Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'rng'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Important Links
    • Serenes Forest Code of Conduct
    • Mistakes or Errors on the Site
  • Important Forums
    • Announcements
    • Member Feedback
    • Site Content
  • General Forums
    • Introductions
    • General
    • Far from the Forest...
    • Creative
    • Fan Projects
    • General Gaming
  • Fire Emblem Forums
    • General Fire Emblem
    • NES and SNES Era
    • GameBoy Advance Era
    • GameCube and Wii Era
    • Nintendo DS Era
    • Nintendo 3DS Era
    • Fire Emblem: Three Houses
    • Fire Emblem Heroes
    • Fire Emblem Warriors
    • Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE
  • Miscellaneous
    • Forum Graveyard

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Interests


Location

Found 36 results

  1. A characters growth rates generally give an idea as to what a character will become as that is the most likely outcome for these characters when they level up correct? Well having random growth rates at all can lead to some interesting character stats. I wanted to make this topic so as to share some of my neat little character stats and hear about interesting levels other people got for their units while they played the game. Me some of them include RES going up on various characters multiple times, cleric faye having the second highest defense in my army, python having not terrible hit rates, and Forsyth becoming rather equal if not better than Lukas.
  2. The Title is pretty self-explanatory, I guess. But anyway, I'm just having a really bad RNG-Day and was curious about other people bad RNG-Days. So, any stories you want to share? (Btw, it doesn't need to be from Fire Emblem)
  3. Quick note: In the future I'll eventually move these topics to the fan-game discussion forum. But for now, the ideas are broad and general enough that I think it makes more sense to discuss them in the context of the FE games we already know. Once I get to discussing more specific ideas that are further divorced from the context of any previous FE game, I'll swap over to fan-game discussion. Last time, I floated an idea for making skill and luck more valuable by tying them to a meter system instead of an RNG chance of crits/misses. It wasn't popular. Let's try the opposite approach. Instead of a system that removes most RNG, what if we actually increased the random factor, but reduce the punishment factor? But first, why do I want to change these aspects at all? Here are a couple reasons: I think 3X damage crits are horrendous. There's strategic merit in needing to have a backup plan. But 300% damage crits don't create those sorts of situations. They're more likely to be instant resets. It's certainly not a common problem, but that doesn't make it good design. Skill and luck feel underwhelming. That isn't to say they aren't important stats, but most units have, in a word “enough”. Individually, each point into one of these stats feels less important. There are a series of changes here, feel free to voice your opinion on all of them, or just each individually: Change 1: Make luck, not speed, the primary factor in dodging attacks. The formula changes in most games, but speed is always more important than luck. Sometimes by a factor of 2, or 1.5, or even 3. I think this needs to be reversed, so that luck is 75% of your dodge rate, with speed being only 25%. I was also considering making speed 0% of the formula. I think this is totally fair balance-wise, as even with the changes to doubling I proposed in the other topic, speed is still an insanely useful stat on its ability to let you double, at all. I'm also admittedly drawn to the simplicity of binding each stat to one purpose, instead of having formulas become complicated blends of stats in various proportions. But despite all this, it would also make speed a totally worthless stat to gain for someone already fast enough to meet relevant doubling thresholds. Luck's role in evading crits and your own hit rate remains unchanged. Change 2: Reduce critical damage. I've got 2 separate ideas on how to do this: First, we could reduce the 300% damage rate to a flat 150%. The only problem I have with this is the potential for confusion on if that extra 50% rounds up or down on odd damage numbers. Second, we could change the formula entirely. Getting a crit now adds the unit's skill stat directly to their strength/magic. This will mean lower crit damage across the board in many cases, but will be more notable for enemies as they typically have lower skill stats anyway. However, enemies might also do more damage with crits under this system, too. An enemy that would've done 0X3 damage off a crit may now deal actual damage. If this change were implemented, I'd include