RE: AI for MWiF

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: AI for MWiF - France

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> AI Opponent Discussion >> RE: AI for MWiF - France

Page: << < prev 11 12 [13] 14 15 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/17/2013 6:54:17 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

The US entering the war a turn earlier is important, but the effect on their build points over the years is even more important. It is not only the big hit of having their build points jump on the turn they take various US Entry Options, but there is another big hit each year on the anniversary of passing the war appropriations bill.

So depriving France or the Commonwealth of a few resources/production points early in the war has to be balanced against increasing the US build points in the out years.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 361

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/18/2013 12:47:19 AM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

20% does not equal impossible. AAMOF if you do it both turns in 1939 the chance for the USA to get one extra chit is 36%. The 1939 chit pool is much better to draw from for the USA than the 39-40 pool. You might be happy with Italy but your axis partners will be less than impressed.

Since "Search & Seizure" only occurs during the production phase by SCS and submarines that stay at sea how are you figuring 36%?

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 362

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/18/2013 1:06:47 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

20% does not equal impossible. AAMOF if you do it both turns in 1939 the chance for the USA to get one extra chit is 36%. The 1939 chit pool is much better to draw from for the USA than the 39-40 pool. You might be happy with Italy but your axis partners will be less than impressed.

Since "Search & Seizure" only occurs during the production phase by SCS and submarines that stay at sea how are you figuring 36%?

First turn: 80% no chit, 20% chit.
Second turn: 64% no chits, 4% 2 chits, 32% 1 chit.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 363

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/18/2013 1:23:30 AM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

With the number of dice rolls per turn you cannot lump 2 turns together.

My formulae have always been for multiple actions of the same type in a single turn by adding the percents together.

Example: 2x "Search & Seizure" in one turn would be 40%

I feel this is very over generous. What is your formula?

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 364

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/18/2013 7:36:39 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

With the number of dice rolls per turn you cannot lump 2 turns together.

My formulae have always been for multiple actions of the same type in a single turn by adding the percents together.

Example: 2x "Search & Seizure" in one turn would be 40%

I feel this is very over generous. What is your formula?

I taught statistics at the college level. The way to combine the probabilities of a sequence of independent events is what I used. It can be shown rather simply using a tree diagram. At the top are the different outcomes of the first die roll. Beneath each of those outcomes insert the full set of possibilities of the second die roll, and so on down the page, building a tree structure.

In this case there were two possible outcomes for each event. So the top level has 2 outcomes, the second level has 4, the third level, 8 and so on increasing by powers of 2.

If there were more possible outcomes (e.g., in land, naval, or air combats), say 5, then the first level would have 5, the second 25, and the third 125. This is what makes calculating the likelihood of success for a groups of attacks on a front line so difficult.

Chess is considered very difficult because the branching logic for possible outcomes (i.e., moves) is so large. But really there are ~20 per side per turn. That makes looking a couple of turns ahead 20**4 = 160,000 possible outcomes/positions. WIF is much worse, because there are easily 100 units that can move and attack in a turn (air + naval + land). Depending on where the units stop their movement, the attacks can vary enormously. Throw in weather and action choices, and the possibilities surely increase to the thousands per side per impulse. 4 impulses would then yield, say, 2000**4 = 16,000,000,000,000.

Perfect strategies in WIF are beyond the capacity of man and machine.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 365

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/18/2013 7:37:31 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

With the number of dice rolls per turn you cannot lump 2 turns together.

My formulae have always been for multiple actions of the same type in a single turn by adding the percents together.

Example: 2x "Search & Seizure" in one turn would be 40%

I feel this is very over generous. What is your formula?

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 366

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 12:15:20 AM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

I have to say chess moves and random numbers are not the same thing.

While playing chess there are a finite number of first moves (20) for each side.

With random numbers there are considerably more possibilities.

On the first turn:

You have you have an unknown number of dice rolls followed by a 10-sided die roll.

