|
|
Post by hsumthin on Nov 29, 2004 17:45:51 GMT -5
I'd like to know in one thread, who thinks what about the CPU cheating. Personally I've only seen it cheat in this manner:
Before it rolls it'll cast a weakening spell on the opposing creature it WILL land on because of the roll and sometimes on the one it'll land on after the current turn. I haven't fought too many of the NPCs but from the ones I have, that seems to hold true. However they will use MHP decreasers and ST decreasers on your strongest creature. I do not believe in the idea that it is just doing what is the best idea at the moment because there are plenty of times where they are near opposing chains and do not cast because they will skip it by with those **** lucky rolls. I do not think it cheats on the rolls but it does know what they are going to be.
I guess the best defense against this is to mess with their rolls with the dice spells. side question: how effective is the reverse direction spell on small maps? big maps? specific maps?
|
|
|
|
Post by iamada on Jan 27, 2005 14:29:23 GMT -5
I've often though this, but looking at it like from a programmer's (not games) perspective....
I imagine the game uses a rand() function of some kind when the dice rolls.
The programmers could have put in some sort of probability function that the higher NPCs use to determine odds.
Example: if facing an opponent's Level 5 creatures in a chain, 1)what are the odds the roll will get the NPC past the chained creatures. 2) what are the likely outcomes of a dice roll ? Then say, if the chance of hitting a spot on the chain is > X%, and the odds are greatest the next roll will be N, then hit the creature on the N square with a negative-effect spell.
The one advantage the computer DOES have is that it knows everything about every card and what in the it's current deck will increase it's chances of surving a landing on spot N. I think that's where the computer takes the upper hand.
Of course, when we're getting our butts kicked by an NPC, it sure feels like their cheating!
|
|
|
|
Post by utawoutau on Feb 8, 2005 19:25:01 GMT -5
I am 100% certain that this game cheats on its rolls.
Although there are numerous times when this fact was clearly evident, I will supply the most aggregious example. When I was trying to earn the medal where you fill the board with Goobas, I set a huge cap on the amount of gold needed to win so basically I would have enough time to fill the board. Towards the end of the game, I finally had filled all of the squares with my Goobas and had all of the lands fully leveled and switched to forest (so as to protect my critters). Basically the A.I. character had no chance of ever beating them. And the only way the A.I. could move around the board at all was to hope that they rolled and landed on towers/castles. All I was waiting for to win the game was to earn the ridiculously high sum of money I needed.
So what happened? Well about 60 - 75% of the time the A.I. rolled the exact amount they needed to land on a castle/fort or any of my creatures that had a "peace" effect on it. I watched for over an hour as their little guy contually bounded around the board, completely avoiding every single square that would have cost them a toll. Of course, I did say 60-70% of the time. Fontunately it appears that the computer, while it may cheat, every once and a while doesn't cheat and the A.I. dude would land on an occupied square and cough up a huge toll.
In addition, if you take a look at the options available when you create a custorm character, you'll see an option that says something to the effect of "lucky die rolls". Lucky die rolls???
So to clarify, I am positive that the A.I. cheats on its die rolls, however, it does not cheat 100% of the time - cause then we simply would have no chance of winning. I do not believe that the A.I. cheats as far as it card draws go - so at least there is some relief there.
And actually, I am okay with the computer cheating, afterall it is really difficult to program the incredibly smart A.I. it would take to go toe to toe with some of the better Culdecept players or any human player for that matter. The cheating is a function of the game trying to level the playing field and supply a challange at the same time. If the cheating upsets you, just try to calm down and remind yourself that the computer does not rig the die rolls 100% of the time. Eventually it will mess up.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrnegativity on Jan 8, 2006 8:48:31 GMT -5
I'll also note the tendency for highly efficient cards to pop up just at the right time as well. I can't think of the number of times I'd just lay down a low-health booster like Mad Clown just to have the AI draw up an Evil Blast. Telekinesis also seems to show up right before they draw near a well-placed leveled-up land.
|
|
yelosnow
Knight
Ba=AL built my hotrod!
Posts: 26
|
Post by yelosnow on Mar 28, 2006 12:53:11 GMT -5
ditto everything... very peculiar how the perfect card pops up in combination with the perfect die roll.. or the perfect item card is drawn right before a battle blah blah blah very frustrating, BUT it does make it ever so enjoyable when you turn around and spank the snot out of the cpu…. You like the bandit executioner love don’t you… yes you do,… yes you do  |
|
yelosnow
Knight
Ba=AL built my hotrod!
Posts: 26
|
Post by yelosnow on Apr 10, 2006 18:24:16 GMT -5
OK is zenith the biggest cheat of a cpu or what how does he get the perfect draw and die roll every friggen time... ive made multiple books for giving him pain but the only one thats been able to do it is my uber cheesy kelpie deck... he just lands one space after my tolls and has the perfect item or creature every time arrrrggggg
|
|
|
|
Post by sketchpad on Jul 23, 2006 7:12:27 GMT -5
I totally agree--one of the biggest cheats I've ever seen is to have the castle surrounded by lv 3/4 lands on all sides and Goligan doesn't get in!!