a “Crit Damage” number in the battle preview, so that players could see at a glance how much total damage they could take in the worst-case scenario. Change 3: Double the effect of skill on the critical hit rate formula. This means that players and foes alike will now have a greater chance of scoring a critical hit. Seeing a crit rate won't be rare, even on an enemy with a good chance to miss. This makes skill more desirable, since each single point gain is basically worth twice as much now, in terms of crit chance. It will mean enemy crits will be something you see far more of, but due to the above changes, you're far less likely to instantly die to one. Perhaps counter-intuitively, I think this will also make luck more valuable, despite being comparatively less effective at reducing crit rate now. A point in luck will seem more valuable when it's reducing the crit rate of a dozen enemies from 4% to 3%, instead of the 0% to 0% “change” we usually see. The enemies with crit rates in FE games are usually the ones with Killer weapons, where oftentimes no amount of luck will reduce their crit rate by an appreciable margin. This isn't an entirely novel idea – Thracia 776 and Fates both halved the effect of luck in reducing crit rates. While not quite the same as doubling the effect of skill, changes have been made in the formula to increase crit rates before. Still, if this becomes too much, and it very well might scale too drastically for higher levels and lategame maps, here are a few simple tweaks: Make skill 1.5X as important for crit rate instead of 2X. Make luck 2X as important at stopping crit rate. So essentially, if the attacker's skill = the defender's luck, no change. But each point of excess skill now has twice the implications on crit rate. Again, I think this makes both crit and luck more valuable. TL;DR: Make luck, not speed, the primary stat in the evasion formula. Make critical hits more likely for both the player and the enemy, but reduce critical damage. As they say “Crit happens” but now an unplanned crit is more likely to put a player onto the back foot, forcing them to come up with an emergency strat, instead of outright killing a unit. More chaos, but also more control.
  4. Was playing Path of Radiance. Decided to use Mia. Suddenly she starts getting defense growths. At this point she looks like this. The only stat-booster she's needed is an energy drop because she's a bit below average in strength. Despite all odds, she's easily one of my best units for tanking between vantage, the frequent crits (meaning one shotting enemies before they hit her), inability to be doubled the decent resistance, and the beautiful defense. This is the first time I ever used her, and it's easily been an experience I loved. Anyone else got similar stories of character you had turn out amazing in a stat they really should not have? Or multiple stats. Or in general. Hell even a bad unit turning out decent. https://imgur.com/a/i6aXEWZ
  5. And people still say the one RN system makes the game more difficult for the player...
  6. Hi, i started playing path of radiance, i just ended 11 chapt, my ike is 3 exp short to 20 lvl (don't ask anything, i just like him) And his stats look like this... 31 HP 7 Str 7 Mag (Amazing) 16 Skill 16 Speed 12 Luck 13 Def 8 Res ...should i be worried about him?? Of course i'll give him at least one energy drop but do you think that is enough xd?
  7. So... Ephraim died of overexposition on ch 15, from an unlucky javelin (he had around 15~20% chance of death on the whole turn). Well, bad RNG is no excuse, and moments like this happen in every run I guess. But what should I do with my save now? When starting my run, I planned to do no resets at all (which I didnt do), and to delete my save should a game over occur. Now the thing is... I really dont wanna delete my save and start all over. On the one hand, the point of my run was to do something a little more realistic and dramatic than your everyday "reset-whenever-someone-dies" run, and to spare myself the task of restarting some maps because of silly mistakes. On the other, resetting from the beginning would be exactly that : doing the same maps all over again, just because of one blunder (and bad luck) . To be honest, I'd keep playing without Ephraim if I could, but you gotta respect plot armor, amirite? So there it is. What would you do in my situation? What do you guys think I should do? Its my first time getting a game over in ironman, so i'd be interested to know what's your opinion on this. EDIT : after careful consideration, I decided to delete my save and restart completely. I didnt want to restart ch 15 just to bench Ephraim.After all, its only 14 chapters to redo, and it fits better the spirit of ironman imo ; thats what "game over" means originally, right?
