Stones' colour distribution is NOT random - MASTER Board Conspiracy

No personal attacks against other players

Stay on topic

Stick within the Forum Rules please

3 Likes

How random/mono works for me, most of the time:

rngvsyou

That’s okay! I’m willing to rise again… :grin:

7 Likes

I suppose your also decide which players to favor in the rounds, right?

I’ll put you in the “always gets the good board” group this time.

So that’s sorted for you unless the Council of Elders decides to remove you as part of the invigilation process. Which can happen. Not all our suggested alliances get chosen for the good boards.

Perfect! Thanks for all !!! Another thing more , i just want a gravemaker i have a lot of rings y a need a red hero five star , and i want gravemaker , ladyloki or the new red what is coming in the valhala , please give me that gift for my birthday!

Just look at the table of top players and you will find that it is not possible without buying, they all have tulleria and lots, so if we do not pay, you will never be a top, easy. Unlike other games where abilities are taken into account, it is not possible here without money. Example Word of tanks and ordinary tank players play top games here but not.

There are plenty of FTP and CTP players at the top end of the competition. That doesn’t necessarily mean they will be top 100, but then again not many are - and not many want to, or care to be. As long as you are hitting 14* titans, regularly collecting war loot, and scoring well in tournies and events - what difference does it make top 100 or top 10000?

Not sure that I would use the adjective “solid” for 3 heroes level >5, and none at 23.

All heroes packing level 23+ can withstand greater damage, while delivering more pepper in their punch
Solid!

Troops are usually where trouble runs into paradise for folks that want to run multiple colors in their D.
And then on attack… without high level troops?..
Bad boards have a more glaring impact!

So… you get in that… “RNG slump” and you do more than just notice, start grinding teeth too.
I still notice but, no longer experience jaw pain.

Yup.

Now add a seed to initiate your algorithm based on previous 15 samples, as a built-in pity/dominance protection, and you’ll see why your alliance’s ratio for Achor’s pulling system is upside down.
The overall numbers shouldn’t change much, however…
Clusters develop.

People experience the “randomness” in waves!
Some come here to vent and be laughed at.
MANY complain in the game, especially during war.
And a few are adapting to it. (Anchor…)

You don’t believe. Cool, most don’t. But like I said. Only the engineers and @voidstrike know what the seed is using to initiate the rng.

I’m a believer. And happy to play without pants on!

Especially now that I’m seeing a discrepancy between mono and rainbow board reshuffling!

1 Like

First of all, I don’t just “not believe”, I tried it and it literally didn’t work. So did many of my alliance mates.

You vastly underestimate the amount of effort it takes to make an pRNG seed for a specific purpose. I’m not even sure it’s possible. A seed isn’t something you can create from scratch to arrange numbers depending on external circumstances, it’s a number that defines the series of generated values (and doesn’t care about any other factors).

Usually, for the purposes of pRNG seeding, one or many of these are used (to provide randomness closest to “true” by using something uncontrollable/unpredictable):

  1. Timestamp in microseconds of a system event
  2. A previously generated pRNG value (recursive seeding)
  3. Cosmic radiation (considered closest to “true” random)

“Pity timers” in other games are usually hardcoded and they break the rules of random number generation. It isn’t what’s happening here.

However, if you find a way to manipulate cosmic radiation to make RNG behave consistently according to a believed set of rules, all power to you.

2 Likes

[Are gem boards random or based on a play table? [Staff Response in Post #240, #276] - #5 by Rigs]

Yup.

Don’t get me wrong @Eldente
I don’t care if the seed is using some form of raid history or whatever to help prevent unlikely scenarios of bad boards x100.

I have experienced waves/slumps/clusters/whatever
of bad boards. And sure…”that’s a mathematical probability. Suck it up buttercup!”
But…now I’ve counted 7 board reshuffles in 126 samples. 2 of those were in the same match! Whereas with mono I had 11 board reshuffles in 632 samples. I’d like more mono samples and still have a ton of rainbow work to do… vacation the last 2 weeks has deflated my gaf button…however
It’s already looking most suspicious.

And I still don’t care! I’ve adapted and enjoy the game regardless. The boards still go both ways! No matter what…

I just feel this argument is a little one-sided when it comes to getting pushed around with “who’s crazy”

When the actual code, understandably…can not be revealed.

