Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

User avatar
grandmaS
Grand Master
Posts: 5705
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 4:23 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by grandmaS » Wed Feb 18, 2009 9:36 pm

LOL so much noise in Spades you wouldn't be heard if you did Dusty hehe
Image

I am woman I am strong

Death_Row
Active Poster
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Death_Row » Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:00 am

I don't believe it's a matter of removing "some of the randomness" it's a matter of making the game "FEEL" random. Of which as the boards and your link to another board points out. This may need to be dealt with from a psychological point of view.... Problems are like "games" or puzzles, something to be figured out or solved... Why doesn't the other games have the same feel...? Why did they (the card games) transfer well from the physical to the digital and Backgammon didn't...? Is there something not seen that should be seen...? There is something missing....
Jonas wrote:We've thought of complicated ways that would attempt remove some of the randomness to try to make the rolls feel more "fair" to counter the perception problem.

The concern there would be introducing more problems. So less say we do something like roll the dice, should we null the roll if it doesn't match a certain criteria of likeliness? Would that make the game less fun in the sense that you'd likely not be that surprised ever? What would be the best way to determine that a roll needs to be rerolled?

Death_Row
Active Poster
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Death_Row » Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:40 am

"If all things are random"... why is it you get the purported "feeling" the computer game (single player) is cheating and you don't get that feeling with physical board game....

"If all things are random" why is it you get the purported "feeling" the computer is cheating with the ultra number of doubles and you don't get that feeling with physical board game....

You may be able to answer your/the question (and maybe solve the problem) by consulting with a Psychologist.

professionals who apply the science of psychology in health care services or in business and industry.

Just a thought

The mind is a wondrous thing.

Death_Row
Active Poster
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Death_Row » Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:03 pm

I have to say... I recommend the other games... but can't recommend backgammon due to the complaints about the dice perception issue... IMHO... single player game wasn't ready to roll out...

User avatar
Dust In The Wind
Guide
Posts: 5336
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:29 pm
Location: North Ga Mts

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Dust In The Wind » Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:46 pm

Oh your playing single player offline game, did you know you can change the "level" at which the BOT players??

JUST DUST
TO BE OR NOT TO BE..... NOW WHAT KIND OF QUESTION IS THAT??? TO BE OF COURSE!!!!!

Death_Row
Active Poster
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Death_Row » Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:13 am

You say that to say what?...

User avatar
grandmaS
Grand Master
Posts: 5705
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 4:23 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by grandmaS » Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:16 pm

I play backgammon and I love it. I do play it on line with other and only use a bot if someone quits. However I have yet to see them get and unfair advantage.
Image

I am woman I am strong

User avatar
Dust In The Wind
Guide
Posts: 5336
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:29 pm
Location: North Ga Mts

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Dust In The Wind » Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:23 pm

I say that to say if you cannot beat the BOT on a high level try a lower one, nothing more, nothing less.

JUST DUST

PS - I don't have problems with BOT's, if I don't like them, I replace them.
TO BE OR NOT TO BE..... NOW WHAT KIND OF QUESTION IS THAT??? TO BE OF COURSE!!!!!

Death_Row
Active Poster
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Death_Row » Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:59 pm

Sorry to have to inform you... it's well known there is a problem whether it be logic or "perception". Maybe you need to read the tread... as well as the link Jonas posted at the beginning of this thread. Become informed before you comment.... This has nothing to do with strategy (not for me anyway)... Do some homework...

Thanks for your comment...

Death_Row
Active Poster
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Death_Row » Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:15 pm

And by the way... if you'd read the thread and some of Jonas's comments... you'd have found where they've attempted (in thought) to deal with (in their minds) the perception problem. My concern is... they've given up either because other (off site) backgammon games have the same perception problem or because their creative juices have ceased to flow (or flow in the right direction). I'm sorry if you mis-take my comments to be something other than what they are...
Dust In The Wind wrote:I say that to say if you cannot beat the BOT on a high level try a lower one, nothing more, nothing less.

JUST DUST

PS - I don't have problems with BOT's, if I don't like them, I replace them.

User avatar
Dust In The Wind
Guide
Posts: 5336
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:29 pm
Location: North Ga Mts

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Dust In The Wind » Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:38 pm

I have read the thread... when one loses ones perception is that they were cheated or deceived in some manner. My suggestion was to play at a lower level and see if you "perceive" the same or is the opposite true that it is too easy, I find it too easy. I have played BG for many years, acey-deucy and played for money. What Jonas suggested was to cheat the randomous to make it seem as if the game is not rigged in some way. If you had read previous chat on the same issue you will find they have done an extensive study on the randomous of the roll and found it to be true and where trying to find how they would go about putting in a cheat to random generator to NOT allow certain random generated combinations.

As stated I don't have a problem with the BOT's and it must be because I feed my BOT's....

JUST DUST

PS - It maybe because also that I take this for what it is.... a GAME and I don't worry about it if I lose and yes I do LIKE to win but learned a long time ago it really don't matter if I had fun.
TO BE OR NOT TO BE..... NOW WHAT KIND OF QUESTION IS THAT??? TO BE OF COURSE!!!!!