  8. PART 1: IN WHICH EIRIKA IS A FUCKING BOSS (Prologue, Chapter 1) So I recently got back into Fire Emblem after not really playing it for a couple of years, and I thought what better way to kick off my return than by playing some FE8? Then I looked on the forums and remembers lushen's excellent randomizer. After two years of little to no Fire Emblem, I'm coming back with a run of FE8, Randomized, Hard Mode because I hate myself, and I thought I'd share the journey with you all. So, rule of this LP: I assume you're familiar with the story, so there won't be much of that. No resets, except in very specific circumstances (i.e a green character suicides because the randomized classes have fucked up the game events) No valni. No random encounters. I think that about sums it up. So, let's get started!
  9. At least over at GameFAQs, I've noticed some people do not like the 2RN that has been the staple of the series since FE6, or most of the game that saw international releases. And to be honest, I am at a loss at why some people do not like them. I'd like to ask the question to everyone here (who I think would have a better understanding) for why do you (not) favour 2RN. I generally favour the 2RN as they would make units that focuses of dodging more viable. Unlike defense-oriented units where their defense stats are generally what they are, dodging still requires some risk no matter what, so some form of modification that makes the percentage gamble less of a luck-based mission is a good idea. FE6 was the most fitting example, which featured the likes of Rutger, Sue, and Clarine who would absolutely dodge everything like no one else's business. On the other hand, this also had the defense-oriented units at their worst, where their defense stats were not as useful due to how doubling enemy units were everywhere. Of course, this would be greatly detrimental for balance, but I think this can all be fixed with good skills, higher WTA bonuses (like the one in Fates), and effective weapons seen in later entries. I think, in the case for Binding Blade Echoes, we can rebalance Armour Knights can do with better defense, and skills like Wary Fighter. Lances and Axes can have better hit rates in general, and Axes in particular have hit modification bonuses as WTA. For the overpowered Swordmasters, bring in Swordslayer-carrying units in, and bring more of them (and other effective weapon-carrying units) in Hard/Lunatic. I can understand the 1.5RN used in Fates, as 2RN in Birthright can make some of the allied Hoshidan units (especially Ryoma) too game-breaking. (I'm under the impression that the Hoshidan units focus more on Speed/Skill and the like. Correct me if I am wrong.) But in other settings, I just find it a case of unnecessary meddling when a) we survived over a decade of 2RNGs without the games being unplayable; and b) we could fix through other means. Anyway, what is everyone's opinion?
  10. This one's probably going to be an odd question and I don't know if someone's already done this, but thought I might throw this out as a question to any math/probability nerds around (and all glory and honor to thee, math nerds, because even though I'm a university history major most high school math lies far beyond my grasp) but I was trying to work this out for a friend of mine who's been stockpiling her orbs. She's waiting on some of her faves (one blue and one green both in the 4*-5* group specifically) and I'm trying to figure out if it works out better from a probability point of view for her to just stick to summoning blue and green or if it works out better from a probability vs. cost point of view to just keep doing a full summon each time. So, trying to work it out myself, I started with identifying the number of each unit in-game by color and star: 5* - Red 18, Blue 12, Green 9, Colorless 9 4* - Red 26, Blue 19, Green 15, Colorless 20 3* - Red 15, Blue 12, Green 9, Colorless 13 And then I tried to break each down to a percentage chance per unit by color: Red Orb: 3% for Focus (if applicable) 3% for 5*, 1/18 of 3% which would basically work out to 0.167% per character 36% for 4*, 1/26 of 36% which would basically work out to 1.38% per character 61% for 3*, 1/15 of 61% which would basically work out to 4.07% per character Blue Orb: 3% for Focus (if applicable) 3% for 5*, 1/12 of 3% which would basically work out to 0.25% per character 36% for 4*, 1/19 of 36% which would basically work out to 1.89% per character 61% for 3*, 1/12 of 61% which would basically work out to 5.08% per character Green Orb: 3% for Focus (if applicable) 3% for 5*, 1/9 of 3% which would basically work out to 0.33% per character 36% for 4*, 1/15 of 36% which would basically work out to 2.4% per character 61% for 3*, 1/9 of 61% which would basically work out to 6.78% per character Colorless: 3% for Focus (if applicable) 3% for 5*, 1/9 of 3% which would basically work out to 0.33% per character 36% for 4*, 1/20 of 36% which would basically work out to 1.8% per character 61% for 3*, 1/13 of 61% which would basically work out to 4.69% per character But this leaves me with a few questions that I was hoping anyone who's been working with stats for the game so far would be able to clarify: If the color isn't in focus, does that 3% just not apply? Is there an equal chance of getting the four different colors in a five-summon group or is it distributed based on the number of units in each category? (With higher chance for example of red showing up in a summoning block than, say, green?) And if one could work out an overage or a percentage of the number of times that a color would appear in the summoning group, could one then use this to more or less predict, if dumping a set number of orbs in (say 100 orbs in one batch for example), what the probability would be of coming up with certain characters? Most of what I'm managing to accomplish with this is hurting my brain at this point, lol, but I'm wondering if anyone could either fill in some blanks or make corrections to where I'm making any wrong assumptions or guesswork on this.
