Dynamic probability in computer games sucks

[StellarRat]

I don't know what you mean by "dynamic probability", but it is true that computers can have problems generating truely random numbers. I've seen this problem in occur in Turbo Pascal once. It had an alarming tendency to roll 98 and 99 when we wanted a 1 to 100 spread. Basically we fixed the problem by reversing the required numbers so that 1 and 2 were "unlikely" event rolls. However I don't know anything about how CMBB generates it's random numbers. We ended up writing a little program that rolled and counted what "random" numbers the computer generating and found the problem after several thousand rolls.

[ August 10, 2003, 03:56 PM: Message edited by: StellarRat ]

[PiggDogg]

Sergei & Michael,

Oh so exemplary with Sergei's experience.

However, I'll take Catherine Zeta Jones or Salma Hayek. Now "that" is a wonderful choice. Can't go wrong there.

Cheers, Richard

[Bastables]

Originally posted by ['nzn]:

Bastables:

What you call "sans propaganda" is simply anti-soviet propaganda instead of the pro-soviet one (which you call just "propaganda" correspondingly).

Seventeen tanks lost against hundreds? My ass! Id think you are trying to joke if you didnt sound so seriously.

You can choose to believe or disbelieve, those are the numbers recorded as irretrievably lost by 5th Tank guard army and 2 SS-Pz Korp at the battle of Prokhovka for there respective general staff to base decisions on, armies tend to be much better at recording their own losses than estimating the enemies. These are the actual losses suffred sans propaganda from either side, not Soviet estimates of German losses and not German estimates of Soviet losses.

You do remember that the "west" was allied with the USSR during the period?