Quote: Originally posted by emy1013 on 1/17/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By coach_billyg on 1/17/2010well, colonels is right about 1 thing. WIS almost certainly does NOT use true randomness. sadly, colonels also really has very little grasp of what this means.

colonels, to broaden your mind on the randomness thing, consider these quotes from the website you rely on:
"A good deal of research has gone into pseudo-random number theory, and modern algorithms for generating pseudo-random numbers are so good that the numbers look exactly like they were really random."

"These characteristics make TRNGs suitable for roughly the set of applications that PRNGs are unsuitable for, such as data encryption, games and gambling. Conversely, the poor efficiency and nondeterministic nature of TRNGs make them less suitable for simulation and modeling applications, which often require more data than it's feasible to generate with a TRNG. The following table contains a summary of which applications are best served by which type of generator: ... application: simulation and modeling, most suitable generator, PRNG"

The site you point out to explain your take on randomness explicitly states simulations, for example, this basketball simulation, are best served with pseudo random number generators. The vast majority of computer games do not use true randomness, nor should they.

It is also worth noting that no mathematician or scientist has even proven any true random number generator is any better than a pseudo random number generator in either of these 2 ways: 1) pulling number with uniform probability from the set of possibilities, which is the desired function of a RNG, or 2) producing a non-deterministic result when the point in the sequence of numbers is known Ouch, interesting find CBG!

Quote: Originally posted by jskenner on 1/17/2010billyg and Z,colonels is actually arguing the point I've made several times in the past.  Specifically, since HD does NOT include any of the following (momentum of any kind, player biorhythms, team chemistry, clutch ability, etc.), such scoring swings would NOT be as significant in HD as in RL.  In essence, HD has ONLY the ratings, settings, and RNG.  Real life has (in essence) all those PLUS the other (intangible) factors above.  So (as I've done several times in the past), I ask "HOW DOES WIS PRODUCE SUCH SCORING/OUTCOME VARIANCE WITHOUT AN 'EXTRA' RANDOM FACTOR?"  With homecourt advantage, this could explain it (IF it VARIES on a somewhat random basis).  However, this was a tourney game, so I can't think of what HD included to allow such a swing.

Quote: Originally posted by colonels19 on 1/18/2010Fair enough and thank you.  I'm sure it doesn't mean much but you really earned my respect tonight, thus I apologize for being a dick to you when there was really no reason to do so.  Take care and have a good evening.

Quote: Originally Posted By coach_billyg on 1/18/2010colonels, i have refrained in bringing up this point until we were on the same page about the fundamentals of true randomness vs pseudo randomness.

the reason it is extremely difficult for a game like this to use true randomness is, the availability of a truly random stream of numbers. the available streams at reasonable costs all have limitations. for example, the website you use, random.org, only allows sequences for free (in the place i looked) of length 10,000 or less, and it takes a little while to get such a sequence. the HD simulator, simulating 10,000 games in a night, could use maybe 10,000 times that many random number generators in a span of 5 minutes. where do you obtain such a quantity of truly random numbers? I understand the fact that practically nobody uses true random, I'm just saying in my ideal, official mind, its by far the best out there and its the only thing I would use to run my piddly games from/with. WIS probably does have a pretty good pseudo-random generator, however their CS stance seems to be, especially in reference to the HD sim, if something bizarre happens, tell them about Chaminade v. Virginia or Villanova v. Georgetown to show them how bizarre things happen in real life too, but if you have an EXCUSE for every time that something bizarre happens and you don't even think/consider "hey our engine/randomness might be messed up", that's where I have a problem. I'm frankly tired of the "its not a problem" responses and I've gotten many over the years...its awful arrogant if you ask me.

because truly random numbers rely on physical inputs from the physical world, it is not cheap to obtain truly random numbers in the quantity required for large scale simulation, like in the line of WIS products. so, i ask - how would you propose HD, and more accurately, all of WIS sims, overcome this problem? Keep what you've got, but investigate/debug/etc. your engine/randomness. They always think they can do no wrong.

i think you will see that it is really not very feasible. which is why i say i am 99.9% sure HD does not use true randomness, without ever having talked to them about the subject. what really needs to be done is make sure the pseudo random number generator is high quality, and does not exhibit obvious pattern or clustering problems like the PHP RNG under windows in the example from the web page you linked. and, i assume this was done (the quality of the random stream verified), because it is pretty obviously extremely important and a company with the computer science resources to make a successful line of simulation products like this is almost certainly aware of the issues surrounding pseudo random streams of numbers. admin had spent a decent amount of time trying to convince us that the randomness in HD was reasonable Of course he did, what's he going to say, the randomness is bad/messed up? I've had enough experiences with WIS that make me not trust them, thus the TRUTH v. "DAMAGE CONTROL" argument pops into my head here. WIS' customer service has a brashness/arrogance/cockiness that I've seen nowhere else., which makes me very confident it was thought about quite a bit, enough to bring to light the limitations of poor pseudo random number generators.