  11. Been playing Conquest Hard/Classic today until chapter 18.... I start the chapter, position my units and end the turn. As i expected the general with the hammer walks up to my great knight corn cob and attacks her with a 53% chance to hit. He hits and kills her. Ok fair enough bad luck so i reset and start the map again. I position my units the same way and let the turn end. Once again corny gets nailed by the 53% hammer. Bad luck again so i reset and start the chapter again and position my units the same way and corn cob gets nailed by the 53% hammer again. So i reset....and reset...and reset (way too many resets later). Alright you get the problem. Ive been nailed by a 53% hammer 20 times now and this is smelling fishy. Just to clarify this is NOT a battle save im reloading from. I am reloading from the prep screen and keep getting this BS. Even tried going back to castle a couple of times to "reset" the RNG but still not working. Is there some hidden value where effective weapons get some stupid hawkeye on the first turn?? EDIT: holy shit the hammer finally missed!!!!!! I guess this topic is a bit moot now however i still think there is something up with how fates calculates rng. For the 2 chapters i have had xander he has nailed more 10-15% criticals than i can count.
  12. It works the same for both FE9 and FE10, and in fact it's almost the same as the GBA RNG. A more detailed post may follow later (if I'm not too lazy), but here is the the tl;dr Calculation of the next RN is exactly the same as for GBA (bitshift+xors of the last 3 rns) There are a total of 8 possible initial seeds from power on The game then burns some "small number" (0~20 roughly) of RNs from this initial seed on the first frame The cool thing here (in my opinion) is that the number of possible initial states from power on in only ~100 or so, which gives us a notion of reliability (in the same sense as for GBA arrow retracing) for both of these games. This also means that TAS for both of these games are now possible, and the regular speedrun can probably be improved too via clock abuse manipulations (this latter claim is untested).
  13. This is rather simple- the units that have had the best level ups in a playthrough, and how much memories you have of that particular run. Preferably your first run of something (of a game, of a difficulty, first time using that unit, etc), but if a later run had a better memory, go. For me, I've only had the chance to play FE7 and FE8 personally. *Florina has got to be my most blessed unit of all time, and has several miracles to her name. *In FE8, almost obligatorily, Vanessa, and to a lesser extent Tana, have been serving me well, but by far the best unit I've had so far (the run's around the halfway point) is Ephraim. His first blow was a critical, his first level up had six stats, the rest of his level ups have had multiple well-placed points, and he's never been in a troublesome position. It says something that I gained more respect for Kyle's first level when Ephraim copied it shortly after (HP, Str, Def).
  14. I've spent the whole night searching for an easy method to get better level up stats for FE4. The closest method I can find is using Lua Scripts in TAS video to get the next 16 RNs here: http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13270&highlight= Even though I've successfully installed the script in my emulator, I don't know how to interpret those 16 RNs and what they represent. I really appreciate if anyone who has experienced in Lua Script can explain or point me to correct method. Thank you.
