15% failure rate, and you zap it because you can't see a damn thing because you are blinded but the bloood pouring into your eyes from the deep gash which is seeping poison, and a little curing never hurt anyone. You fail to zap the rod properly. OK fine, I still have some HP I can survive another hit You fail to zap the rod properly. You fail to zap the rod properly. You fail to zap the rod properly. You die. Then there'll be 12 times in a row where it will work as advertised. Has anyone else noticed this? Or is it confirmation bias?
 February 12, 2018, 01:26 #2 Pete Mack Prophet   Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 5,016 Donated: \$40 4 failures in a row is a 1 in 2000 chance. That is expected roughly every 5 games, assuming a. you use devices about 400x per game. b. You retry the device on failure. A more useful estimate is 1 in 300 conditional chance of 3 failures in a row, following the first failure in the sequence. Not a bad risk, but still something you can't mess around with as a matter of course. Anything near 1% is a risk you should only take with deliberation. 4 fails in a row doesn't qualify. You had plenty of chances to heal, and certainly on the last fail you'd have died even if it was successful: the monster attack still would have killed you.
 February 12, 2018, 09:36 #3 PowerWyrm Veteran     Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 2,417 I've failed 1% fail spell 5 times in a row once. An average is an average on infinite tries, you can't expect x% fail to fail x times out of 100 for every 100 tries you do. __________________ PWMAngband variant maintainer - check http://powerwyrm.monsite-orange.fr (or http://www.mangband.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=9) to learn more about this new variant!
 February 12, 2018, 11:47 #4 grumbleguts Scout   Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 27 The was brought up in the usenet group rec.games.rogue.angband, or whatever it was called, in the mid nineties, it seems a lot of people noticed failures come in clusters, I am well aware of the maths involved in calculating the probabilities, and strings of failures still today appear more often than their theoretical probabilities would suggest. I got 11 failures in a row which is approximately 1 in 10.5 million. Now I get that a 1 in 10.5 million still has that chance. But it happened twice in 45 minutes. And it was a phenomenon that people have noticed in the past.
February 12, 2018, 14:55   #5
takkaria
Veteran

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,859
Donated: \$40
Quote:
 Originally Posted by grumbleguts The was brought up in the usenet group rec.games.rogue.angband, or whatever it was called, in the mid nineties, it seems a lot of people noticed failures come in clusters, I am well aware of the maths involved in calculating the probabilities, and strings of failures still today appear more often than their theoretical probabilities would suggest. I got 11 failures in a row which is approximately 1 in 10.5 million. Now I get that a 1 in 10.5 million still has that chance. But it happened twice in 45 minutes. And it was a phenomenon that people have noticed in the past.
The RNG totally changed since the r.g.r.a days. Maybe twice. It's just confirmation bias.
__________________
"Physician, heal thyself."

 February 12, 2018, 15:24 #6 Pondlife Apprentice   Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: UK Posts: 69 Testing RNGs is quite difficult. A couple of test suites are: Dieharder: A Random Number Test Suite: http://webhome.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/General/dieharder.php TestU01: http://simul.iro.umontreal.ca/testu01/tu01.html Running the angband RNG through something like the dieharder suite might give some assurance that there are no serious problems. __________________ Playing roguelikes on and off since 1984. rogue, hack, moria, nethack, angband & zangband.
February 12, 2018, 15:58   #7
takkaria
Veteran

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,859
Donated: \$40
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Pondlife Testing RNGs is quite difficult. A couple of test suites are: Dieharder: A Random Number Test Suite: http://webhome.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/General/dieharder.php TestU01: http://simul.iro.umontreal.ca/testu01/tu01.html Running the angband RNG through something like the dieharder suite might give some assurance that there are no serious problems.
Angband uses the WELL1024a RNG. It is generally considered a pretty decent non-secure PRNG based on what I've read online, though admittedly I'm barely even an amateur when it comes to RNGs.
__________________
"Physician, heal thyself."

 February 12, 2018, 18:20 #8 Pondlife Apprentice   Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: UK Posts: 69 Yes, WELL looks fairly reasonable. I've used the similar but older mersenne twister in my own projects. The fact that the Angband maintainer has taken the time to choose an independent RNG function is a good sign in itself. IME many software RNG problems stem from one of two causes: a) The developer uses the languages' own rand() function, which is often poorly implemented with a linear congruential generator; or b) They write their own random function, which is often poorly implemented with an LCG. __________________ Playing roguelikes on and off since 1984. rogue, hack, moria, nethack, angband & zangband.

 Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Angband     AAR     Vanilla     Development     ToME     Sil     Variants     Competition The real world     Idle chatter     Oook! Obsolete     v4

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post chikinn Vanilla 3 November 29, 2014 09:34 gangli Development 5 November 27, 2013 10:06 Therem Harth Vanilla 7 May 4, 2012 23:27 raycluster Vanilla 18 February 13, 2012 11:13 Geofferic Vanilla 2 October 22, 2007 07:38

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:46.