@barnee I am not able to recreate the bug anymore, I suppose it’s only the first time I loaded, the result above was done by your method, with the renamed folder instead of the zip file.
Feature requests for TripleA
-
LOL Nice concept Vance.
But that would bog the system down no? Basically battle calculating ALL combat moves before they are rolled?
I suppose if it did 100 iterations, instead of 2000, it would move faster.
We need to creatively find a SIMPLE solution to have some kind of dice/luck monitor… SOMETHING. Because dice whines are too common!
-
…
So, please list any feature requests here.(there are feature requests for the ENGINE. if you want to mod a map, that is something different, and you can probably do it right now without changing the engine at all.)
If you guys have any cool, and hopefully simple, ideas on how to improve the triplea experience, then I am all ears.
I don’t know whether this is engine- or map-related (or maybe both):
I would like some options allowing to use the rule-improvements of G40/1941/1942-2ndEd. in other (older) AA-games:
Basically
- Tanks cost 6
- the “new” AA-Guns
- the new submarine rule (Transports are not allowed to unload in SZ containing an enemy sub, unless escorted by a warship)
in AA50 and Spring1942.
-
@P@nther:
…
So, please list any feature requests here.(there are feature requests for the ENGINE. if you want to mod a map, that is something different, and you can probably do it right now without changing the engine at all.)
If you guys have any cool, and hopefully simple, ideas on how to improve the triplea experience, then I am all ears.
I don’t know whether this is engine- or map-related (or maybe both):
I would like some options allowing to use the rule-improvements of G40/1941/1942-2ndEd. in other (older) AA-games:
Basically
- Tanks cost 6
- the “new” AA-Guns
- the new submarine rule (Transports are not allowed to unload in SZ containing an enemy sub, unless escorted by a warship)
in AA50 and Spring1942.
ya, those are map related
you could easily do them yourself with the xml file and notepad++ or any other text or xml editor
-
We need to creatively find a SIMPLE solution to have some kind of dice/luck monitor… SOMETHING. Because dice whines are too common!
Hmmm OK so what if you could make it do all the calculations at one time using the History? Usually you would only do it once at the end of a game. TripleA would chug away for an hour or so and then post the total number of attacks made by the axis side and the allies side throughout the game up to that point in the game history, the total number of anomalous outcomes had by each side, and percentages. I would bet that both sides have anomalous outcomes in about 5-10% of their battles in any game. Boo hoo.
-
@P@nther:
…
So, please list any feature requests here.(there are feature requests for the ENGINE. if you want to mod a map, that is something different, and you can probably do it right now without changing the engine at all.)
If you guys have any cool, and hopefully simple, ideas on how to improve the triplea experience, then I am all ears.
I don’t know whether this is engine- or map-related (or maybe both):
I would like some options allowing to use the rule-improvements of G40/1941/1942-2ndEd. in other (older) AA-games:
Basically
- Tanks cost 6
- the “new” AA-Guns
- the new submarine rule (Transports are not allowed to unload in SZ containing an enemy sub, unless escorted by a warship)
in AA50 and Spring1942.
ya, those are map related
you could easily do them yourself with the xml file and notepad++ or any other text or xml editor
Ah ok. Good to know, thanks.
-
i may be able to record dice in some way,
however, i doubt we would be able to run battle calcs after battles, and I don’t think I’d want it to anyway…
the possible solutions are:
1. We simply record all “combat” related dice, per player. Maybe we have a “current round” and “total”, and once the round is over, the current round gets reset. It would simply be a list of things like, you got six 1s, three 2s, etc.
2. Or, depending on the complexity involved, maybe we can record what the dice was rolled at as well. So, for example, you have rolled 20 @ 1 so far, and gotten a total of 3 hits.
3. Or, maybe we do both. But of course, the more info recorded, the bigger savegames, the more memory used, the more exponentially increasing in size of both each round, etc.
I’ll let you guys debate what you want to see, but keep it simple.
-
i may be able to record dice in some way,
however, i doubt we would be able to run battle calcs after battles, and I don’t think I’d want it to anyway…
the possible solutions are:
1. We simply record all “combat” related dice, per player. Maybe we have a “current round” and “total”, and once the round is over, the current round gets reset. It would simply be a list of things like, you got six 1s, three 2s, etc.
2. Or, depending on the complexity involved, maybe we can record what the dice was rolled at as well. So, for example, you have rolled 20 @ 1 so far, and gotten a total of 3 hits.
3. Or, maybe we do both. But of course, the more info recorded, the bigger savegames, the more memory used, the more exponentially increasing in size of both each round, etc.
I’ll let you guys debate what you want to see, but keep it simple.
#2 is preferable to #1, but having access to both sets of data would be sweet (memory permitting, of course).
-
I would love to see #2.