  15. So as it turns out, Awakening's storage and calculation of random numbers appears to be identical to that of FE12, and since I have the formula for the latter figured out... well, yeah. I'm probably going to spend most of today playing around with this since I don't have class, but if there is any particular question you guys want answered, feel free to ask in this thread.
  16. Almost. I have the pRNG, need to get the valuations like I did with SD. It's a little bit trickier this time because the modulus appears to be a function of the framecount, but hopefully it won't be too bad. EDIT: Also the initial seed is harder UPDATE: Never mind, only the level up works weirdly, the valuation works nearly identically to last time. lua script should be available soon.
  17. Hey guys, I revisited this game recently in an attempt to crack the RNG formula and found it somewhat easier than expected. In particular, I already managed to crack the PRNG, so that I can calculate all of the random numbers in advance. My only issue is... interpretation... while my script readily obtains the 32 bit hexadecimal numbers produced by the game's RNG, I haven't been able to figure out how the game converts these values to a random number between 0 and 99 (it's not as simple as division like it was in the GBA games). I can do stuff in game to get the associated random number for any string, but I'm looking for a mathematical formula so I can get a lua script ready and post it to the website. If anyone has some experience with figuring out this kind of stuff, I'd appreciate some help. For anyone interested in helping, I can grab data relatively quickly by modifying Lena's in game HP growth rate and giving her a first level up to figure out what the value is. Hopefully we can wrap this up fairly quickly and get this up and running!
  18. While I procrastinate working on and recording defense chapters in my active playthroughs, I decided to figure out how to effectively RNG abuse in yet another Fire Emblem game... and this was the result: No plans to pursue this any further at the moment (since I've never played this game before, and I have other playthroughs that are higher on my priority list), but thought you guys might enjoy. EDIT: Sorry, there is a recording issue at the moment that will get fixed in like 2 minutes when I change the link. Fixed!
  19. So, this may not be the perfect place to ask this, but "people who know about the game's innards" seemed like the best bet. I'm trying my hand at LTCing for the first time with FE8 0% growths using dondon's patch(Might be relevant to the question, idk). I'm having a great time, but I don't really like searching through RNs and want to make a program to find sequences of number thresholds easily. In order to actually apply it, I need the list of RNs and I don't really want to manually go through the lua script in vba and write down hundreds of numbers. So, I want to know exactly how the RNG works. Is it calculated using a function with the same seed of 8 every time or something like that? I don't need memory address stuff, but I'm looking for something like this: https://youtu.be/MiuLeTE2MeQ?t=1m27s If I can get this information I'll post the program here when I am finished (Java, so it's all-platform and that's what I'm most familiar with) and hopefully it will help people who may want to play with RN knowledge but don't really like slogging through with the RN script to figure out how enemy phase will go.
  20. So, you may remember that I did the same thing with FE4 a couple of weeks ago. Well, now it's time to do this poll for Fire Emblem: the Binding Blade! I am doing this topic to have a overall opinion about this game, since it's the one of the few I've never even tried... Anyway, let's debate!
  21. I meant to make this post a while ago, but I've discovered something interesting about the enemy AI mechanics from my playthroughs of Awakening and Fates on emulators. As you might imagine, there are times when the enemy AI has to make a "random" decision about what to do, usually involving choosing between two (or more) equally good spaces from which to attack one of your units. So how does it go about doing this? Well, in GBAFE and FEDS, the game would just burn some RNs from the standard RNG to make the decision. In Radiant Dawn, something more complicated goes on which I don't completely understand and won't elaborate on here. In FE3DS, however, it appears that the game uses a separate RNG string (sort of like the one that has been used to prevent arrow retracing RNG abuse since FE10) that is time dependent. What this means, is that under certain circumstances when you make a Bookmark/Battle Save, you are not always guaranteed to get the same results upon reloading your Bookmark/Battle Save! Due to the (rout) nature of most maps in Awakening, this doesn't really matter much there, since enemy units that attack you usually end up dead anyway. But for Fates, it has some striking consequences due to the enemies' ability to utilize the Dual Strike system in the game. I could go on to explain this in detail from a theoretical perspective, but I think an example would be much clearer. Consider the above situation (taken from Chapter 11 Conquest). Bow Knight!Niles is equipped with a bow, and on the enemy phase (once I end my turn) the Lunge!Ninjas will all swarm and attack him from up close. I make a Bookmark save here. When I reload and end my turn, for the first Ninja that attacks, going from left or above is "equivalent" in terms of AI priorities, so the decision is randomized. But depending on which one is chosen, different situations can occur! For example: In the second screenshot (where the first Ninja decided to attack from the left instead of above), the Ninjas end up forming a box around Niles which results in one extra attack on him (due to a DS proc) that didn't occur in the first scenario. This of course causes a shift in the battle RNG, and goes on to have consequences (i.e. different results) in the other parts of the map as well. And these aren't even the only 2 possiblities; I found another one where the Ninjas form an L-shape to block Camilla's path forward too! And remember, these all come from the same bookmark! So yeah, just an interesting tidbit of information that I thought you guys might enjoy. Let me know if it's not clear from the above example why the bolded statement is true and I'll try to explain it from a more pedagogical perspective.