On the second turn:

You have an unknown number of additional dice rolls followed by a 10-sided die roll.

The only thing the 10-sided die rolls have in common is they occur during the same stage of different turns.

While I add percentages together if they occur back to back for the same issue this also is unlikely.

You cannot get an increase in percentages from turn to turn otherwise there is no such thing as a random number.

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 367

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 1:04:14 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

I have to say chess moves and random numbers are not the same thing.

While playing chess there are a finite number of first moves (20) for each side.

With random numbers there are considerably more possibilities.

On the first turn:

You have you have an unknown number of dice rolls followed by a 10-sided die roll.

On the second turn:

You have an unknown number of additional dice rolls followed by a 10-sided die roll.

The only thing the 10-sided die rolls have in common is they occur during the same stage of different turns.

While I add percentages together if they occur back to back for the same issue this also is unlikely.

You cannot get an increase in percentages from turn to turn otherwise there is no such thing as a random number.

Never visit Las Vegas.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 368

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 4:16:01 AM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Never visit Las Vegas.

Your advice is too late.

I've been to Las Vegas several times along with Atlantic City and worked at the Hard Rock casino here.

Rhetorical Question: Steve when you go to Las Vegas do you have a system you play that never fails?

Of course you do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I taught statistics at the college level. The way to combine the probabilities of a sequence of independent events is what I used. It can be shown rather simply using a tree diagram. At the top are the different outcomes of the first die roll. Beneath each of those outcomes insert the full set of possibilities of the second die roll, and so on down the page, building a tree structure.

In this case there were two possible outcomes for each event. So the top level has 2 outcomes, the second level has 4, the third level, 8 and so on increasing by powers of 2.

If there were more possible outcomes (e.g., in land, naval, or air combats), say 5, then the first level would have 5, the second 25, and the third 125. This is what makes calculating the likelihood of success for a groups of attacks on a front line so difficult.

Using your sequence of independent events please explain:

How does 80% in two rolls become 64%?

While 20% in two rolls becomes 36%,

Working with dice combinations two 10-sided dice give you 100 possible combinations.

Of that 100 possible combinations only three dice combinations will be a 2 or less.

The first die roll is listed horizontally.
The second die roll is listed vertically.

...1234567890
1 xx
2 x
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 369

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 7:50:20 AM

Cad908

Posts: 1333
Joined: 10/9/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

Using your sequence of independent events please explain:

How does 80% in two rolls become 64%?

While 20% in two rolls becomes 36%,

Working with dice combinations two 10-sided dice give you 100 possible combinations.

Of that 100 possible combinations only three dice combinations will be a 2 or less.

The first die roll is listed horizontally.
The second die roll is listed vertically.

...1234567890
1 xx
2 x
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0

Oh for heavens sake. Lets try restating your question with this:

An NBA player gets fouled and is awarded 2 Free Throws;
That player's Free Throw (FT) percentage is 80%, which means he makes 8 and misses 2 out of every 10 foul shots;

What is the probability he will:

(1) Make both FT's?
(2) Make one & Miss one FT?
(3) Miss both FT's?

Answer:

First FT: Make 80% (Outcome A) Miss 20% (Outcome B)
Second FT: Make 80% (Outcome C) Miss 20% (Outcome D)

Therefore:

(1) Outcome A * Outcome C = .8 * .8 = .64 or 64%
(2) Outcome A * Outcome D + Outcome B * Outcome C = (.8 * .2) + (.8 * .2) = .16 + .16 = .32 or 32%
(3) Outcome B * Outcome D = .2 * .2 = .04 or 4 %

So, from the Axis perspective 64% of the time ZERO entry markers will be added, 32% ONE marker will be added, and 4% of the time TWO markers will be added

Stated in another way, on average, the Allies will get 32 + 8 = 40 markers added on 100 draws of 2 search and seizures, which works out to 20% + 20%.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 370

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 10:04:25 AM

michaelbaldur

Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline

quote:

Of that 100 possible combinations only three dice combinations will be a 2 or less.

what ... only 1 combination will be 2 or less. both ones ....

