EPTMetalopolis prone to close positions, why? - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
I apologize to everyone in this thread for taking the OP seriously. My mod senses are definitely off today. -- Chill | ||
|
BeefyKnight
United States127 Posts
| ||
|
LoLAdriankat
United States4307 Posts
| ||
|
philcorp
Canada32 Posts
| ||
|
Duka08
3391 Posts
On February 16 2011 06:09 Seronei wrote: You can join as spectator with 2 bots and it's much faster. It doesn't really take that much time to go through 100, shouldn't take more than 30seconds per game with this method. This is actually a magnificent idea, I'd be willing to do a few hundred if I found a sweet method and contribute. With replays if needed. Will post back soon I hope | ||
|
JoeSchmoe
Canada2058 Posts
On February 16 2011 06:05 Zelniq wrote: it's true he could have done it in singleplayer and it wouldn't show in match history apparently, it also avoids the 10 second countdown timer so it makes sense. I'm still very doubtful that he took the time to load 100 games and load 100 replays (to see spawn location, or instead wait to scout his opponent's base). I think we should assume bullshit unless he provides replays, they should autosave you can use sawnoutofmemory (cheat) to disable fow to see spawn positions that way but I agree that the OP might be trolling. | ||
|
Deadeight
United Kingdom1629 Posts
On February 16 2011 06:05 Zelniq wrote: it's true he could have done it in singleplayer and it wouldn't show in match history apparently, it also avoids the 10 second countdown timer so it makes sense. I'm still very doubtful that he took the time to load 100 games and load 100 replays (to see spawn location, or instead wait to scout his opponent's base). I think we should assume bullshit unless he provides replays, they should autosave I'm starting to agree with you. My results so far don't agree. If so it's a pretty good and unexpected troll, certainly wasted a lot of my time. | ||
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
On February 16 2011 06:09 Seronei wrote: You can join as spectator with 2 bots and it's much faster. It doesn't really take that much time to go through 100, shouldn't take more than 30seconds per game with this method. That's true, didn't think of that good catch. However then it very well could just be something to do with how the game generates AI spawn locations and wouldn't be conclusive for player spawns, no? Shouldnt the OP have told us about that? anyway if the chance to spawn close positions was that high, after all this time and metalopolis being one of the most popular maps, people would have certainly noticed that by now. | ||
|
jiabung
United States720 Posts
On February 16 2011 06:03 hypercube wrote: You mean, it's more likely you get exactly 72 than 73 or more? Surely, that can't be right  It's right. Probability isn't logical in these extremes. The chances of something like this happening are so astronomically low that it doesn't make sense to us because we never observe it in real life. The chances of you getting 79 instead of 72 is over a million times more unlikely for instance. Also, based on personal experience I find the OP's claims pretty dubious. | ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19299 Posts
On February 16 2011 04:52 Dimagus wrote: The problem could be two things: - The random number generator is not as random as Blizzard thought - The algorthim to generate starting locations is flawed or it could be both. Random generators are based of the current time of your computer. No matter how complex they are made up, there is always an influence on what the outcome random number is. I will say this, random is random no matter how much coincidence you get. The result you have been given don't really prove anything. It was a fun test and interesting that your results came out so heavily in favor. But lets break this down; 2 ways you can be close by air 2 ways you can be close cross ways 2 places you are in a cross position 2 in 6 chances that you have far positions; //it is was more likely that you are not in a cross position through plain logic | ||
|
Annq
Germany104 Posts
On February 16 2011 05:53 Zelniq wrote: Has nobody even questioned whether or not the OP is telling the truth? smells like bs/trolling. can someone check his match history for 100 games on metal recently? he claims he's HUARGH (http://sc2ranks.com/eu/717496/HUARGH) on EU, division Scion Uncle http://sc2ranks.com/div/67191/division-scion-uncle his most recent match history (http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/profile/717496/1/HUARGH/matches) doesn't show any metalopolis games. sure seems he's full of it. also I really doubt someone actually hosted a game, waited 10 seconds for it to start, scouted close positions (sent OL to close-air), or instead left and loaded replay, rinse and repeat 100 times. Matches against AI (singleplayer) arent listed in the match history? Atleast i think so | ||
|
Myia
173 Posts
| ||
|
Deadeight
United Kingdom1629 Posts
So either way 72% cannot be accurate, if it was anywhere near 72% as Zelniq said it would definitely have been noticed by now. That still doesn't it's more likely to spawn in one position, but right now I'm at basically 1/3 for all positions. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
Basically the 2 positions, and different combinations in 1v1 for those positions (red at 6 oclock or blue at 6 o clock and so on). So it's not even just 2 possible combinations, it's 4 out of however many for the others. That is an important piece to put in the test. A good way to do it would be for someone to make a replay parser to test this, and us all submit replays to one person from metalopolis. | ||
|
Deadeight
United Kingdom1629 Posts
| ||
|
rS.Sinatra
Canada785 Posts
| ||
|
Ludwigvan
Germany2371 Posts
| ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
I suppose we'd have to be certain the spawn choice mechanism is the same in yabot though, I have no idea how one would check that. | ||
|
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
Myia, that would apply to your tests too. | ||
|
johlar
Sweden165 Posts
| ||
|
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
| ||
| ||