  22. I've mentioned this before but the RNG in this works in an extremely strange manner. I haven't seen this occur in any other FEs (let me know if I'm wrong), but the game uses the RNG differently for short-range attacks vs. long range attacks... most of the time. And yes, I've tested this many many times in different scenarios to ensure this isn't just a result of me neglecting to account for skill procs, supports, or something silly like that. The most glaring evidence for this is a test I did with the a tome-user (with 1~2 range) who attacked from 3 different squares and got different results. I don't really know too much about exactly what is going on here (hence the reason for creating this topic), but I do know that close-range attacks are always "stable;" they work in the normal way that we expect them to (the first 2 RNs are averaged for the hit, and the next for the crit, and then skill procs or whatever). The long range attacks, however, do not seem consistent at all; in some rare cases (which seem fixed for particular tiles on a map, although I have not found any conclusive patterns), it works just like a short-range attack. The majority of time however, it seems to use some alternative mechanism, or perhaps a combination of multiple alternative mechanisms (more details on this to follow). I have not done any testing to figure out if these same mechanisms apply for longbows or siege tomes (and probably won't touch that until we resolve this simpler issue first). I have (in fact, I've had) some proposed tools/methods to do testing on this and maybe gather information, sort of like with the Enemy AI Targeting thread I made here a while ago. Just like in that case, however, I've been too lazy to actually put effort into this and get a detailed understanding of how this system works, and I'm hoping this thread might inspire someone else (or maybe me) to actually put effort into this and figure out what is going on. Feel free to post here with any questions/comments related to the above.
  23. When I was playing through Fire Emblem Fates: Revelation (on Lunatic mode) I had what quite possibly was my most insane RNG experience in my entire life. For as long as I can remember, I've never really experienced something like this in Fire Emblem, or just video games in general, so you can guess how amazed I was when this happened to me. My Avatar (Kenneth) was on defense during the Enemy Phase in Chapter 7: Unspeakable World of Revelation. He had his Dragonstone equipped, so I wasn't worried. He held off two enemies like it was nothing, and it didn't seem like the third (a cavalier) was going to be much of a threat. However, I was fairly certain that I was going to take some damage from the encounter and I would have to finish off the cavalier on the next turn due to Kenneth's low skill and crit rate. Boy, was I wrong. My enemy missed a 79% shot, then I activated a 6% Dragon Fang and a 1% critical AT THE EXACT SAME TIME. I was stunned, so I did some calculations and found some staggering numbers. Here is the math: 79% chance for successful enemy attack, making the miss chance .21 or 21%. Then we take into account the activation of Dragon Fang, which is 75% of the skill statistic for the attacker. My avatar had an original skill statistic of 11, which was decreased by 3 due to the Dragonstone for a total of 8 skill. 8 X .75 = 6, giving us a .06 or 6% chance. Finally, we have the critical hit rate, which was only a measly .01 or 1%. To find the grand total percentage for all of these happening in the exact same combat we use the following equation: .21 X .06 X .01 = y, which gives us a final percentage of y = .000126% or a 1 in 7936.5 chance. This is basically the Shiny Pokémon of Fire Emblem. What do you guys think? Let me know! (Also, please let me know if this kind of post violates any of the Serenes Forest Codes of Conduct. If it does, I will stop these kinds of posts immediately. Thank you.)