_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to Cad908)

Post #: 371

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 12:53:07 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Never visit Las Vegas.

Your advice is too late.

I've been to Las Vegas several times along with Atlantic City and worked at the Hard Rock casino here.

Rhetorical Question: Steve when you go to Las Vegas do you have a system you play that never fails?

Of course you do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I taught statistics at the college level. The way to combine the probabilities of a sequence of independent events is what I used. It can be shown rather simply using a tree diagram. At the top are the different outcomes of the first die roll. Beneath each of those outcomes insert the full set of possibilities of the second die roll, and so on down the page, building a tree structure.

In this case there were two possible outcomes for each event. So the top level has 2 outcomes, the second level has 4, the third level, 8 and so on increasing by powers of 2.

If there were more possible outcomes (e.g., in land, naval, or air combats), say 5, then the first level would have 5, the second 25, and the third 125. This is what makes calculating the likelihood of success for a groups of attacks on a front line so difficult.

Using your sequence of independent events please explain:

How does 80% in two rolls become 64%?

While 20% in two rolls becomes 36%,

Working with dice combinations two 10-sided dice give you 100 possible combinations.

Of that 100 possible combinations only three dice combinations will be a 2 or less.

The first die roll is listed horizontally.
The second die roll is listed vertically.

...1234567890
1 xx
2 x
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0

My 'system', which I learned in college, is that it is always best to be the house. I don't gamble against the house - it is like giving money away. For instance, in Las Vegas the casinos will tell you the odds of you winning at each game of chance; it's never 100+%. Poker among friends is a different story, but I will only play very small stakes even there. While I am an excellent chess player, my skill at poker isn't worth risking my hard earned money.

---

Here's how the odds for the land combat tables are explained in the Players Manual.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 372

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 4:32:11 PM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
An NBA player gets fouled and is awarded 2 Free Throws;
That player's Free Throw (FT) percentage is 80%, which means he makes 8 and misses 2 out of every 10 foul shots;

What is the probability he will:

(1) Make both FT's?
(2) Make one & Miss one FT?
(3) Miss both FT's?

Answer:

First FT: Make 80% (Outcome A) Miss 20% (Outcome B)
Second FT: Make 80% (Outcome C) Miss 20% (Outcome D)

Therefore:

(1) Outcome A * Outcome C = .8 * .8 = .64 or 64%
(2) Outcome A * Outcome D + Outcome B * Outcome C = (.8 * .2) + (.8 * .2) = .16 + .16 = .32 or 32%
(3) Outcome B * Outcome D = .2 * .2 = .04 or 4 %

So, from the Axis perspective 64% of the time ZERO entry markers will be added, 32% ONE marker will be added, and 4% of the time TWO markers will be added

Stated in another way, on average, the Allies will get 32 + 8 = 40 markers added on 100 draws of 2 search and seizures, which works out to 20% + 20%.

First FT: Make 80% (Outcome A) Miss 20% (Outcome B)
Second FT: Make 80% (Outcome C) Miss 20% (Outcome D)

Therefore:

(1) Outcome A * Outcome C = .8 * .8 = .64 or 64%
(2) (Outcome A * Outcome D) + (Outcome B * Outcome C) = (.8 * .2) + (.8 * .2) = .16 + .16 = .32 or 32%
(3) Outcome B * Outcome D = .2 * .2 = .04 or 4%

Rolling one 6-sided die to roll a one the odds are 6 to 1 (16.6%).

Shooting craps
To roll snake eyes (a combination of 1 and 1) the odds are 36 to 1 (2.7%).

...123456
1 x
2
3
4
5
6

When shooting craps house odds are weighted in the house favor at 31 to 1.