i am one of not that many people who has made a case for "additional random factors" like jskenner mentioned earlier in the thread. honestly, i am not sure what my opinion is, i just can see it going either way. but, i do acknowledge my case amounts to conspiracy theory, and is mostly based on my feeling that there are too many ridiculous outcomes, that the randomization does not follow the normal bell curve i would expect. So we do agree, though I would argue your assessment is a bit more scientific. and i acknowledge my feeling is not worth a whole lot, even though i have put more time into analyzing game results than the vast majority of coaches, because it is very subjective and i believe there is a human tendency to remember the outliers more than the regulars Sure, which i feel results in a misrepresentation of reality when we look to our memory for a gauge of the frequency of outliers. i would hope you could accept the same was true about your own personal feeling on the frequency of outliers. I've seen weird stuff happen too many times to simply give bizarre events a free pass here, just because they only happen every once in a while. The fact that I've seen extreme randomness in the NBA sim, the NFL sim, HD, and CRD only further cement my stance. Its not only the problem(s) that bug me, its WIS' responses...they're never wrong...I can't tell you how many times I've seen them blame or pass the buck to the customer.....what company does this?

anyway, when i compare the conspiracy theory-like case for the existence of additional random factors, to the case for a faulty random number generator, i really don't think its close - i think the chances of a faulty random number generator are much, much lower. whether you agree or not, can you at least acknowledge that additional random factors (for example, a random factor at the beginning of the game, maybe regenerated at the half, to be applied to the chance a team makes a shot) could very easily and completely explain the kinds of results you attribute to a faulty RNG? and that because it is pretty reasonable to expect a product line like WIS's sports simulations to have a verified high quality random number generator, that is is quite possible their RNG is not the problem at all, but rather, bugs in the HD code and/or additional random factors? It doesn't really matter whether the problem is the randomness itself, or its implementation...something is wrong with the randomness and has been for years and all WIS has ever said is that "no there isn't/you're wrong". Like I said, WIS not taking ownership of their shortcomings is just as annoying as the bizarre game outcomes.

Quote: Originally Posted By coach_billyg on 1/18/2010

Quote: Originally posted by colonels19 on 1/18/2010Fair enough and thank you. I'm sure it doesn't mean much but you really earned my respect tonight, thus I apologize for being a dick to you when there was really no reason to do so. Take care and have a good evening.

i do appreciate the apology. and, you are welcome. but, the thing that will determine if it means anything or not is if you continue with the negative tone in the forums. I can't guarantee that...like I said from the get, my posts normally have a negative slant to them and I'm not going to sugarcoat things on a message board that I don't like or have a perceived problem with. I've always posted with a lot of sarcasm, hell I talk rather sarcastically at times (if you met me in person though, you'd probably never guess I was the infamous colonels19) so I know I've gotten out of hand here and I'll own that all day, but part of it is too is that people just need to get used to me and to my style. Whenever I post something negative in a thread, its the same guys coming out of the woodwork to tell me I'm wrong, WIS' right, I don't know what I'm talking about, etc. Really, if people could just leave well enough alone sometimes, then we wouldn't have as many problems. Yes I'm stubborn to a fault and am very engrained in my ideas, but a lot of that is because I've thought/done a lot of the things I speak of...rarely am I just spouting off the cuff about something I know nothing about, and if that's the case and its proven, I always apologize. Some people aren't going to like me all the time/at all and they just need to get used to that. I'll try to tone it down on my end, but I will not just sit idly when people are trying to defeat me...which is normally what ends up happening here. Threads I'm in go from discussing the topic, to trying to shut me up. i know you are not the only one doing it, and there are definitely some others who are too quick to get cynical with those they disagree with. i am not trying to imply the opposite in any way.

but actions speak louder than words. and the tone you have taken many times in the past couple weeks is bad for the forums, and bad for the community - newbies and vets alike. so, if you are sincere in your apology, do me the favor of treating others with courtesy and respect, by default. i promise it will be a more enjoyable and more enriching experience for you, if you choose to do so, as well :) This is almost insulting to me, really....you telling me that I should/how to be nice? Just because you've earned my respect doesn't mean that others have and I will continue to deal with people here the way that I see fit. Every time I think I'm on the brink of a breakthrough with some of the guys here and that we're past the BS, they decide to start slinging it again, and I'm not going to be the one that stops it. Just because you disagree with me doesn't mean that you can't be cordial.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 1/18/2010
The fact is that no one on this forum gets consistently attacked without cause. Doesn't happen.

Unfortunately, the situation w. you has progressed to the point where finger pointing does us no good, and the reality is that you've been a jerk to so many people, that in order to turn this around and start helping things instead of hurting, the biggest change is going to have to come from you.

I'm not totally exonerating myself or anyone else, but personally, I know that I'm totally willing and capable of being civil and decent, and leaving the past in the past.

I know you've made it clear that you are out for yourself rather than HD This was in reference almost specifically to my rankings and "giving" WIS my formulas/methods (not that they would use them). I'm all for the majority of HDers getting what they want here, because if I got the game the way I exactly wanted, but had nobody to play against, what's the fun in that? I don't normally try to change things currently in place, I usually just go off and make something new. Don't think I'll be creating a CBB game, but its given me something to think about., but I really hope you'll consider this plea and try to keep things friendly, for the good of HD and the forums. I pledge to do the same. Fair enough, take care.