MobileGamer Rey's Hero's Event w/CrazyExcuses

Kozispoon
3245 posts EA Staff (retired)
MobileGamer

Thank you for your patience 8D Forum Guidelines

Replies

  • TVF
    15937 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    Can someone explain why I should watch this? I thought more information on Rey's event would be provided since Kozi posted it, but it took about 10 seconds to realize that's not the case.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • I took it as a hint...
  • TVF
    15937 posts Member
    Yeah, you're probably right.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • It’s worth watching for the explanation of why doing 3-sims at a time is just silly.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • NicWester wrote: »
    It’s worth watching for the explanation of why doing 3-sims at a time is just silly.

    While I 100% agree that the 3-sim myth is rubbish, she really offered no explanation other than "I don't even know how that is possible." Not a convincing argument.
  • TVF
    15937 posts Member
    Any theory about sims is automatically silly.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Liath
    4559 posts Member
    NicWester wrote: »
    It’s worth watching for the explanation of why doing 3-sims at a time is just silly.

    While I 100% agree that the 3-sim myth is rubbish, she really offered no explanation other than "I don't even know how that is possible." Not a convincing argument.

    Yep. The video was not very compelling on that point (or any point). I guess I can buy it being Kozi's stealth hint that all the speculation about Rey's journey is correct. Seems like the type of thing she would do.
  • Neo2551
    1824 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    Although I respect her theory and I even support it, having a coding hack for simming is not that hard: the server receives a request for a number of trials, nothing prevent the servers to have different distribution of rewards for number received.

    In a more technical terms, nothing prevents devs to create conditional distribution given the number of sims and make sure that the join distribution still has an overall drop rate of 1/3 by punishing even numbers of sims.

    I agree it would totally silly and unprofessional to do it, but this is not impossible, differential pricing exists after all.

    And if you really want a code snippet (in R as I assume she uses it):
    # Let's say you get a shard if the sample gives a 1 
    # assume p < 0.5
    compute_shard_rewards <- function(sim, p) {
      
      m <- sim*p + min(1, 0.1/abs(sim - 1/p+1e-8))
      s <- sim*p*(1-p)
      return(max(0, min(sim, floor(rnorm(sim, m, s))))
    }
    

    I did not tune it to have expected value of one third, but I guess you can do with a bit more of time :-)

    I still say this is complete non sense and my guess devs just draw from multiple random independent coin flip.

    [Edit] reworked algorithm to take out the hard coded equality.
    Post edited by Neo2551 on
  • I hope the mobile gaming guy is okay he didn't look well. And yes I think we will be needing that line up I will catch it next time
  • Neo2551 wrote: »
    Although I respect her theory and I even support it, having a coding hack for simming is not that hard: the server receives a request for a number of trials, nothing prevent the servers to have different distribution of rewards for number received.

    In a more technical terms, nothing prevents devs to create conditional distribution given the number of sims and make sure that the join distribution still has an overall drop rate of 1/3 by punishing even numbers of sims.

    I agree it would totally silly and unprofessional to do it, but this is not impossible, differential pricing exists after all.

    And if you really want a code snippet (in R as I assume she uses it):
    # Let's say you get a shard if the sample gives a 1 
    compute_shard_rewards <- function(sim, p) {
      rewards <- rep(0, sim) 
      if (sim == 3) {
        rewards <- c(1, rbinom(2, 2/3*p)) # make sure you have 1 shard but scale down the odds to not make it too obvious
        return(sum(rewards))
      }
      return(sum(rbinom(sim, 19/20*p))) # max number of sim is 20 so   
    }
    

    I did not tune it to have expected value of one third, but I guess you can do with a bit more of time :-)

    I still say this is complete non sense and my guess devs just draw from multiple random independent coin flip.

    She did mention that she believed the only way this was possible was if it was hard coded in. Which is exactly what you’re suggesting with that code
  • Ender22 wrote: »
    Neo2551 wrote: »
    Although I respect her theory and I even support it, having a coding hack for simming is not that hard: the server receives a request for a number of trials, nothing prevent the servers to have different distribution of rewards for number received.

    In a more technical terms, nothing prevents devs to create conditional distribution given the number of sims and make sure that the join distribution still has an overall drop rate of 1/3 by punishing even numbers of sims.

    I agree it would totally silly and unprofessional to do it, but this is not impossible, differential pricing exists after all.

    And if you really want a code snippet (in R as I assume she uses it):
    # Let's say you get a shard if the sample gives a 1 
    compute_shard_rewards <- function(sim, p) {
      rewards <- rep(0, sim) 
      if (sim == 3) {
        rewards <- c(1, rbinom(2, 2/3*p)) # make sure you have 1 shard but scale down the odds to not make it too obvious
        return(sum(rewards))
      }
      return(sum(rbinom(sim, 19/20*p))) # max number of sim is 20 so   
    }
    

    I did not tune it to have expected value of one third, but I guess you can do with a bit more of time :-)

    I still say this is complete non sense and my guess devs just draw from multiple random independent coin flip.

    She did mention that she believed the only way this was possible was if it was hard coded in. Which is exactly what you’re suggesting with that code

    Yeah, but that would mean actually listening to a woman instead of just assuming they don't know what they're talking about and correcting them by just restating what they said.

    Got to love the internet, am I right?
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Neo2551
    1824 posts Member
    Ender22 wrote: »
    Neo2551 wrote: »
    Although I respect her theory and I even support it, having a coding hack for simming is not that hard: the server receives a request for a number of trials, nothing prevent the servers to have different distribution of rewards for number received.

