sees_all1

I'd like to see a few more trials, but I don't want to waste your time. I'm not to the hit values yet, I'm still trying to nail down the probability of a hit, based on strength, attack, and opponents defense. However, If my next few tests go as predicted, I can move on to more advanced things, such as that setup. I'm betting if you conducted the test again, you'd get different results (duh), as in different numbers receiving different proportions. Just curious, what style were you using?

So, a prayer potion costs 2050, and restores from 7 to 31 Prayer points.... versus this spell which costs 1500 per cast, and restores up to 15? I don't think that ruins the balance.

How many zeros did you hit? This is relevant because: -1/16 of your hits should have been naturally zero (due to the strength component) -Some (large) proportion of zeros should have been from failing attacks -If you knew the proportion of zeros you should have hit, and recorded those too, your x^2 GOF test would have different results. I'm not saying your data is invalid, or conclusion is definitely incorrect, there are just a few confounding variables that you haven't taken into account. I was brainstorming today as to why the 0/1 defense didn't make sense, and what the underlying reasoning could be. What if, the number they use to calculate defense is defense level, and the number they use to calculate attack is just attack. So, you'd get a random double that's [0, 1), and multiply it by those integers. You'd never really get 1, but they could always round down defense, and always round up attack to the nearest integer. Any numbers that tied, I.E. 0 for attack vs. 0 for defense, would result in no hit. This would make sense because you'd have 4 different available outcomes: 1/2 the time you wouldn't hit, and of the other 1/2, 1/2 of that time your hit would naturally be zero. This would explain why having 0 defense versus 1 defense wouldn't make any difference. -sees

Look through the eyes of the credit card companies: Customer says - My credit card number was stolen. I didn't buy all this. Credit Card Company says - hey, look it, you're an idiot, but because I can get 21% interest off you, I'll refund you the money, and go beating around the bushes for it. Credit Card Company: .... OOOO, there's a familiar trend going on, 20% of stolen credit cards are going to buy stuff from this company, called Jagex. Lets see, if Jagex doesn't refund me my money, I'm not going to let my credit cards purchase stuff from them, because it's all a loss for me. Credit Card Companies To jagex: Give me my money, or else you'll lose your ability to accept payment from credit cards. Jagex: WTFOMG stupid players, cheating, violating our Terms and Conditions, getting owned, and now we have to pay for it. Seriously, noobs. Alright, here's your stupid money, but this isn't going to happen again. What's the source of the credit card fraud? The wilderness! If we completely crash RWT, then we won't be put in this situation again. Jagex - screw you guys, i'm taking away RWT because I can't trust you players with it. Players - well, I didn't like grinding or getting achievements anyway, I'm going to post a rant on a forum, to tell you exactly how angry I am. 1 year later - the rule breakers aren't here, but jagex is. What does that tell you?

I've just completed another 3 tests, and updated the OP to reflect this. Not sure if I want to keep beating a dead horse, I suppose I can do another 7 or so. Anyhow, each value is remarkably close to .75, the value I estimated. I just spat the numbers into a calculator, and the z-value that came up was .459. Which means that we cannot be sure that the data that I got was different than the expected value. Unless someone does more tests and comes up with a significantly different proportion, I'm happy with the results. So, the answer to the first test: What is the probability of hitting on a character with 1 defense, with 1 attack, 1 strength, and no bonuses? The answer: you can expect to hit on average 1 out of every 4 hits. About 1000 hits has shown this to be quite accurate. Now its on to the next test. What is the probability of hitting on a character after casting curse, when their defense is lowered to 0? I've just run some tests, and the results are as follows: Test 1: 29 miss, 12 hit Test 2: 31 miss, 11 hit Test 3: 42 miss, 12 hit This data indicates that your defense can't go lower than 1, or that curse only lowers your defense by 5%. To determine if it is actually 5%, the number of tests I'd have to run would be much more than I did for the first question. Help! Is there any way to lower your defense in F2P?

Lets first figure out if its a straight scale with various attack/defense levels, and then we'll start looking at atk/def bonuses.

Can't buy RC, right? I'll go with that.