-
yes option #2 would be good.
-
Right, I’ve looked into the engine, and found out what is possible, and what isn’t possible.
I can not have the engine record what you rolled at.
This is because in the engine, what we are rolling at is separate from the actual rolls.
This is why you get a dice server message saying you rolled for 2 infantry and 2 tanks (ie: 4 dice results).
The engine then later matches them up with the sorted list of units.It would probably require 20+ hours of work to undo all that, and even then I’m not sure I wouldn’t introduce any bugs or anything.
However, what we can do is the following:
1. Record total dice for everything.
2. And also record per player dice JUST for combat.
And do statistics like average, variance, standard deviation, total, etc, for each set of data. -
If that simply means a tally of the number of ones, twos, threes, fours, fives, and sixes, I doubt that will reflect discrepancies in luck.
If my infantry are rolling 4s and my bombers are rolling 2s, it’s way different than if my bombers are rolling 4s and my infantry are rolling 2s.
-
Damn…
*Knowing overall how many times your -should have hit-, versus, -how many times you actually hit- was the key point I was looking for…
But per V’s comments it doesn’t sound like that’s possible.
What V is suggessting is helpful though… in the sense that you’ll be able to see how often you’re rolling high dice as oppossed to low dice, and how often? 13.7% being perfect average. If you’ve got more than 60% of your dice rolls in the 4, 5, 6, range… that’s going to HURT.
-
Here is a mockup preview of what the dice stats could look like:
I will also see if I can get an option to show the dice stats during the forum post, or as part of the forum post.
Remember that the “AVERAGE” dice roll should be 3.5
Generally, the fewer the number of rolls, the higher the variance and standard deviations.
For those who don’t know math or what “standard deviation” means, here is a short explanation:
68.3% of all results will fall within 1 standard deviation of the mean
95.4% of all results will fall within 2 standard deviations of the mean
99.7% of all results will fall within 3 standard deviations of the meanso you can really only claim you are getting diced (overall) when you are 2.5 or more standard deviations from the mean, on a large sample of dice rolls
you can see in this example that the French are not rolling well, while the japanese and italians are doing just a little better than average
(the chinese and americans, have not rolled enough dice to really be able to know yet)
-
Veq I REALLY like that report.
You’ve managed to pull of -basically- what I was hoping for.
LOL 13 5’s for france vs 2 2’s says alot.
An -Ambigious- look at the dice is helpful, because then you can’t claim -oh this battle, that battle, etc- you get an overall look at ALL of your dice. Period. Either they are average, really hot, or total garbage, and you can see.
EXCELLENT WORK.
-
V, can you include your NOTES on that spread sheet?
So people understand the deviations, and how to read it properly. :P
Basically the addage that in Axis and allies, if you’re roll average is less than 3.5, they are with you, if they are greater than 3.5 they are against you.
-
OK its starting to get pretty nerdy in here……
Once you know the means and standard deviation of all dice rolled by both sides, you could use a t test to definitively test whether the difference in dice rolls between the two sides is statistically significant. The t test is empirically robust with violations of its assumptions, but in this case the sampling distribution will be approximately normal with a mean about 3.5 so the test is very appropriate to this situation. It will tell you the likelihood of the difference between all dice rolled by the axis side versus the allies side. If t is equal to or greater than 1.645 then the someone got diced, which will happen about 1 in 10 games.
See formulas in the “Unequal sample sizes, equal variance” section of “Independent two-sample t-test” about halfway down this wikipedia post:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student’s_t-test -
Ok, so for all the stoopid folks. How can we get somekind of simple reading, which uses the math, and seperates the dice 50/50, 60/40, 70/30 etc.
IE, based off the average rolling, and the standard deviation etc, OVERALL, the dice are rolling lower for -this- side, than -that side.
A simple Dice Gauge, that rolls from Even, to troublesome, to massacre based on the T calculations, and the reality that in axis and allies lower dice are better.
-
A simple way to do it would be for TripleA to calculate the t statistic using the formulas on that wikipedia post or any stats textbook and if it comes out to 1.645 or greater, then a little notice could come up saying something like “the allies have had significantly lower dice rolls than the axis so far in this game”. If its not 1.645 then the two are not significantly different from one another and there is justification for dice whining.
-
I think for the non-mathematically able, they could just read the “average” dice number.
I’ll take a quick look at the t thingy, but I make no promises if it looks even remotely hard to code. After all, variance and standard deviation already tell you everything you need to know.
Lastly, I will do no comparisons between different nations or sides, purely because the sides are dynamic.Here is an example of a Dice Report for the Forum poster:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=28114.msg999794#msg999794 -
I think for the non-mathematically able, they could just read the “average” dice number.
Agreed.
We could probably even do without the deviations… is it too much info?
Suggested Topics
