Jump to content

Jeff Wilder

Members
  • Content Count

    2,818
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Jeff Wilder reacted to Hiemfire in Podcast - Wide World of Wargaming (X-Wing)   
    Whoot!
    Edit1: @FlyAndtheMighty To answer your question about S&V and Sat Salvo (If it hasn't already been). Kimogila, Andrasta Firespray and Y-Wings (those are the 3 chassis with reload in S&V) all can make use of it with the Kimo specifically having a semi-synergy with the talent against targets in bullseye (other than against ******* force users).
    Edit2: @Jeff Wilder Bare Scum Han pilot has dropped 6 points after remaining unchanged for 5 points updates.
  2. Like
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from Hiemfire in Podcast - Wide World of Wargaming (X-Wing)   
    Episode 75 of Wide World of Wargaming (X-Wing) (last time!) is now available.
    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/pb-9j8jr-e5ad16?utm_campaign=w_share_ep&utm_medium=dlink&utm_source=w_share
    Unfortunately, no time to do a blurb for this one, as I had to physically come into my office and do actual work.  The horror.
    We discuss about half, maybe a bit more, of the points changes, and then reveal our new name (which we all really like)!
    Sorry for the radio silence for a while ... we've had some audio troubles, losing an entire episode.  Vince managed to save this one.
    Y'all have a good week!
  3. Thanks
    Jeff Wilder reacted to CoffeeMinion in The Big X-Wing Trade Thread   
    Thanks again to @Jeff Wilder, @QQMoore, and @Zero8855 for another round of trades!
  4. Thanks
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from CoffeeMinion in The Big X-Wing Trade Thread   
    Two more good quick-turnaround trades from @CoffeeMinion!
  5. Confused
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from Rydiak in [Blog] How to Fix an E-Wing.   
    I love the E-wing, so I enjoyed that.  One very minor thing: it's "jibe with," not "jive with."
  6. Like
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from CoffeeMinion in The Big X-Wing Trade Thread   
    At long last, my trade list is up-to-date.
     
  7. Like
    Jeff Wilder reacted to dsul413 in XWD33: Acquisition Strategy 4: Jango Unleashed   
    XWD30: Work the Board Edge, Part 1: Turns and K-Turns
    https://xwingdebrief.wordpress.com/2020/07/18/work-the-board-edge-part-1-turns-and-k-turns/
    New post up (first in apparently awhile!) We've been busy with streaming, discording, YouTube, and all that, but back to our roots with the blog. I started a new position at work that makes me a little less consistent with streaming, so writing becomes my X-Wing outlet again! Sorry for the break. Here are some rules of thumb and Vassal visuals for board edge maneuvering, first in a 4 part series.
  8. Haha
  9. Thanks
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from nitrobenz in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    It's the first.  I don't think it's possible to stop people from calling a roll "average," so I would be a little happier if they'd expand what they call an "average" roll, though.  It's really striking: you'll see a player roll HFB and hear it called "exactly average," and then the same player will roll HHB and have it called "really good."  It's like ... wut?  This sort of thing really is contributing to the misunderstanding of probability, and probability is already not intuitive.
  10. Like
  11. Like
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from nitrobenz in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    Agreed.  I don't really have any objection to calling it an "expected" roll, or a "normal" roll.  It's just that when it's referred to an "the average roll," it's misleading people who don't really understand that it's actually noticeably sub-average.
  12. Thanks
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from punkUser in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    I think wurms is restating what I hypothesized in my original post as the reason people like to call HFB the "average" roll: it "visually represents" every face of the attack die ... as long as you don't count crits.  It's just one of those fuzzy things that folks strangely consider relevant.
  13. Like
    Jeff Wilder reacted to Hiemfire in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    The 0.5 factors in physical interactions with the rolling environment and the other dice during a roll if I'm understanding @Baaa's posts in this thread correctly. Those would be the outside factor.
  14. Like
    Jeff Wilder reacted to Baaa in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    You've done the maths, so just add an outside factor in (a condition) which initially will be 0.5.
    There's a book on my bookshelf which I dip into now and then not a Rick Roll honest which would explain it better. The problem with the vast majority of dice games (and I include X-Wing as a dice game) is that players (me) go for the easy pure mathematical model. 
    Nothing wrong with that in the grand scheme of things but it's not entirely accurate.
    Cheers
    Baaa
     
  15. Like
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from Hiemfire in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    Just to add a little bit of context:
    I am addressing the tendency of X-Wing players and commentators to talk about rolls, whether "good," "average" or "bad."  And they usually do that without regard for dice modifications available: i.e., they are usually strictly talking about what shows on the dice.
    For reasons discussed, that is a problematic way of looking at things, in a strict sense, but there is some validity in ranking rolls from "phenomenal" to "abysmal," right?  I mean, in the absence of corner cases, CCC is better than HHH.  Without other information, does anybody disagree?  And HHH is better than FFF, and FFF is better than BBB?  (Yes, I know that in the absence of a way to modify your focus results, they are effectively the same result, but without knowledge of whether a ship has the ability to modify focus results, does anybody disagree that FFF is a better roll than BBB?)
    That's the reason that I assigned values to results, and thus values to the full roll, to get a spectrum of roll values to look at (albeit, again, without regard to dice modifications available).  I couldn't really think of another way to do it, if in fact we can all agree that CCC (or even CHH) is a "better" roll than HHH.
    Really, without consideration of dice modification, players and commentators should consider every HMM and HHM raw roll as equally worthy of calling "average," if they're (we're) going to call rolls average at all.
  16. Like
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from Ablazoned in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    https://imgur.com/YprsAxD
    (Sorry for just the link.  I'm working, and my firm has some weird stuff locked down.)
    EDIT: I left off CFB, which is also only 0.5 from "average."
     