That isn't what I'm testing now - I don't care about the number you hit. If I did, the strength level I would be testing would be higher, say 10, or 20, or 90. Start at the beginning, make few assumptions, prove the assumptions, and then use what you know to find the other things. I haven't gotten to the hit hypothesis, and I'm not going to argue it either way until I have statistics to back it up. I will get there eventually, but until I do, quit nitpicking about stuff I may or may not do in the future.

http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/ <- this one is the most recent latest and greatest... and guess what, its exactly the same! And its not an operating system, its the API for the Java Programming Language. There are two natural ways to generate a random number in Java, one is using the Random class, or the other is using the Math class's Random method. I highly doubt that Jagex has made their own, it would be a waste of time. Even if they had, though, they would've used a similar algorithm to get good randomness. What you've just described as patterns is just seeding. Check it out - code up something that uses Java's random class. Run it. Observe the results. Then, seed the random number generator to, 5. or 10. or any other constant. Then run it, and run it again. and again. You'll get the same results. Why? Because it's seeded. Probably 95% of all languages that offer random number generators allow you to seed the generator. Most of them probably use the same algorithm anyway.

I'd like to be able to confidently say that though... I have to start from scratch and work my way into a thesis. If I go out and say - Hey, it should be 0 instead of .95, and go out and my data indicates .95 instead, I'm hosed. That's why I'm starting with level 3's - because I can control them much more than I can control level 126's, too many numbers to get accurate results.

http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api ... andom.html Compfreak, I know the numbers aren't purely random.If its done by a program, it can't be purely random. If its done in java and you don't know the seed, it might as well be random. That's what pseudo-random means - somewhere the number generator gets seeded, and then off it goes with your "random numbers." Now, you might have done enough testing to get started with the same seeds, and that's why some numbers are more frequent than others. I don't know. What I do know is that I have absolutely no clue where the random nature of hits come from, and that you have absolutely no clue. Unless your name is Andrew, and you created Runescape. What I do know is that somewhere there is a method / function called something along the lines of "calculateHit" - and that numbers are fed into it, and a number is spat out -- It isn't magic. I don't know if the numbers are generated server side or client side. I don't know if the servers are programmed in Java. Right now I can't tell you how the client or server communicates, or if it matters to this application. What I do know is that the first probability I got for this first set of data - this .71, is incredibly close to .75 -> 2 numbers are generated, 1/0 for attack and 1/0 for defense, and then a 1/0 for strength, which means that 1/2 the time attack beats defense and 1/2 the time you won't hit a natural zero, and violia, .25 you'll hit, .75 you'll splash.

EDIT: I need help finding items that provide very specific amounts of bonuses, particularly f2p armour/weapons that provide low Attack bonus, OR low Strength bonus, and items that provide low Defense Bonus, esp. in the category of the attacking one. example: Bronze b-ax provides 9 strength bonus, nothing else or Bronze Pick provides 2 slash defense, nothing else. etc. If you can think of any items that fit these categories, please post with their stats, and if its a weapon, what kind of attacks it has (i.e. trains defense with its slash bonus of +2) Alright, after a hijacking a rant and having a lengthy discussion/argument with Compfreak, I've decided to try and conduct several experiments to find the underlying methods used in Runescape, particularly the ones determining the probability of a hit. Critical Assumptions: -Your own defense, magic, or range has no outcome on the probability of you hitting on your opponent with melee. -All numbers generated are random, or pseudo-random. -The formula for determining a hit does not change from trial to trial. -The dice rolled to determine hits are integers, from 0 to the stat itself [hide=The first test - probability of 1 d and 1 a, no bonus, P to hit]To start, I'd like to know the following scenario: What is the probability of hitting on a character with 1 defense, with 1 attack, 1 strength, and no bonuses? Next, I'd like to explain the setups I will be using. I will create 2 or more characters, go to the Duel Arena, and repeatedly duel. For each hit, I will record its value. One character will have auto retaliate off, with its style as accurate, while the other will be hitting, with its style as defensive. That way, the only experience gained is for a stat that doesn't effect hits. The results: Sub Test 1: 31 miss, 12 hits Sub Test 2: 15 miss, 11 hits Sub Test 3: 16 miss, 11 hits Sub Test 4: 34 miss, 12 hits Sub Test 5: 47 miss, 12 hits Test 1 Total: 143 miss, 58 hits p-value miss: .711443 Sub Test 1: 31, 12 Sub Test 2: 25, 12 Sub Test 3: 39, 12 Sub Test 4: 56, 13 Sub Test 5: 38, 12 Test 2 Total: 189 miss, 61 hits p-value miss: .756000 Sub Test 1: 17, 11 Sub Test 2: 42, 12 Sub Test 3: 23, 11 Sub Test 4: 35, 12 Sub Test 5: 44, 12 Test 3 Total: 161 miss, 58 hits p-value miss: .735160 Conclusion: Each of these are remarkably close to .75. After doing 918 hits, the ratio I got was .743 So, in the setup: 1 attack versus 1 defense, hitting in defensive mode, the probability of a miss is .75[/hide] [hide=The second test... with curse]This setup was pretty difficult: Before attacking, I had to cast curse, then hit repeatedly until curse lost its effects, cast curse again, etc. After three tests: Test 1: 29 miss, 12 hit Test 2: 31 miss, 11 hit Test 3: 42 miss, 12 hit which means the probability of missing is about .745 - the same as the first setup. Conducting these tests were difficult because if I didn't notice the curse was reset, and I continued to record hits, all the data was null at that point. This happened to me once. Anyhow, with no significant reason to believe that curse makes any difference at such a low level, I decided to abandon testing. Conclusion: It didn't make a difference if it says your defense is 0 or 1. Curse could have been -5% on defense, but I'd never know without several thousand tests, to make the Standard Error lower than 5%.[/hide] [hide=The third test]Alright, so after the "failure" with curse, I'd like to test and see if doubling your defense halves the probability of a hit. The setup: 1a 1s vs. 2d, using defensive instead of aggressive. What I'm looking for: The probability of a hit in this setup should be .125, or 1 in 8, if doubling your defense halves the probability of being hit on.[/hide] Why it matters: Jagex gave a clue as to how hits are determined in postbag #38. I assume that two dice are rolled, one for a player's attack, and one for the others defense. Assuming a hit, a third dice is rolled to determine the size of the hit. If you would like to help out with this testing, please PM me. If you see any flaws in my methods, post here.