First craps roll: no snake eyes 97.3% (Outcome A) Makes snake eyes 2.7% (Outcome B)
Second craps roll: no snake eyes 97.3% (Outcome C) Makes snake eyes 2.7% (Outcome D)

(1) (Outcome A * Outcome C) * 100 or (.973 * .973) * 100
or 94.6% to not roll snake eyes on your second roll.

(2) ((Outcome A * Outcome D) + (Outcome D * Outcome C)) * 100
Or ((.973 * .027) + (.973 * .027)) * 100
Or (2.6% + 2.6%) = 5.2% to roll snake eyes on your second roll. Even if you pass the dice go to dinner and come back.

(3) ((Outcome B * Outcome D) * 100) or ((.027 + .027) * 100) = 5.4%

When shooting craps play the odds not the statistics.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Extraneous -- 7/19/2013 9:27:21 PM >

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 373

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 4:49:20 PM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

The Allies are The House in World in Flames. Excessive betting against them on the first two turns is poor strategy.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 374

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 7:24:13 PM

Cad908

Posts: 1333
Joined: 10/9/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
An NBA player gets fouled and is awarded 2 Free Throws;
That player's Free Throw (FT) percentage is 80%, which means he makes 8 and misses 2 out of every 10 foul shots;

What is the probability he will:

(1) Make both FT's?
(2) Make one & Miss one FT?
(3) Miss both FT's?

Answer:

First FT: Make 80% (Outcome A) Miss 20% (Outcome B)
Second FT: Make 80% (Outcome C) Miss 20% (Outcome D)

Therefore:

(1) Outcome A * Outcome C = .8 * .8 = .64 or 64%
(2) Outcome A * Outcome D + Outcome B * Outcome C = (.8 * .2) + (.8 * .2) = .16 + .16 = .32 or 32%
(3) Outcome B * Outcome D = .2 * .2 = .04 or 4 %

So, from the Axis perspective 64% of the time ZERO entry markers will be added, 32% ONE marker will be added, and 4% of the time TWO markers will be added

Stated in another way, on average, the Allies will get 32 + 8 = 40 markers added on 100 draws of 2 search and seizures, which works out to 20% + 20%.

First FT: Make 80% (Outcome A) Miss 20% (Outcome B)
Second FT: Make 80% (Outcome C) Miss 20% (Outcome D)

Therefore:

(1) Outcome A * Outcome C = .8 * .8 = .64 or 64%
(2) (Outcome A * Outcome D) + (Outcome B * Outcome C) = (80% * 20%) + (80% * 20%) = 160% + 160% = 320%
(3) Outcome B * Outcome D = 20% * 20% = .04 or 4 %

Really, 320%? This probability distribution should add up to 100%, or 64 + 32 + 4 = 100.

In my world, 80% * 20% = .8 * .2 = .16 or 16%, not 160%.

If you are having difficulties with this example, you should really not be offering AI advice. I think brian's rule in the post above is a good one to follow.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 375

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 9:58:18 PM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cad908

Really, 320%? This probability distribution should add up to 100%, or 64 + 32 + 4 = 100.

In my world, 80% * 20% = .8 * .2 = .16 or 16%, not 160%.

If you are having difficulties with this example, you should really not be offering AI advice. I think brian's rule in the post above is a good one to follow.

Excuse me for trying to understand a poorly written formula. Is it better now?

It only took me three posts to get them to post the formula in the first place. Then I had to figure it out.

Did you note my changes to the formula to arrive at a percentage (1) (Outcome A * Outcome C) * 100?

That is how Steve should have posted the formula.

Have you ever programmed a computer professionally?

I'm glad you agree with Brian others have posted just the opposite. To me 20% is a good bet.

Since you just started posting here today "Welcome to the MWiF forum".

Control Alternate Delete 906.

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Cad908)

Post #: 376

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/19/2013 10:41:01 PM

Cad908

Posts: 1333
Joined: 10/9/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cad908

Really, 320%? This probability distribution should add up to 100%, or 64 + 32 + 4 = 100.

