Originally Posted by TyPinOwly


Well I have recorded 662 rolls myself so far and intend to continue. For the interested people: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15ahq3jkENBJ_gLPDDeHFZDK2Kg9oZhCCaNZ6p8ijWPM/edit?usp=sharing


There remain two ranges in particular that are intriguing, at least some. The 90-95% one, as ~10% below the expected (though I was 9% above the expected in my 81% hit chance test -- came out at 90% after 50 rolls). And the 50-55% one. You personally also rarely come out above the expected in your bigger samples, whilst for me it was a mixed experience of being above and below. Excluding the damage roll and AI vs player bias tests I did:

70 rolls 90% hits expected 95% -5%
50 rolls 76% hits expected 75% +1%
50 rolls 90% hits expected 94% -4%
50 rolls 90% hits expected 81% +9%
40 rolls 50% hits expected 49% +1%
75 rolls 93.33% h expected 94% -0.67%
35 rolls 71.42% h expected 66.54% +4.88%
50 rolls 100% hits expected 100% +/- 0%
100rolls 88% hits expected 90% -2%
TOTAL: +4.21% (not weighted accordingly)


I may just do that 55% one over a really big sample of data in the hopes of getting multiple bad and good streaks, and showing what they may mean in the bigger picture. The supposedly "buggy" bugbears may again be a good target for that, so two birds with one stone. laugh edit: Starting good so far, of the first 30 rolls only about a third are hits. Let's see what this may mean in the long run.

NOt that'd convince anybody who isn't convinced yet -- I actually kind of find this fun. laugh

Last edited by Sven_; 24/10/20 08:45 AM.