|
The real problem here is that the randomness is not symmetric. The fire rate of a BC is 0.225 + some random number between -0.0625 and 0.1875. As previously stated, that makes the average attack rate 0.2250 + (0.1875-0.0625)/2 = 0.2875 Blizzard should report it as 0.2875 +/- 0.1250. That would be far less confusing.
|
Are you accounting for the difference between real time and Blizzard time, were their any conversions messed up in those methods, because that would throw it off by a similar amount?
|
On July 18 2012 05:42 RedDragon571 wrote: Are you accounting for the difference between real time and Blizzard time, were their any conversions messed up in those methods, because that would throw it off by a similar amount?
He's using in-game clock so the time point is irrelevant.
|
On July 18 2012 05:44 -FoX wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 05:42 RedDragon571 wrote: Are you accounting for the difference between real time and Blizzard time, were their any conversions messed up in those methods, because that would throw it off by a similar amount? He's using in-game clock so the time point is irrelevant.
I see, guess I missed it.
|
Russian Federation483 Posts
Random attack delay is in BW too lol. Not a bug, just a feature.
|
wouldn't this be something for the battlenet forums instead? the only way this will produce results if it is bugged is if blizzard sees it which is far from a guarantee on TL unless this gets to be 100+ pages or headline worthy
|
Sadly, I wrote my post and did my tests at 5 am this morning and wasn't thinking and thus apologize. No more posting before first shift. The original post is correct.
|
Yeah it's kind of like... so what? If Blizzard wanted BCs and reapers to be more powerful then they would be more powerful, regardless of whether or not the tooltip DPSes are correct.
|
On July 18 2012 01:55 Varanice wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 01:52 ragz_gt wrote:On July 18 2012 01:49 Varanice wrote:On July 17 2012 18:55 darkness wrote:On July 17 2012 18:36 eScaper-tsunami wrote: Random delay actually explains a lot of things that's been happening to me... I go into probe vs probe battles getting a slightly faster attack off at the beginning but end up losing the fight..... thank you random delay, now I know to NEVER fight probe vs probe despite knowing the opponent's probe had the slightly slower first attack... I fail to understand why we need any random factor in a strategic game. data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/77e98/77e98be67f263e78995d632fb850d627ce97d99f" alt="" Also one more thing, 'Random' is sometimes f*cked up. You may spawn as a race more than 3 times in a row. That's flawed imho although there's really small chance something like this happens. Like... 1/12 to be one race 4 times in a row? Actually, that's incorrect. The chance for spawn any race 4 times in a row is 1/27. + Show Spoiler +The first roll doesn't matter, it just determines what race you are rolling for, and then the remaining is 1/3x1/3x1/3 If you want a specific race four times in a row that would be 1/81. And yeah, I've personally rolled Protoss five times in a row in team games before as Random. Edit: Fail Spoiler. Their RNG is definitely not the best. I've rolled Terran 11 times in a row in team games, and same race 5-6 in a row is not uncommon. This is actually pretty common as depending on the seed chosen, RNG can have distinct patterns. There's no proof behind this, and I definately don't have a large enough sample size, but my personal experience is that it tends to pick the race that I've played the least, as of recent. The distribution from SC2s RNG is very even. Getting Terran 11 times in a row will happen.
It's actually pretty interesting: whenever a pseudo-random number generator is involved, conspiracies about a bias based on an incredibly minute sample size will arise. Even when we understand that 11 is a small sample when we consider how many random numbers the game generates, we still like to create a reason behind the madness.
|
On July 18 2012 01:04 HardlyNever wrote: The random delay between attacks has been known about since early beta. There was a pretty famous thread where a guy's zealot swung first in a zealot vs zealot fight and ended up losing, thus discovering this random delay (this is before the map editor was released to the public).
For the vast majority of the units in the game, this random delay is much too small to matter. I know everyone wants SC to always be 100% consistent (fyi, BW had much more randomness on high ground damage calculations), but these random delays should never be enough to be a real deciding factor in a game, and they aren't. They are there primarily for cosmetic purposes.
Why they decided to give the reaper and BC a much bigger random window than the other units is beyond me, and it should probably be reduced.
