I GOT SCREWED BY WIS!!! Topic

colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 1/17/2010
COlonels? PROVE that the game DOESN'T use true randomness. GO on, I'll wait
A guy that doesn't like me very much (gin_caesar) told me that most likely WIS uses some sort of pseudo randomness because virtually nobody uses true randomness because many companies/processes feel that they can operate soundly within the context of pseudo randomness. So pseudo randomness can be good and its most likely that WIS uses it, however if not regularly inspected and debugged, you can have recurring problems like clustering and other bizarre events...this is what one of my arch-enemies told me. BPI Home Run Derby uses TRUE randomness.
1/17/2010 9:43 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By coach_billyg on 1/17/2010um, in case you didn't notice, you called this event completely unjustifiable. the fact that a much more absurd outcome happened approximately 4-5 times out of 6 games for the national champion in 1998 takes it out of the realm of completely unjustifiable in the minds of every rational being playing this game. and you only really need 1 time out of 6 to demonstrate that. which, by definition, can't be that an extreme real life example, now can it? by virtue of the fact that it happened 4-5 times in 6 games!

meanwhile, this is your argument:
I'm arguing a 47 point swing between halves in a sim game with concrete numerical ratings....a team goes from -22 one half to +25 the next half to win by 3....and this is a matchup between the #1 and #2 teams in the nation...really?

i am reminded of this quote from billy madison, after his ridiculous response to one of the questions in the game-show like contest to decide who was better fit to run the company:
Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul
I love that you have the gall in the other threads to try to tell me that you agree with the extreme randomness argument, but you come in here and not only say its justifiable, but you say its justifiable because it can/did happen in more random real life. Your two-facedness is greatly appreciated....at least I'm consistent.
1/17/2010 9:46 PM
a_in_the_b
Posts: 1653 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 18 666 3
Pro
I saw the words, 'most likely' in there, COlonels. . what exactly have you proven?



UIs this the "School of what some guy told me he thinks"?

1/17/2010 9:47 PM
a_in_the_b
Posts: 1653 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 18 666 3
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 1/17/2010
Quote: Originally Posted By coach_billyg on 1/17/2010
um, in case you didn't notice, you called this event completely unjustifiable. the fact that a much more absurd outcome happened approximately 4-5 times out of 6 games for the national champion in 1998 takes it out of the realm of completely unjustifiable in the minds of every rational being playing this game. and you only really need 1 time out of 6 to demonstrate that. which, by definition, can't be that an extreme real life example, now can it? by virtue of the fact that it happened 4-5 times in 6 games!

meanwhile, this is your argument:
I'm arguing a 47 point swing between halves in a sim game with concrete numerical ratings....a team goes from -22 one half to +25 the next half to win by 3....and this is a matchup between the #1 and #2 teams in the nation...really?

i am reminded of this quote from billy madison, after his ridiculous response to one of the questions in the game-show like contest to decide who was better fit to run the company:
Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I love that you have the gall in the other threads to try to tell me that you agree with the extreme randomness argument, but you come in here and not only say its justifiable, but you say its justifiable because it can/did happen in more random real life. Your two-facedness is greatly appreciated....at least I'm consistent
Now you are calling BIllyg 'Twofaced'? I think he has more credibility here than you, especially at this rate, ever will.

1/17/2010 9:48 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 1/17/2010
I saw the words, 'most likely' in there, COlonels. . what exactly have you proven?I'm sorry if 99.99% isn't good enough for you...sorry....

UIs this the "School of what some guy told me he thinks"? If I thought WIS used true randomness, you wouldn't hear a peep out of me...if the guy that started this thread thought that WIS used true randomness you probably wouldn't have heard a peep out of him. If something didn't go wrong here, then why is the "screwee" perpetuating that he got screwed?



1/17/2010 9:51 PM
a_in_the_b
Posts: 1653 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 18 666 3
Pro
SO because one player believes he got screwed, that means automatically that he's right, and because you believe it doesn't use true randomness, thats an incontravertible fact? YOu really are WAY too much, COlonels.

1/17/2010 9:52 PM
coach_billyg
Posts: 2072 (0)
Hall of Famer
92
Pro
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
1/17/2010 9:55 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 1/17/2010
SO because one player believes he got screwed, that means automatically that he's right Again, would he be posting if he thought he lost fair and square? Does everyone believe that he lost fair and square?, and because you believe it doesn't use true randomness, thats an incontravertible fact? If I thought WIS used true randomness, I wouldn't have ever said anything, because if WIS used true randomness, then there's no reason to *****. YOu really are WAY too much, COlonels.



1/17/2010 9:56 PM
sublightd
Posts: 220 (0)
Hall of Famer
315 2
Prospect
The important part of this topic is that I had that team for 14 seasons and made it to one final four and now its won 3 NT's in like 5 seasons. Its like teaching my gf how to be a freak in the sack so she can dump me and go out with some other guy.
1/17/2010 9:57 PM
jfinn19
Posts: 4 (0)
Hall of Famer
44 1 4
Prospect
Colonels did you actually read the boxscore? If you did you would notice that I (Hardin-Simmons) switched from normal to uptempo in the second half. So It wasn't like all the game settings remained the same and my team just randomly started to perform better. The uptempo setting in the second half favored my team because of my advantage in athleticism-since colonels likes OTR I will point out that my team's athleticism was 12 overall points higher than chewchad's-this lead to my team being able to force turnovers, score more in transition, and get more chances on the offensive boards. You will also notice that it was a 6 point game when Wilson was injured. Chewchad's team made a strong run while Wilson was playing hurt in the first half, and since Wilson played limited minutes in the second half chewchad's team was not able to exploit Wilson's injury and create easy opportunities that they created in the second half. So if you are not as ignorant as I think you are, you will be able to see that it is not complete randomness. There are coaching factors that actually impact the game.
1/17/2010 9:58 PM
arssanguinus
Posts: 1120 (0)
Hall of Famer
282 1
Pro
(ANd yes, Hi, its me, A_in_the_b, so COlonels can't try the distraction angle again)
1/17/2010 9:58 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
1/17/2010 9:59 PM
jfinn19
Posts: 4 (0)
Hall of Famer
44 1 4
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by sublightd on 1/17/2010The important part of this topic is that I had that team for 14 seasons and made it to one final four and now its won 3 NT's in like 5 seasons. Its like teaching my gf how to be a freak in the sack so she can dump me and go out with some other guy.
Haha sublightd that made my day. And don't forget we lost in the finals last year.
1/17/2010 9:59 PM
arssanguinus
Posts: 1120 (0)
Hall of Famer
282 1
Pro
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
1/17/2010 10:02 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By arssanguinus on 1/17/2010
Yes. Random.org is a good site, and I in fact do use it. In fact, its randomized list function is permanently in my toolbar as a link. HOwever. .it doesn't prove all that much about your point. .
Billyg asked me how exactly I used TRUE randomness and how I knew I was doing so, that's what I was responding to. The fact that a computer programmer told me that virtually no companies out there use true randomness helps to support my inkling that WIS doesn't use true randomness.
1/17/2010 10:04 PM
◂ Prev 1|2|3|4|5|6...22 Next ▸
I GOT SCREWED BY WIS!!! Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.