Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:00 pm
theonlysaneone wrote:Cranberry is right, the randomizer that determines which WC piece you get (as with all computer pseudo-randomizers) is broken....
Er -- why do you say that? The language library's (PHP, I think) random generator should definitely be statistically random (all outcomes equally likely without knowledge of the values the function previously spit out). PHP is very widely used, so any breakage in the library's rand() should have been caught by now. If TNT wanted it to be statistically random, I wouldn't see why they wouldn't use the built-in generator. If it isn't random, then it pretty much has to be intentional - even an incompetent programmer knows how to use rand()...
Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:24 pm
I was hoping this thread had died. 
Maybe it's intentional, but it's definitely not completely random -- some pieces are MUCH more common than others.
Maybe it's intentional, but it's definitely not completely random -- some pieces are MUCH more common than others.
Fri Apr 27, 2007 12:17 am
Sorry, Cran
I always thought you would get the more "rare" pieces if you placed in the top three rather than the top four. I always get more expensive pieces when I place in top three or in the top place overall....
*kicks thread life support system*
I always thought you would get the more "rare" pieces if you placed in the top three rather than the top four. I always get more expensive pieces when I place in top three or in the top place overall....
*kicks thread life support system*