Actually this makes a real big difference in mirror match up spawns in the early game on the custom game Desert Strike in expert mode. Also with Firebat vs Dark Zealot/Zealot mix spawns in spawn 1 and 2
|
So... Sc2 isn't true skill-based game. I'm disappoint. :\
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On July 21 2012 05:41 YoYoha wrote: So... Sc2 isn't true skill-based game. I'm disappoint. :\ Yup, I've lost countless of games because of the random attack delay. If it wasn't for that i would definitively be masters instead of gold.
|
So wait. This means terran really is underpowered.
|
Would be nice if you put a final word or tl;dr for people who don't want to waste 10 minutes of their lives parsing through meaningless numbers and percentages. But nice work, it's a good find.
|
So wait. This means terran really is underpowered. I think it means, that sometimes Terran is stronger and sometimes weaker.
|
This is not a bug, but a feature, that is clearly displayed in the map editor, so pretty much everyone that has played around with it, knowns about it. BW also had random attack delay.
All attacks except the PDD's anti-missile attack have a random delay. This is a property inherited by all weapons and if some weapon has different values that means it was changed specifically, so it's unlikely that different values are put there by mistake.
Most units have it at -0.0625 to 0.1250 or from -1 to +2 frames, which is the same as in BW, so on average the attack times for most units are 0.0625 longer. This is introduced to make units look less like robots that fire in perfect unison and to spread out the attack calculations that have to be done by the processor.
The BC has -0.0625 to 0.1875, likely to make the attacks look more like multiple independent batteries firing, instead of a constant stream.
Reaper mines have a random delay of 0.1 to 0.5 seconds.
All units have slightly lower DPS than the cooldown by itself would imply and all weapon tooltips display just the cooldown.
|
On July 17 2012 20:48 ciox wrote: Really stupid parameters that don't follow the rules are nothing new in this game, just look at the random armor-less units like Baneling, Ghost, Queen. Random attack delay is also pretty terribad for Hellion micro, I really wonder if BW had this much delay/delay variance. helions do not have random attack delay as you mean them to have.
they turn ttheir turrets around before firing. thats why they have much smaller delay before they fire while pursiing then kiting.
|
United States12224 Posts
On July 18 2012 05:52 chuDr3t4 wrote: Random attack delay is in BW too lol. Not a bug, just a feature.
Yeah it's actually funny how many people like to point to BW as the pinnacle of competitive games because of its lack of randomness, but BW had MANY random elements from high-ground miss chance to random firing delays. If anything, SC2 is LESS random than BW which is sort of an ironic conclusion for many people.
Ever wonder why it was so difficult in BW to kill off both your remaining SCVs when you were an observer? Cooldown variance... aka random attack delay.
|
Well...this combined with the weak attack of battlecruisers (high fire rate low damage) explains why they simly DONT kill things fast enough.
Thankfully they are still flying beasts that just don't die when supported/upgraded...
They should fix the tool tip or alter teh "true" DPS of the battlecruiser. Cruisers are really difficult to get out in sufficient numbers to matter, let alone have upgraded. No reason to allow them to be further gimped by in game mechanics when other, simpler units such as tha marauder are uneffected.
|
United States7483 Posts
On July 17 2012 18:55 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 18:36 eScaper-tsunami wrote: Random delay actually explains a lot of things that's been happening to me... I go into probe vs probe battles getting a slightly faster attack off at the beginning but end up losing the fight..... thank you random delay, now I know to NEVER fight probe vs probe despite knowing the opponent's probe had the slightly slower first attack... I fail to understand why we need any random factor in a strategic game. data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/77e98/77e98be67f263e78995d632fb850d627ce97d99f" alt="" Also one more thing, 'Random' is sometimes f*cked up. You may spawn as a race more than 3 times in a row. That's flawed imho although there's really small chance something like this happens. Like... 1/12 to be one race 4 times in a row?
I've got news for you: spawning as one race 4 times in a row is just as likely as any other pattern of spawning (like zerg then protoss then terran then zerg). And no, the odds of spawning as one race 4 times in a row (or any particular racial spawning pattern is one in 3^4, or 1 in 81. (Actually it's 3/81, given that it doesn't matter which race you spawn as, but the odds of spawning as any given race 4 times in a row is 1/81).
|
|
|
|