Death_Row
Active Poster
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Death_Row » Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:40 pm

Please re-read this thread and the thread regarding the doubles issue. The problem comes in prior to one losing the game. Look it's a problem... Silver Creek knows it's a problem with perception. Other backgammon games have the same problem according to the link that Jonas posted. I've never heard the same complaints regarding the physical game. There is not the same problem any of the card games. Backgammon has not made the transition from physical to digital (in the same manner as the card games)... something to be worked on...

You have a good evening...
Dust In The Wind wrote:I have read the thread... when one loses ones perception is that they were cheated or deceived in some manner. My suggestion was to play at a lower level and see if you "perceive" the same or is the opposite true that it is too easy, I find it too easy. .

User avatar
Dust In The Wind
Guide
Posts: 5336
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:29 pm
Location: North Ga Mts

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Dust In The Wind » Tue Feb 24, 2009 7:46 pm

As quoted from the very first post "There seems to be an interesting effect in backgammon that folks feel like the computer gets special rolls to its benefit.

I'm here to tell you that not only it's it not the case, but that ethically we wouldn't do that. That just not how we roll. (sorry couldn't resist)"


As quoted by a second post...

We have collected data from games played on our lobby server and analyzed the results. The distribution of rolling doubles and series of doubles is as it should be.

As quoted from another post...
The logic that controls the die rolls has no information of what the computer needs. Nor does the AI have any knowledge of the Rolls prior to it's own roll.

We would have had to put in that logic for it to be able to a) roll what it needs, or b) take advantage of rolls before their rolled, and neither has been done.

If it appears the dice are rolling what it needs, it's either dumb luck, or its just more memorable than the times it doesn't.


And the last...

We've thought of complicated ways that would attempt remove some of the randomness to try to make the rolls feel more "fair" to counter the perception problem.

The concern there would be introducing more problems. So less say we do something like roll the dice, should we null the roll if it doesn't match a certain criteria of likeliness? Would that make the game less fun in the sense that you'd likely not be that surprised ever? What would be the best way to determine that a roll needs to be rerolled?



At no point does SCE say there is something wrong with the AI but the peception by a player that it is being unfair maybe judged by said player and to correct this would be to change the program to throw away some random selections (as I said, cheat the program).

I have followed and very aware of the post and what was said, maybe you can use these to view the post more accurately. Perception of getting your butt kicked at BG and that it was unfair that you lost or I lost because the program cheated is just that a perception not a fact. I also do not care if I don't win all the time and would prefer that the BOT's win every so often whether or not they got lucky and to chnage the program to take the random out for the sake of peception gets my NO!! vote. So I choose to disagree with making changes and this is a forum for such.

Thank you,

JUST DUST

PS - the doubles issue is a whole other issue and made suggestions to help resolve that too.
TO BE OR NOT TO BE..... NOW WHAT KIND OF QUESTION IS THAT??? TO BE OF COURSE!!!!!

Death_Row
Active Poster
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Death_Row » Wed Feb 25, 2009 1:45 am

One doesn't think about making changes to something they believe has no issues. The fact it was thought about... the fact a link was posted pointing others to another (other) Backgammon games with the same issues kinda proves my (and others) point. As much as I've played Backgammon and Acey Ducey (the physical game)... there has never been the types of complaints as leveled against the digital game (I've never complained, and have never heard complaints). This isn't to single out SC. However the fact we're (not just you and I) here (at Backgammon) and not over on the Spades, Hearts, or Euchre BB is saying something. A lot of what you posted proves my point (data collections, studies....), there have been complaints.

Somethings just don't transition (physical to digital) as well as others "right out the box..."

Thank you....

Death_Row
Active Poster
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Are the rolls stacked in the computers favor, absolutly not.

Post by Death_Row » Wed Feb 25, 2009 2:48 am

I just remember of a Backgammon (digital) I played a few years ago where I don't remember having this perception issue. The only difference is the other game had very poor graphics. However what they did have is the dice cups... you could shake the cup as many times as you wanted and then throw the dice. So far that's the only thing missing. You guys are big on graphics... have you thought about using the dice cups? It's cosmetic but the problem is purportedly perception.

Maybe "internally" each time a player shakes the cup (if the player shakes the cup 3 times... the random generator kicks in 3 times) random numbers can be generated (of which is what would be taking place inside the cup) and when the cup is flipped another number is generated.

1. No logic changes...
2. bit more code...
3. you're not trying to dumb down the game

Don't know if you guys have thought of this... but just throwing it out there (no pun intended)...

a. Player 1 release dice to player 2
b. Dice end up in player's 2 cup
c. Player 2 can shake (hold left mouse button and move mouse back and forth) cup
d. Player 2 can throw dice (release left mouse button)

of course there is a bit more to it than that... but I think you get the picture...

It adds another visual dimension (the one that's missing from the digital game) to the game that "MAY" resolve the perception issue... It gives the player the feeling of being in control of when the dice are thrown (perception). That perceived control is currently not there.

Thanks

p.s. this is something similar to the cut deck/shuffle feature in one of the card games (of which I believe also deals with a perception issue)

Post Reply