In my world, 80% * 20% = .8 * .2 = .16 or 16%, not 160%.

If you are having difficulties with this example, you should really not be offering AI advice. I think brian's rule in the post above is a good one to follow.

Excuse me for trying to understand a poorly written formula. Is it better now?

It only took me three posts to get them to post the formula in the first place. Then I had to figure it out.

Did you note my changes to the formula to arrive at a percentage (1) (Outcome A * Outcome C) * 100?

That is how Steve should have posted the formula.

Have you ever programmed a computer professionally?

I'm glad you agree with Brian others have posted just the opposite. To me 20% is a good bet.

Since you just started posting here today "Welcome to the MWiF forum".

Control Alternate Delete 906.

The "poorly written formula" you describe is a pretty simple probability distribution not unlike flipping a coin twice. The expected outcomes from that experiment are:

25% TWO Heads
25% TWO Tails
50% ONE Head and ONE Tail

because each event (Head or Tail) has a 50% probability. I hope we can agree on that.

I have posted several times in this forum, though in different threads. My profession is corporate finance so I do not write software for a living. Though, for the life of me, I cannot see what that has to do with the probability distribution we have been discussing. Also, for what it is worth, I have been beta testing MWiF during the last 2 1/2 years.

< Message edited by Cad908 -- 7/20/2013 1:32:01 AM >

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 377

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 2:30:16 AM

Tonqeen

Posts: 45
Joined: 1/31/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Example: If you cast your bait and have a 10% chance to get a mackerel per cast, what is your probability to get two mackerel in a row?
It is 10% to get the first one (0,1) times the second one 10% (0,1) = 1% (0,01)
IF i got a mackerel in my first cast and holding it in the tail THEN I have 10% (0,1) chance to get a second one...

_____________________________

(in reply to Cad908)

Post #: 378

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 12:43:15 PM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cad908

1) The "poorly written formula" you describe is a pretty simple probability distribution not unlike flipping a coin twice. The expected outcomes from that experiment are:

2) 25% TWO Heads
25% TWO Tails
50% ONE Head and ONE Tail

because each event (Head or Tail) has a 50% probability. I hope we can agree on that.

3)I have posted several times in this forum, though in different threads. My profession is corporate finance so I do not write software for a living. Though, for the life of me, I cannot see what that has to do with the probability distribution we have been discussing. Also, for what it is worth, I have been beta testing MWiF during the last 2 1/2 years.

1) To a programmer you would be considered an "end user" to you the formula is simple and understandable. As a programmer it is a poorly written set of specifications.

Example:

Steve changed 80% to .8 and 20% to .2 unnecessaryly, with no reason, or instructions as to why.

I started multiplying 80 and 20 but didn't divide the result by 100 to get a percent (Outcome A * Outcome C) /100. I then thought this would probably confuse people since it wouldn't look like Steve's formula. The way a formula looks means a lot to people.

So I decided to submit my own example of the formula to make my point. But forgot that I needed to change the part of the document that I had been working on.

2) Statistically yes. But flipping coins is a bad example after the probability study on flipping coins disproved the statistics.

But the situation is not flipping coins we are rolling dice looking for a set of values.

3) Your profile shows only two posts on this forum since October 12, 2012.

Have you ever submitted specifications to your IT people for coding? They would probably explain that your computer has the comparable intelligence to that of a three-year-old human. You have to be specific with your instructions.

Two and a half years in the beta I'm glad to see they got some new people in there.

New business
You have suggested I cease posting advice on AI.

I have tried to get members of the beta to post on what they like about the game.

They have all refused.

One even posted he would rather flame people than post about the game.

Other than the "Best WWII movie?" thread there have been ZERO posts on the game not initiated by me.

I originally started this under a thread to discuss player global strategy. Steve moved this to the AI threads.

Since you are from Finance I would think the production aspect would be of interest to you. Why haven't you posted something in two and a half years?