I could care less on this one. Its not like it affects a large percentage of the F2P population, and even if it did the "unfair" advantage is a small extra boost. Besides, Jagex will fix this one soon enough, and it doesn't affect all aspects of the game (like the mu bug or penguins)

As promised, I've put the book back into an image, and I've kept the text. Sorry about the dark green on dark blue, that's just your settings, and I don't know how to change the color for the CODE tags, or even one that would suit everyone. Praise - requires 5 laws, recharges prayer by up to 15, level 88 spell. 5 laws * 300 = 1500 per cast, how much do prayer pots cost? Super alchemy - requires 4 nats, gives High Alch level + .75 * (High Alch - Low Alch). level 90 spell. Sample High alchs: Dragon Scimitar - 75k vs 60k current Dragon Halberd - 243k vs 195k current Green D'hide Body - 5850 vs 4680 current Compfreak said the Halberd would be a serious problem, I don't think so. People would realize it's a money maker, demand would go up, and it'd match the current super alch price - cost of nats within a week or two. They boost your health too. So before going into the fight you could have 96/80. Anyhow, can I put you down as a supporter?

That prayer button was my idea... posted Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:56 am.... Or rather, I came up with it independently of anyone else, as probably other people did too. The thread is on page 6 of the Bugs and Suggestions forum if you want proof. Don't post on it though, I don't like old threads coming back from the void.

You're forgetting the Opportunity Cost. With the X amount of money I'd lose using the materials myself, I could be getting these other, better skills with it.

@compfreak - please READ it and not SKIM it, you'll miss certain details that balance it. Sorry, that's just the "Code" format... I'll turn it back into an image soon enough.

You're testing the DClaw special then? Special Attacks for weapons will use an overwritten method to calculate a hit, pure and simple. I won't be testing special attacks, so I won't have that as a confounding variable. You can test special attacks until you're blue in the face, but unless you try to understand whats going on underneath it all, you won't understand the mechanics of the game, and therefore will draw wrong conclusions.

What on EARTH are you talking about? I see nothing even remotely related to hit accuracy or hit spreads. The closest thing I see is a max hit calculator, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the hit spread and is far, FAR simpler to test. Runescape is programmed in Java. Runescape, at its very core is composed of objects and methods. There are a few ways to generate a random number in Java, using the Math class, the Random class, etc. There might also be a couple ways to generate random numbers that aren't in a even distribution. The purpose of programming in objects is to reuse code - there are 3 different classes. I doubt Jagex overloaded the calculate_hit method (or whatever they called it) more than 4 times. Whether you hit or not isn't magic - it has something to do with levels, bonuses, and your opponent's defense and bonuses. If the numbers generated in Runescape are random (which for this they are), then with enough simple analysis you'll be able to determine the underlying method for determining a hit, and how much of a hit. But I feel that explaining all this to you is a waste of time because you know it already. What you tested was "In this armour setup, against this armour setup, what was my average damage per hit ratio" What I want to know is "With X attack, Y strength versus Z defense and n bonuses, what is the probability of a hit, and therefore my average damage per hit"

Architect ....... 72 ..... 4 S, 4 As ....... P . Doubles experience of next 10 construction ..................................................builds. Can only be cast once per 20 minutes. Can only be cast once every 20 minutes, and it only lasts for 10 builds. What's there not to understand about it?

