 |
|  |
 |
|
solo
|
|
Lowell, MA USA
Jan 2001 time: 05:14
|
|
samson,
For all the tests I did, yes, all eligible techs appeared, so I doubt any are held back, as they are when a list is presented for research.
The civ doing the tipping may indeed be a factor. I did not think of testing for differences among civs, and have even forgotten which civ was in use for the results above.
I reloaded before each tip, and have no results on multiple tips during the same turn. It was easier to do many tips this way, and I wanted a very large test sample. What surprised me was that I often got similar pairs and/or clusters for results we are used to seeing in actual games. I would have thought a reload would prevent the game from adjusting or favoring the odds of a similar result in subsequent tips. Noteworthy is the fact that units come up much more frequently than tech or gold before founding the first city, and yet tech results often came in pairs and clusters in spite of having a low overall chance of appearing at all as a category.
There are so many possible factors that may have an influence on tipping results, and so many tests are needed for a usable conclusions to be drawn, that I put research into the subject on hold until I have a few spare years of free time to devote to it. Anyways, I'd rather just play civ!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Edward
|
|
East Street Trader,
Detecting multiple reloads of the same game in rapid succession (i.e. detecting a player trying to change battle/hut outcomes) might be possible if, upon loading a saved game, the program 1) loaded the saved game 2) read the (hypothetical) saved game variable that says how many times this game has been reloaded in the last x minutes 3) immediately - before allowing the player to move - resaved the game with the number-of-times-this-game-has-been-saved-recently variable incremented by 1. However, I'll have to agree with Blaupanzer that this is more work than it's worth for the programmers, especially the subtle effect on battle outcomes for reloaded games. (After the key civ revelation, I don't give the programmers any credit for being subtle or complex (insane or sadistic...maybe)).
From a programming viewpoint both following a sequence and randomly choosing from a weighted list are easy to implement. However the sequence method might take a little more planning. When I program, I tend towards random probability since it's more "realistic", less predictable, and less exploitable than making a sequence. However the Civ2 programmers were very fond of sequences.
It could be hard to unravel the hut sequence (as is evidenced by the fact that OEDO years and tech categories remained mysteries for so long). The programmers might have used sequences so as to avoid a player getting a long string of similar results by random luck. If you jump into the sequence list at a random (or not so random) spot, you can construct your list so as to guarantee that players never get three of the same result in a row. But maybe you want to make a few pairs so players don't say "I just uncovered a barbarian horde, so my next hut this turn is guaranteed not to be barbarians." Perhaps the hut seed changes every turn and every reload. I'd be very interested in the results of shade's suggested experiment - pop a whole bunch of huts on the same turn and see if there's a pattern.
I'd quickly rally behind shade's random probability hypothesis if it hadn't been shown already how many times the programmers chose illogical sequences over realistic probabilities. It wouldn't surprize me if we were eventually able to predict the outcome of a battle based on how long ago the participating units were created. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
solo
|
|
Lowell, MA USA
Jan 2001 time: 05:14
|
|
In my current game I'm getting a lot of nomads, after using the starting settlers to found cities. Used to be I'd keep nomads to make improvements since they do not cost any food or shield support, but plunking down a city instead does indeed trigger a high probability of nomad results afterwards.
One more thing may play a factor in boosting the probability of nomads from huts. In my game I had not built any settlers yet, either. Perhaps the fact that I had no settlers of any type makes the game want to provide one even more, because after I built a settler with a city, nomad hut results decreased. One game does not prove anything, but this is worth testing, too.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Caesar the Great
|
 |
New York
Apr 1999 time: 00:14
|
|
A random thought I had when reading through this thread... the percentages of each tech.......
Pottery 18%
Alphabet 16%
Warrior Code 22%
Horseback Riding 26%
Bronze Working 7%
Masonry 10%
Ceremonial Burial 1%
Two things, the military techs were the highest, 22% and 26%, next highest was economic, 18%, next highest was academic, 16%, next highest was applied, 10% and 7%, and least was social 1%... I think this hold relatively true for all techs you receive from huts, for I have no recollection of ever getting monarchy, code of laws, ceremonial burial, philosophy, polythiesm etc from huts. Meanwhile I have often gotten Warrior Code, Horseback Riding, Feudalism, Currency and Trade from huts....
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Caesar the Great
|
 |
New York
Apr 1999 time: 00:14
|
|
I remember once I was trying to play an OCC game, just to get a feel for the style of play. So I have one of my early explorers out looking for a trading partner, I pop a hut, I get an advanced tribe, I reload, advanced tribe again, I continue this, and I must have reloaded at least 20 times and each time I was given an advanced tribe, I just got so frustrated I gave up. This was diety, raging, 2.42, small map, I've never had that happen to me on MGE, then again I never play OCC on MGE, so I take advanced tribes as they come... maybe this was just a random occurence, but this hut was in the city radius of 2 whales a river and was on a grassland sheild, a perfect city location, and I could never get it to not pop a hut, maybe I still have the save, but I'm probably just too lazy to look.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Capitano Morgan
|
|
ABQ NM
Jun 2001 time: 23:14
|
|
First Post!
Err, I mean this is my first post. I don't think the hut popping is completely random.
Many times when I have a great start, like 5-6 cities at 3000 bc (from the huts). I'll be working to get Monarchy to make life a little more pleasant. It seems the computer will give me techs from every hut I pop, to slow down my march to Monarchy. Also, if I demand tribute from anyone I get a technology and Monarchy is a little further away.
Another thing the computer does when your ahead is to give you nothing but units (pre monarchy). This means you nearest city will quickly lose its ability to produce anything. I hate this tactic too.
One thing that really seems to trigger the above evil software tactics is when you have discovered a huge unoccupied area. I don't know if this is a principal ingredient of the power ranking or not, but when I have a huge area and a good start I'm usally whining pretty fast.
Regards,
Bill
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
samson
|
|
quote: An unanswered question is just what algorithms of what quality were used by the developers of our favourite game? |
Well, the four-year revolution cycle had a lot of people thinking it was "random" for a long time.
So I don't think the bar is set too high.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Bird
|
|
South Orange, New Jersey
Jan 1970 time: 00:14
|
|
If you can be assured of a reasonably high number of nomads once the original second settler is out of the way, it could have a strategic impact on OCC games. Let's say you have a good starting spot and have found a hut that gives you an exploring unit. Use the second settler to immediately increase the city size and bank on finding a nomad to return to the city before you really need the terrain improvements. This will be particularly useful with city locations that have a couple of whales, since you don't need to improve them to maximize their benefits (prior to building a harbor, of course). This may help get to monarchy earlier, plus everything that follows from that.....
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14. Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|