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Cad908)

Post #: 379

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 2:36:31 PM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

80% is 80 divided by 100, which is 0.8. Extraneous, all your above posts indicate no knowledge of probability and a pretty poor grasp of basic mathematics but you lash out and blame others for your ignorance.

Plenty of people have started posts about the game. I've started several but from memory they were some time ago. In short, you appear to have a very strange attitude and have trouble getting along with people.

Just in case you're wondering, I am a commercial programmer and achieved a perfect score for university probability

Neilster

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 380

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 4:38:00 PM

Easo79

Posts: 99
Joined: 7/12/2013
From: Mallorca, Illes Balears
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
---

Here's how the odds for the land combat tables are explained in the Players Manual.

Is that a scan of your overused and aging printed manual, or is it that the Player Manual PDF has been created with that cool, pulp, vintage appearance?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 381

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 7:53:14 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easo79

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
---

Here's how the odds for the land combat tables are explained in the Players Manual.

Is that a scan of your overused and aging printed manual, or is it that the Player Manual PDF has been created with that cool, pulp, vintage appearance?

The latter.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Easo79)

Post #: 382

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 7:54:48 PM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster

1) 80% is 80 divided by 100, which is 0.8. Extraneous, all your above posts indicate no knowledge of probability and a pretty poor grasp of basic mathematics but you lash out and blame others for your ignorance.

2) Plenty of people have started posts about the game. I've started several but from memory they were some time ago. In short, you appear to have a very strange attitude and have trouble getting along with people.

Just in case you're wondering, I am a commercial programmer and achieved a perfect score for university probability

Neilster

Neilster do you receive all your programming assignments verbally?

1) And 100% is 1. You don't have to divide you can multiply by 0.01 its your choice.

Probability ~ the ratio of the number of outcomes in an exhaustive set of equally likely outcomes that produce a given event to the total number of possible outcomes

Odds ~ the probability that one thing is so or will happen rather than another.

2) Post# 3253 June 7, 2013

quote:

If any of you are passionate about an aspect of the game (pro or con) start a thread let's all discuss it. If you are a member of the MWiF beta test it may be necessary get Steve's permission first.

Why haven't you posted something about the game since then?

My attitude? I'm shocked have you forgotten already or didn't you get the memo?

Its Extraneous hunting season.

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 383

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 7:59:33 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cad908

1) The "poorly written formula" you describe is a pretty simple probability distribution not unlike flipping a coin twice. The expected outcomes from that experiment are:

2) 25% TWO Heads
25% TWO Tails
50% ONE Head and ONE Tail

because each event (Head or Tail) has a 50% probability. I hope we can agree on that.

3)I have posted several times in this forum, though in different threads. My profession is corporate finance so I do not write software for a living. Though, for the life of me, I cannot see what that has to do with the probability distribution we have been discussing. Also, for what it is worth, I have been beta testing MWiF during the last 2 1/2 years.

1) To a programmer you would be considered an "end user" to you the formula is simple and understandable. As a programmer it is a poorly written set of specifications.

Example:

Steve changed 80% to .8 and 20% to .2 unnecessaryly, with no reason, or instructions as to why.

I started multiplying 80 and 20 but didn't divide the result by 100 to get a percent (Outcome A * Outcome C) /100. I then thought this would probably confuse people since it wouldn't look like Steve's formula. The way a formula looks means a lot to people.

So I decided to submit my own example of the formula to make my point. But forgot that I needed to change the part of the document that I had been working on.

2) Statistically yes. But flipping coins is a bad example after the probability study on flipping coins disproved the statistics.

But the situation is not flipping coins we are rolling dice looking for a set of values.

3) Your profile shows only two posts on this forum since October 12, 2012.

Have you ever submitted specifications to your IT people for coding? They would probably explain that your computer has the comparable intelligence to that of a three-year-old human. You have to be specific with your instructions.