How many methods do you think Jagex programmed into Runescape to determine whether there is a hit or not, and how hard should it hit? I'm guessing about 3, maybe 4 for standard weapons (I'm not counting specials because they do some crazy things). Tip.it's combat calculator is (from my point of view) correct. I haven't had an instance where it's prediction was inaccurate. How did Tip.it get its calculator? Tons of data. Tons and tons of data. Now, If I carefully go about this the correct way, and I figure out what their method for determining whether there is a hit or not, and the amount that is hit, then that probability formula could be applied to all sorts of situations, including estimated number of hits per level, estimated victor in a 1v1 battle, etc. All these things would need basic assumptions, and it is those assumptions that need to be checked. I've told you now quite a few times: I'm familiar with statistics. I'm not going to make some outrageous claims based on the data I collect, because I know better than that. And once I post my procedures, my data and my findings, you can scrutinize it all you want. Lol. Those are two level 90 F2Pers going at it. And if you've read the suggestion, you'd understand whats happening. Funny, I haven't seen a response from you yet about it. I figured you would be all over my suggestion, how out of whack the spells are, etc. :P

I hear what you're saying, but remember these numbers are pseudo-random, and for all intensive purposes it is random. If what you're saying is correct, then some number, like 8, would hit more often than 9. I can test that. I can get another set of data, and test it again. I can repeat this 100 times. If its statistically significant, and it remains statistically significant for 4 sets of data, then the probability that there is a fluke is very small. You don't have to explain that to me, I know stats. I don't know what setups you were using, or your opponent's setups. I can, however, setup my own people to get my own data, explain to you exactly what I did. If you feel so inclined, you can replicate it. As of right now, I can't replicate what you're telling me, so to me, its void. What I want to do is to do my own analysis of this, so next time I argue with you, I have statistics and data to back it up, and I can show you exactly how I got that data - and you can get your own data using the same method, and you can test your data to mine, so you can tell I'm not pulling numbers out of my behind. Also, it serves a purpose to the RS community as a whole. Next time they think, gee, should I raise my Strength level, or my defense level, they can look at the data, and the analysis, and judge for themselves.

With what Jagex posted in that postbag, and how I believe hits are calculated, its very simple to set up an experiment, and be 99.7% sure of your results. If you don't know what you're doing, you're not going to prove anything to yourself, nor anyone else. If your method is repeatable, the data set large enough, and you use the right tests, no one can argue with the conclusions, espescially if you're 99.7% certain from the tests. Read up about the Chi-squared Goodness of Fit tests, and you can understand how I'm going to test each one. For example: Hypothesis: Someone with maxed attack and a max hit of 10 should hit an even spread. Make assumptions: Someone with 99 attack, +51 in attack bonuses should hit 149 times to every time they splash once, when hitting on someone with 1 defense. Of the 149 times they "hit", they should hit from 0-max, and those hits should be distributed evenly, with 0 hitting slightly more because of the 1/150 thing. Now, say their max is 9. They could hit 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. If you hit 1000 times, you'd expect about 100 hits in each, with a couple more in the zero column. Then you'd do the Goodness of Fit test, to see if the actual data conforms to what you expected. If it doesn't conform, then you could repeat, and gather new data. Or, you could try another hypothesis, that there's "trends" or something along that nature. There are many variables to play with, some easier than others. With many simple hypotheses, and many different tests, an idea behind the actual random numbers driving the combat triangle can be determined, and then accurate statements can be made. Whatever is going on inside the runescape servers isn't magic - there are methods constructed from more methods from the Java API. There are numbers that Jagex displays. None of us on the outside know exactly how they are used, but we can figure it out.

A few thousand hits is all I need to test something with stats, and if my hit range is from 0-9, I'll need fewer about 10x fewer hits than if its 0-99. Once I'm done, I'll post my method, my data, my analysis, and my conclusions. Then you can scrutinize it all you want. Until then, I've got calc III homework due at midnight.