|
|
Post by fallen on Mar 19, 2018 20:54:11 GMT -5
I posted above the conflicting contents of the two wikis. One is >= 6 (50%) and the other is > 6 (40%) for strong dice. Similar difference exists for Standard dice. Awesome, synchronized the wikis with cut and paste. |
|
|
|
Post by Cory Trese on Mar 19, 2018 20:54:33 GMT -5
Looks like the BF wiki has a typo and the STF wiki is correct.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cory Trese on Mar 19, 2018 21:04:40 GMT -5
Ok so we have resolved #1 from the list and start looking at 2-4 next  Thanks for playing Templar Battleforce! |
|
|
|
Post by truealcove on Mar 19, 2018 22:12:48 GMT -5
Ok so we have resolved #1 from the list and start looking at 2-4 next Thanks for playing Templar Battleforce! Thanks for giving us the chance to play it You might want to change the in-game library in the next patch though, it has the BF wiki version  which was why I thought the 50%/30% way. |
|
|
|
Post by Cory Trese on Mar 19, 2018 22:53:10 GMT -5
Great catch. I will include a fix for the library text in Wednesday's update.
|
|
|
|
Post by truealcove on Mar 27, 2018 4:12:05 GMT -5
2. Shield and Warrior parry bonus seems not working as indicated; Warrior looks like giving standard dices, and shield parry seems close to not existing. So I tested three groups of data from the gamelog. (A) Captain with Blade (3s), Orion Shield (8s), 16 Warrior(16s) and 3 Evasion (3) = 27s+3. Tested 56 times. The average number of success rolls is 5.11. (B) Captain with Blade (3s), some sidearm (0), 4 Warrior(4s) and 15 Evasion (15) = 7s+15. Tested 54 times. The average number of success rolls is 6.24 (C) Paladin with Heavy Warblade (4s), Orion Shield (8s), 14 Warrior(14s) and 3 Evasion (3) = 26s+3. Tested 53 times. The average number of success rolls is 6.58. I actually can't have a theory of how the result of (C) and (B) are higher than that of (A). But the general idea is that Shield evidently doesn't work, and Warrior is not better than Evasion for melee defense. For reference, the standard deviation for throwing 30 coins/dices 50 times and compute the # of success is no more than 0.5*sqrt(30/50)~0.39. Just say report I did another test on my Windows 8.1 PC (with AMD A6-5200 APU, 64-bit OS). The results seems to suggest again some bug exists along the line. Let me carefully outline the result (you might want to jump to the last line): (i) Background: Have brand new lvl 5 Captain and Paladin holding Thunder Shield (6s parry). Captain listed Melee Defense = Sword(3s)+Shield(6s)+Warrior(8s)+Evasion(3)=17s+3. Paladin listed Melee Defense = Sword(3s)+Shield(6s)+Warrior(7s)+Armor(2)+Evasion(3)=16s+5. (ii) Method: Let the Paladin and Captain get hit by Scittering, Hunter and Brood Mother. Collect the first 50 data of the parry rolls (those X in "Defend [17s+3]=X") from Paladin and Captain, then stop. The method is decided before data collection to avoid bias. (iii) Theoretical outcome: Paladin has in average 16*0.4+5*0.2=7.4 successes and Captain also has in average 17*0.4+3*0.2=7.4 successes. (iv) Result: 32 data from Paladin with a total number of success = 122; average = 122/32~3.81. 18 data from Captain with a total number of success = 50; average = 50/18=2.78. Average in total = 172/50=3.44. (v) Analysis: One Paladin data has 16*0.24+5*0.16=4.64 variance, or ~2.16 standard deviation. Captain has slightly less. Average by 50 sample gives a std deviation of 2.16/sqrt(50)~0.306. With a 99.9999% chance, the result should be within 4.892*std deviation, or 1.5 success rolls in average. Either 999,999 out of 1,000,000 times a test of 50 samples should give an average that doesn't deviate from the expected value by 1.5. Anyhow, I just want to say that I did some math to check that when somebody does a test with similar 50 samples, with 99.9999% chance the average should be off by no more than 1.5 rolls. My laptop gives me a result that's off from the theoretical average by 3.9. The conclusion is that my laptop doesn't like the game rule  , or feel like winning the lottery. |
|
|
|
Post by Cory Trese on Mar 27, 2018 8:38:54 GMT -5
Ok, sorry! You win! We will try to improve!
Probably just a minor bug in the log text formats.
Next update we will see if we can fix it.
|
|
|
|
Post by fallen on Mar 27, 2018 10:22:59 GMT -5
Wow, I am really sorry that you are gathering metrics this way. That must be really painful and time consuming. Our test suites do it in an automated fashion and do it for very large numbers.
Sorry that you feel like there is a bug and we'll keep trying to improve! I hope you can play the game and enjoy it.
|
|
|
|
Post by truealcove on Mar 27, 2018 11:27:21 GMT -5
I always enjoy the fantastic game! And I also see that it's not the highest (or even high) priority. Just to say that the bug is indeed there, at least on some platforms  Not that it's the most important one. Just 30 mintues testing and another 1 hour carefully analyzing and writing to share with the community. Meanwhile I get to think about the game mechanic for this fun game, not too bad really  |
|
|
|
Post by Cory Trese on Mar 27, 2018 11:53:17 GMT -5
Thanks! We ran our tests again and the results look good here.
We will keep our eyes open for any bugs and fix them as soon as they are identified.
|
|
|
|
Post by fallen on Apr 9, 2018 18:25:57 GMT -5
Fixed a series of small bugs related to carrying two axes and carrying a shield.
Also, made some rule changes to shields, adding their Parry to ranged defense as standard dice.
Thanks all!
|
|
which was why I thought the 50%/30% way.
, or feel like winning the lottery.
Not that it's the most important one.