Two and a half years in the beta I'm glad to see they got some new people in there.

New business
You have suggested I cease posting advice on AI.

I have tried to get members of the beta to post on what they like about the game.

They have all refused.

One even posted he would rather flame people than post about the game.

Other than the "Best WWII movie?" thread there have been ZERO posts on the game not initiated by me.

I originally started this under a thread to discuss player global strategy. Steve moved this to the AI threads.

Since you are from Finance I would think the production aspect would be of interest to you. Why haven't you posted something in two and a half years?

Back off on attacking other posters, especially when you know so little about them.

Cad908's contribution to MWIF has been enormous. For instance, he has tested all the US Entry Options to make sure that code works. He has tested all possible land moves by all units types, in all weather, in all terrain, across all hexside terrain - and has proven that all that code works. He has extensively tested the Vichy France subphases. He has tested NetPlay as much as I have. I could add to this list, but I think I have made my point.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 384

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 8:10:07 PM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Back off on attacking other posters, especially when you know so little about them. Cad908's contribution to MWIF has been enormous. For instance, he has tested all the US Entry Options to make sure that code works. He has tested all possible land moves by all units types, in all weather, in all terrain, across all hexside terrain - and has proven that all that code works. He has extensively tested the Vichy France subphases. He has tested NetPlay as much as I have. I could add to this list, but I think I have made my point.

You know I will if he will.

Have you informed him about my contributions to the game?

Or are serving beta testers now immune to criticism?

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 385

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 8:45:47 PM

Cad908

Posts: 1333
Joined: 10/9/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

New business
You have suggested I cease posting advice on AI.

I have tried to get members of the beta to post on what they like about the game.

They have all refused.

One even posted he would rather flame people than post about the game.

Other than the "Best WWII movie?" thread there have been ZERO posts on the game not initiated by me.

I originally started this under a thread to discuss player global strategy. Steve moved this to the AI threads.

Since you are from Finance I would think the production aspect would be of interest to you. Why haven't you posted something in two and a half years?

To some extent, I think this is a fair question about what the beta team's role is, or should be, in the public forum. Here is what guides me on this subject:

1. I signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement which limits what I can say in the public forum. Various aspects of the program are covered by that agreement and I just will not comment on them.

2. I have a limited about of time available due to work and personal considerations. Because of this my choice has been to focus on Beta testing.

3. While I may not post much in the Public forum, I have been somewhat active in the Beta forum and in other ways. If you look at the production planning map from a couple of months ago, you will see that I was credited by Steve as the author. While I did the layout and editing, there was massive input from other Beta testers and it was very much a team effort. That was not a post per se, but a contribution?

4. Steve, via his monthly status reports, keeps this forum apprised as to the game's status. I have never seen this from any other developer, and really there is not much I could add to that discussion.

5. My experience with World in Flames is somewhat limited. Actually, I have never played a single impulse of the board game. I have a couple editions, two sets of maps and most of the counters - still unpunched. There is no way I could ever set this beast up in my apartment, let alone try it solo. I have played many computer games over the years, and was drawn to World in Flames by its reputation and the sheer audacity of what it does. Like many others, I followed Steve's posts and finally volunteered in March 2011. Given this, I really do not have much to add about the player's various strategic options within the game. I have learned the system, well some of it, through Beta testing and if Patrice, Paul, Peter, Michael, Orm, Lars, (et al) are saying something, it might be a good idea to listen.

6. The general tone of this forum often times is extremely negative bordering on toxic, or it seems that way to me. This is driven by frustration over the development time as is understandable. I agree, and think Steve would also, that it has taken to long. What can we say, or should we say, until there is a release date? I worry about the message being transmitted via these exchanges and if new members are getting turned off. I do not enjoy the negativity and, for the most part, therefore do not participate.

Again, these are just my views.

-Rob

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 386

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 9:21:11 PM

Easo79

Posts: 99
Joined: 7/12/2013
From: Mallorca, Illes Balears
Status: offline

quote:

The latter.