  17. Like
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from Ablazoned in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    Agreed.  I don't really have any objection to calling it an "expected" roll, or a "normal" roll.  It's just that when it's referred to an "the average roll," it's misleading people who don't really understand that it's actually noticeably sub-average.
  18. Like
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from punkUser in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    @punkUser - Personally speaking, I'd like you to advertise whatever calculator you're talking about more explicitly.
    This is good stuff.
  19. Like
    Jeff Wilder reacted to theBitterFig in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    If we're treating Crits and Hits identically... So much nicer for fast math...
    HHF = 0.5 * 0.5 * 0.25 * 3 = 0.1875
    HHB = 0.5 * 0.5 * 0.25 * 3 = 0.1875
    HFB = 0.5 * 0.25 * 0.25 * 6 = 0.1875
    All equally likely outcomes.
    Indeed.  I'm loading up stuff on the calculator ( http://xwing.gateofstorms.net/2/multi_preset/ ) all the time, since that's really the most accurate way to evaluate stuff.*
    I still think Advanced Optics is kind of a special case of the HFB mental trap.  With something like Predator or Howlrunner, someone mired in HFB will think "Oh, I'll reroll the blank, and can still spend my focus," and while their process will be entirely wrong, their final destination won't be as far distant.
     
    * I only wish it could model the Autoblasters effect...
  20. Like
    Jeff Wilder reacted to Brunas in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    http://xwing.gateofstorms.net/2/multi_preset/

    the thread got removed for advertising (???????????)

    meanwhile, things that are actual patreons, actually infringe copyright, etc are around.  Was pretty dank, would recommend.
  21. Like
    Jeff Wilder reacted to Baaa in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    I think that the problem with any game that involves dice and trying to figure out the probability of outcomes is that they are nearly always based on models which use "clean" results.
    Now, whilst these outcomes may be nearly close to the actual dice rolls that players hit, they invariably don't don't include conditions.
    A model that included some form of Bayesian updating would be slightly more accurate.
    Cheers
    Baaa
  22. Like
    Jeff Wilder reacted to punkUser in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    Yep but it's worth noting that that applies to *every* case, not just specific mods. You can't pick a value that you consider representative out of the distribution of rolls then mod *that* and claim it is representative of the distribution of *results*. You have to apply your mods to *every* possible roll separately and then combine those *results* based on the probabilities of those rolls. Yes it gets tedious for anything beyond the simple cases. If only someone wrote a tool to automate it... (or is that too close to "advertising" on these forums) 
  23. Like
    Jeff Wilder reacted to theBitterFig in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    1.5 hits       =P       with a focus token, 2.25       ;}
    The place where I think it's really lead to mistakes: evaluation of Advanced Optics on a 3-red ship.  Someone will say: "Oh, but the average roll will have a hit/eye/blank, so Optics will be wasted on average."  And that's just plain inaccurate.  HHB will show up about 19% of the time, treating crits as hits.
  24. Thanks
    Jeff Wilder got a reaction from punkUser in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    It's the first.  I don't think it's possible to stop people from calling a roll "average," so I would be a little happier if they'd expand what they call an "average" roll, though.  It's really striking: you'll see a player roll HFB and hear it called "exactly average," and then the same player will roll HHB and have it called "really good."  It's like ... wut?  This sort of thing really is contributing to the misunderstanding of probability, and probability is already not intuitive.
  25. Like
    Jeff Wilder reacted to punkUser in What's an "average" roll on 3 attack dice?   
    If your intention here is to convince people that talking about "the average roll" is nonsense in the first place, same team! If it's to instead shift the discussion to trying to argue that "no, HHB or some other result is actually the average" and thus I can feel validated complaining when I get (whatever thing I think is worse than that) then super nope - that's the same mistake about distributions everyone else is making.

    Ex. the frequency of HHB and HHF is identical, and indeed that's true for any permutations of blanks and focuses obviously. Assigning focus a "higher value" from the point of view of X-Wing is not really meaningful... either you have a focus mod you are willing to spend or you don't when you roll those dice. If you do then focuses are hits and you're rolling a 6/8 die. If you don't, they're blanks. Obviously rerolls and other mods factor into this too, but that's the whole point: the only meaningful thing to measure from a roll distribution is the results *after modding*, not the "roll" itself.

    None of this making up "values" for dice or results or anything else - it's a pretty simple probabilities and distributions. Usually when people get confused it's because they are asking questions or making assumptions that are fundamentally flawed. Ex. there's no such thing as an "average *roll*" (only average results), as you are pointing out here.
×
×
  • Create New...