I was so mad!
|
|
|
|
Post by riddle on Nov 3, 2006 15:50:25 GMT -5
yes, it is a fact that the game cheats. and yes, this does make it gratifying when you beat the CPU. but it also makes it INFURIATING when you've spent an hour to build up your win and the computer just skips by you and starts leveling up his own lands and there's nothing you can do about it cuz it just keeps cheating! at least i don't feel that the computer cheats on the rolls you get : you either land on what you want or you don't (though sometimes... does anybody feel they've been cheated on their own turn?)
|
|
|
|
Post by quikdraw77 on Nov 3, 2006 18:05:40 GMT -5
I agree with you guys on some of the rants and raves that the CPU does cheat. There are actually a few people out there that thrive off of the fine essences of the game, and just call it "mere coincidence" that the AI opponents stiff them on the most cruical moments of the game. Im willing to just say the AI controlled Opponents just FLAT OUT play dirty, and the game mechanics working in their favor doesn't hurt their cause either. I find it highly suspicous that when i play Holy Word 1 on an AI enemy to make them pay a visit to my Level 5 land, They get a movement card like "fly" or "haste" on their next active turn, which they happily use to circumvent the toll that wouldve turned their pockets inside-out.
Moreso on this point, it seems that the in-battle perecntiles seem to favor the CPU as well. The percentages im talking about are:
1) Werewolf's % of transforming opposing creature - Usuing this card i havent really found a "glitch". it works equally for both parties.
2) Creatures with ID (instant death) attacks - Seems like the CPU gets the better of the deal here; Their ID attacks are activated more frequently, whereas yours are less common.
3) Baldanders' & Protean Ring Transformation - These cards are the CPU's f&*^ing WARMECH. For some reason unknown to man, they'll almost ALWAYS manifest into a card that has either just enough HP to withstand your attack, or Just enough ST to kill you on the offensive.
Overall, I am quite confident that the CPU doesnt play too fair for the most part. Many matches that i thought i had in the bag, the CPU just somehow out-of-the-blue went All-out rambo on my ass and then scooped up the win......damn the AI.
|
|
|
|
Post by OWell on Nov 3, 2006 21:56:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by OWell on Nov 3, 2006 22:02:58 GMT -5
I suppose that the dice used by this game are standard random number functions. In that case, the dice have be only a short cycle possibilities. A.I. always rolls the dice by constant time. Then the dice of A.I. will go along in a short cycle. However, a human being can change distance to roll the dice. It affects the dice roll later. If the dice of A.I. and the other dice continue, the human can control the dice of A.I. If the dice of A.I. become independent, merely dice may have a short period. If you are going to collect a toll from A.I. then, you should not follow your dice. It is raising the level of the land on which the dice of A.I. is observed and A.I.'s often lands. Therefore, you should use Holy Word and Leap. Holy Word can be used also for A.I. When die is generally 6-10, a number called 6 point tends (15% or more) to land between 1 and 2 rounds. But probably, in Culdcept Saga, the dice will become as MT function. MT function has a longer cycle. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mersenne_twisteren.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mersenne_primewww.math.sci.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/~m-mat/MT/VERSIONS/C-LANG/mt19937-64.c |
|
|
|
Post by jvgfanatic on Nov 10, 2006 3:19:58 GMT -5
He speaks to values of dice and frequency of landing on certain squares. Neither of those has to do with the avoiding or frequently hitting certain square types (i.e. a levelled up player land or a castle). Basically, despite the anaysis that paper totally misses the point (as I read it, anyway). |
|
|
|
Post by jvgfanatic on Nov 10, 2006 3:26:35 GMT -5
I suppose that the dice used by this game are standard random number functions. In that case, the dice have be only a short cycle possibilities. A.I. always rolls the dice by constant time. Then the dice of A.I. will go along in a short cycle. Except that you forget that the PS2 has a clock in it and thus can use the time/date that the game was booted as a random number seed. In that case it hardly matters how long one waits before the die is cast. A long wait is just as random as a short wait. The wait to roll does not affect the seed in the slightest. |
|
|
|
Post by OWell on Nov 10, 2006 7:20:25 GMT -5
It does not forget the cycle at the time.
Record of a clock is meaningful when a random number is long. Rather, when a random number is short, other than initialization of a random number, it does not have a meaning.
It could happened that the 1 spot of dice comes at 10 times in a long random cycle.
A short cycle, a random number has many factors which regularity generates.
Probably, when a random number is long, it will be better to record the ring of a table of random numbers rather than using a clock function.
That is because the characteristic of a random number is utilizable rather than circulation of the same point occurs by the clock.
|
|
|
|
Post by jvgfanatic on Nov 10, 2006 14:30:47 GMT -5
I really can't make heads or tales of what you wrote though I've written quite a few random number routines in various languages a long time ago. If a random number generator is truly random then there is no "cycle." (It should be noted that NO random number generator is truly "random" as the same exact seed will yield the same exact sequence of numbers).
Seed->Random Number->Random Number->Random Number, each one of them different. The seed just starts it off. If you start with the same seed then the numbers will repeat but a clock, when you calculate it inclusive of a date will offer a different seed each and every time (assuming the clock isn't reset).
On computers (at least when I was in the biz) we used "the number of seconds since a given date" and thus if a program were started on two computers with one being started one second after the other then they would generate wildly different random sets.
You can boil down ANY long integer to a number between 1 and X by using the a MOD function. This computation doesn't result in the random set being cyclical either.
On a side note: Itadaki Street Portable seems to pre-generate its rolls. I'm not sure how far in advance. If you save a game and load it and then check the rolls. Re-load that save and you'll find the rolls are the same for at least two turns (I've not checked further).
|
|