Nice!!

err...it would be so wonderful if there were a pre-release of the Manual...(at least a partial pre-release)

I have enjoyed reading your tutorials, and it seems that the Manual is going to be a nice book in itself. I am struggling with the Rules as Written, but it is hard. Sometimes it is of the "The party of the second part shall be known in this contract as the party of the second part" kind of reading, of Marx (not Karl) fame

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 387

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 9:39:13 PM

michaelbaldur

Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easo79

quote:

The latter.

Nice!!

err...it would be so wonderful if there were a pre-release of the Manual...(at least a partial pre-release) I have enjoyed reading your tutorials, and it seems that the Manual is going to be a nice book in itself. I am struggling with the Rules as Written, but it is hard. Sometimes it is of the "The party of the second part shall be known in this contract as the party of the second part" kind of reading, of Marx (not Karl) fame

it is really hard to pre-release something that is still being edited.

but i�m sure that there will be more on this closer to the release.

_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to Easo79)

Post #: 388

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 10:21:36 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Back off on attacking other posters, especially when you know so little about them. Cad908's contribution to MWIF has been enormous. For instance, he has tested all the US Entry Options to make sure that code works. He has tested all possible land moves by all units types, in all weather, in all terrain, across all hexside terrain - and has proven that all that code works. He has extensively tested the Vichy France subphases. He has tested NetPlay as much as I have. I could add to this list, but I think I have made my point.

You know I will if he will.

Have you informed him about my contributions to the game?

Or are serving beta testers now immune to criticism?

I disagree strongly.

Just because someone says that you are wrong, does not mean they are attacking you personally. I am told by the compiler dozens of times every day that I am wrong, but I do not believe that the compiler is attacking me personally. I've had beta testers reporting thousands of bugs in the game - where for one reason or another "I've done something wrong". That is not an attack on me personally.

The number of times you have said something that was incorrect in the forum is not a small number. But rarely have you posted, "oh yeah, I got that wrong." This is just one case. You asked Cad908 "Why haven't you posted something in two and a half years?" If you had bothered to look at his post, you would have seen that he has had over 1000 posts. Conclusion: your statement about his posts was wrong. But that seems to be a very difficult thing for you to admit. Instead you change the subject so the argument goes in another direction (e.g., about beta testers posting to the open forum).

You see, you could have stated to Cad908 something like: "I haven't seen a lot of posts by you." That would have been an objective statement and non-aggressive. It would have opened the door for him to reply factually. That's not your style though is it?

As for your statement: "You know I will if he will.", that made me laugh. Years ago I decided that you appear to believe you have 'WON' any discussion/argument if you made the last post. Regardless of how convoluted a position you have to take (e.g., arguing about grammar and syntax in rules) to justify your opinion, you just keep going and going.

---

And yes, you have managed to make me visibly irritated. That is not easy to do.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 389

RE: AI for MWiF - France - 7/20/2013 10:29:30 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easo79

quote:

The latter.

Nice!!

err...it would be so wonderful if there were a pre-release of the Manual...(at least a partial pre-release) I have enjoyed reading your tutorials, and it seems that the Manual is going to be a nice book in itself. I am struggling with the Rules as Written, but it is hard. Sometimes it is of the "The party of the second part shall be known in this contract as the party of the second part" kind of reading, of Marx (not Karl) fame

Thanks.

I decided to not to try to rewrite RAW (ADG's Rules as Written) when I wrote RAC (MWIF's Rules as Coded). RAC is 98% the same as RAW. Correcting all the grammar and vagueness of RAW would have been a lot of work and would have run the risk of a change in wording changing the meaning of a rule. Instead I decided to write the Players Manual as a full explanation of how MWIF works. For example, Section 7 is 53 pages, a step by step progress through the sequence of play.

I expect to post a few more screenshots later this month in the thread the Printed Manual.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Easo79)

Post #: 390