  24. [Project officially closed as of May 3.] We haven't yet figured out whether Fates uses 1 RN, 2 RNs, or some new system, so I've taken it upon myself to figure that out. I'm taking all data points from all sources to try to fit one model or another, and I've got an Excel sheet keeping track of all hit/miss ratios for all values 1-99. It's a daunting task, though; I have 1000 points as of starting this thread, and I estimate it may take 30,000 or more, so please, all help is welcome. Guidelines for Recording Values: Dual Guards don't count -- Dual Guard procs first. DO NOT use data from reloading Battle Saves. See below. Reloading chapters from the beginning is fine. Not necessary to maintain records for 0 and 100 Just get the value (1-99) and the outcome (H/M) -- circumstances not necessary Use either Excel or .csv formats -- those will be easiest to merge into the existing models You can now record and view collected data in real-time on a spreadsheet on Google Drive. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UaKECEGX7Dyb_JhduG6j_SPDkphsKELdVZvr2mAv5aU/edit?usp=sharing On the "Data" (front) tab, go to a column and record data in this format, aligned with the appropriate headers. [Hit Rate], [Outcome] [Hit Rate], [Outcome] This will ensure that your data is integrated into the results in real-time. The sheet has a large number of points and functions on it already, so it is fairly normal for it to lag a little on loading or when changing formulas, so be patient. Thanks in advance for your help! Latest Version: 23873 data points, 3:56 pm, May 3, 2016. Using data from myself, Balcerzak, XeKr, wvype, Verile, Minternets, myith, Vascela. Confirmed that the game uses 1-RN for values below 50 and weighted (3A+B)/4 for values above 50. The project is now closed. Eliminated possibilities: 1-RN (upper range) Unweighted 2-RN (all ranges) (3A+2B)/5 Weighted 2-RN (all ranges) Dynamic 1-RN (all ranges)
  25. As you might have seen from recent posts on the old 55 turn playthrough thread, I'm thinking of starting this up again, aiming for a 51 or 52 turn clear of Shadow Dragon on H5! This playthrough will involve significantly more RNG abuse than the previous one, and will perhaps be slightly less interesting to watch (besides Jagen during the early game, pretty much only Marth and Caeda are ever going to do any useful combat). On one hand, this makes guessing the correct answers to the topic poll questions a little bit more interesting, but it does have the potential to make the playthrough become even more bland than it already is, since there won't be any interesting Jake or Hardin shenanigans to watch. Anyway, tentative turn counts for the 51 turn playthrough are posted below: [spoiler=Expected Turn Counts]Chapter 1 (5 turns) Chapter 2 (4 turns) Chapter 3 (5 turns) Chapter 4 (2 turns) Chapter 5 (4 turns) Chapter 6 (2 turns) Chapter 7 (2 turns) Chapter 8 (2 turns) Chapter 9 (1 turn) Chapter 10 (2 turns) Chapter 11 (1 turn) Chapter 12 (2 turns) Chapter 13 (2 turns) Chapter 14 (2 turns) Chapter 15 (2 turns) Chapter 16 (1 turn) Chapter 17 (1 turn) Chapter 18 (1 turn) Chapter 19 (1 turn) Chapter 20 (3 turns) Chapter 21 (1 turn) Chapter 22 (1 turn) Chapter 23 (1 turn) Chapter 24 (1 turn) Chapter 24x (1 turn) Endgame (1 turn) I'm probably not going to actually start work on this for some time, but feel free to post comments, questions, advice, or anything you think I might find useful during the planning stages of this run. I have some tentative strategies for most of the chapters at this point in time, so if you want to ask about forges, character recruitment, or general strategy, I can probably answer most questions that you may have. Hope you guys will enjoy!
×
×
  • Create New...