    In a more technical terms, nothing prevents devs to create conditional distribution given the number of sims and make sure that the join distribution still has an overall drop rate of 1/3 by punishing even numbers of sims.

    I agree it would totally silly and unprofessional to do it, but this is not impossible, differential pricing exists after all.

    And if you really want a code snippet (in R as I assume she uses it):
    # Let's say you get a shard if the sample gives a 1 
    compute_shard_rewards <- function(sim, p) {
      rewards <- rep(0, sim) 
      if (sim == 3) {
        rewards <- c(1, rbinom(2, 2/3*p)) # make sure you have 1 shard but scale down the odds to not make it too obvious
        return(sum(rewards))
      }
      return(sum(rbinom(sim, 19/20*p))) # max number of sim is 20 so   
    }
    

    I did not tune it to have expected value of one third, but I guess you can do with a bit more of time :-)

    I still say this is complete non sense and my guess devs just draw from multiple random independent coin flip.

    She did mention that she believed the only way this was possible was if it was hard coded in. Which is exactly what you’re suggesting with that code

    If you don’t want to hard code it I can come up with another hierarchical model still biased around the inverse of the drop rate.
  • Neo2551
    1824 posts Member
    NicWester wrote: »
    Ender22 wrote: »
    Neo2551 wrote: »
    Although I respect her theory and I even support it, having a coding hack for simming is not that hard: the server receives a request for a number of trials, nothing prevent the servers to have different distribution of rewards for number received.

    In a more technical terms, nothing prevents devs to create conditional distribution given the number of sims and make sure that the join distribution still has an overall drop rate of 1/3 by punishing even numbers of sims.

    I agree it would totally silly and unprofessional to do it, but this is not impossible, differential pricing exists after all.

    And if you really want a code snippet (in R as I assume she uses it):
    # Let's say you get a shard if the sample gives a 1 
    compute_shard_rewards <- function(sim, p) {
      rewards <- rep(0, sim) 
      if (sim == 3) {
        rewards <- c(1, rbinom(2, 2/3*p)) # make sure you have 1 shard but scale down the odds to not make it too obvious
        return(sum(rewards))
      }
      return(sum(rbinom(sim, 19/20*p))) # max number of sim is 20 so   
    }
    

    I did not tune it to have expected value of one third, but I guess you can do with a bit more of time :-)

    I still say this is complete non sense and my guess devs just draw from multiple random independent coin flip.

    She did mention that she believed the only way this was possible was if it was hard coded in. Which is exactly what you’re suggesting with that code

    Yeah, but that would mean actually listening to a woman instead of just assuming they don't know what they're talking about and correcting them by just restating what they said.

    Got to love the internet, am I right?
    Ender22 wrote: »
    Neo2551 wrote: »
    Although I respect her theory and I even support it, having a coding hack for simming is not that hard: the server receives a request for a number of trials, nothing prevent the servers to have different distribution of rewards for number received.

    In a more technical terms, nothing prevents devs to create conditional distribution given the number of sims and make sure that the join distribution still has an overall drop rate of 1/3 by punishing even numbers of sims.

    I agree it would totally silly and unprofessional to do it, but this is not impossible, differential pricing exists after all.

    And if you really want a code snippet (in R as I assume she uses it):
    # Let's say you get a shard if the sample gives a 1 
    compute_shard_rewards <- function(sim, p) {
      rewards <- rep(0, sim) 
      if (sim == 3) {
        rewards <- c(1, rbinom(2, 2/3*p)) # make sure you have 1 shard but scale down the odds to not make it too obvious
        return(sum(rewards))
      }
      return(sum(rbinom(sim, 19/20*p))) # max number of sim is 20 so   
    }
    

    I did not tune it to have expected value of one third, but I guess you can do with a bit more of time :-)

    I still say this is complete non sense and my guess devs just draw from multiple random independent coin flip.

    She did mention that she believed the only way this was possible was if it was hard coded in. Which is exactly what you’re suggesting with that code

    Thanks for your comment I hope your prefer the new version with an approximate Gaussian with a biased mean. I forgot the part she said hard coded, but my initial answer still holds: you can come up with a hierarchical model to bias the rewards depending on the sim number without hard coding number.
  • Okay, cool, but why?

    People are so busy bending over backwards to figure out how this could be possible that they aren’t bothering to think why even make a system that biases towards anything in the first place? How would that be to the benefit of anyone?

    It’s all perception bias and hokum thinking.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • LOL It is hard coded in the game, all of these mobile games are 1000s of hard coded, if ,then , statement altering the outcome based on user actions. To think it is not, is wishful thinking. I have interviewed for the people who basically invented the mobile platform...they wanted sample code of how to do exactly what is being discussed as "impossible" just to get an interview...the cup is half full for a reason.
  • Ender22
    1194 posts Member
    Crowtalker wrote: »
    LOL It is hard coded in the game, all of these mobile games are 1000s of hard coded, if ,then , statement altering the outcome based on user actions. To think it is not, is wishful thinking. I have interviewed for the people who basically invented the mobile platform...they wanted sample code of how to do exactly what is being discussed as "impossible" just to get an interview...the cup is half full for a reason.

    Well duh, this website is hard coded, every program is literally hard coded. What is being discussed is wether or not they hard coded a specific piece; because statistically, simming 3 would be no different than simming 1 unless they hard coded that function in. The impossible is referring to simming 3 being a statistical outcome rather than being hard coded in.
  • Probably this video is posted because their guess is right. Yes, Rey, BB-8, Vet Chewie, Vet Han, Finn is more likely than ever to be the specific squad needed to get through the new Rey event.
Sign In or Register to comment.