The answer always involved “no pants”…

I’m not sure if the full extent of the rules have been clarified but I’m sure you’ll find some answer here:

@Pompitous stop exposing me for being “the man”…it makes my faux attempts to fight “the man” seem disingenuous. But also thank you for proliferating the “no pants” agenda you are a scholar and a gentleman (or gentlewoman)

Edit (obligatory on topic): random is random and color is subjective

2 Likes

Why do you say that? While it’s certainly unlikely for a color to be missing entirely, it is technically possible.

I’m sorry, but that’s just flat out wrong. The color of the tiles that have previously appeared have no effect on the color of the tiles that are coming. So if 50 tiles have come, and none of them have been green, tile number 51 still has a 20% chance to be green.

2 Likes

Will the RNG not retrigger if a color contains fewer than 3 tiles?
Ah it’s about the refilling tiles sorry :slight_smile:

You misunderstand the essence of what a seed is.
A seed is not an AI that manipulates the oncoming numbers.

A seed is a just a number used in the function that generates new values. The question of how that number is acquired is a moot point because again, it doesn’t manipulate the live results, it just predetermines them

The link you provided doesn’t disprove that: yes, the seed may be the same for live and beta, and so will be the series of numbers. But not even SGG can tell you what the value #2842 with that seed is going to be without actually getting to that value.

Any mandatory rules for the values (like invalid boards) are most commonly done by skipping values until one is valid. Again, no live manipulation occurs.

1 Like

Yes it’s not AI
:joy:
But I am willing to be educated

So could this “number” be your raid win streak?

It could, but it doesn’t guarantee you any results that follow any rules. It’s just a different succession, that’s all.

I assume that ALL colors have some form of value.

And assume that when you say “rules” you’re referring to a mathematical formula contained in the code?

So… there is a “seed” which was exploited for a brief time:
You’re saying that the seed can’t possibly be used for an algorithm that contains value for the color blue when you’re attack squad has a high integer value (mono blue) running a 34 raid win streak.

There’s no way they can write an algorithm for that?
Impossible?..

As soon as a weighting factor is introduced to values, the number generator can no longer be considered even pseudorandom.

The link you provided mentions the device ID being part of the seed (or maybe even the seed itself), in which case:

  1. Multiple accounts playing from the same device would have the same boards, regardless of raid history or other in-game stats
  2. SGG would need to figure out in real time a special seed modifier for any given player’s specific device given your specific raid history that would happen to highroll early. That’s five equally difficult tasks (highlighted in italic) rolled into one, worth months of development time, and for what? It brings no value to the company. It delegitimizes the RNG. It is prone to exploitation.
1 Like

As a BA having close ties to project management, my main concern isn’t even the technical impossibility of the task.

Development time is a very precious resource, and judging by how raw most new features are (emblems, costumes) - SGG is developing from a very firm “least effort required” viewpoint. Second place viewpoint would be “most income generated”.

Artificially introducing streakiness into the RNG with very complex parameters falls into neither.

If we take the C++ programming language, seeding an RNG with least effort would look like this:

srand(deviceId)

It’s one line of code with a parameter that’s easily acquired, and it works.

To do something you are describing, it would require thousands of lines of code, be clunky as all hell, and bring no added value.

3 Likes

I think it would be an intelligent financial decision:

  1. With millions of players the unlikely probability of Repeated “random” bad boards increases. Even here the complaints pile in. Limiting the probability of bad boards x100 and preventing, “screw this game” will help stabilize a growing population.

  2. Ensuring Free advertising. I was just watching a 7DD player get wiped out in one move that had many combos on Line a few weeks ago. It was spectacular! I want one now…

  3. Ensuring More free advertising, look at the 5* I just pulled. Rather than 98% of the population with down trodden reports

  4. Preventing Deadlift from dominating the #1 spot for weeks on end and annoying me relentlessly until “I quit, see you tomorrow”

Plus… it would still maintain a sense of randomness. Almost protecting it even!

I dunno. I could be wrong lol… but so could you!
The ones who feel the most pain, are addicted to tile damage… that’s the ultimate take-away for me from all this.

Good boards
Bad boards…
Have at thee!

1 Like