Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21

Thread: Reflect Magic

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    11

    Reflect Magic

    Is reflect magic nerfed? It hasnt worked all round long. So far I ve reflected like 2 cbs and that it. Anyone else having any luck with RM? I have over 1.5 wpa

  2. #2
    Game Support Bishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21,332
    ive rmed MS and MV a few times, though ive also had an fb run get through 10 times in a row :(
    Support email: utopiasupport@utopia-game.com <- please use this and don't just PM me| Account Deleted/Inactive | Utopia Facebook Page | #tactics <-- click to join IRC|
    PM DavidC for test server access

  3. #3
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    238
    it's random, I think 20-25% chance of a magic reflect?

  4. #4
    Moderator for:
    Utopia Forums
    Palem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    22,030
    Quote Originally Posted by WhenTheLeveeBreaks View Post
    Is reflect magic nerfed? It hasnt worked all round long. So far I ve reflected like 2 cbs
    Stopped reading there

  5. #5
    Forum Addict RAKIdaRHINO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,337
    wrong forum

  6. #6
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,496
    The number of spells reflected for n attempts is a binomial random variable.

    Let X be the number of successes (ie, reflections) and p be the probability of a success, then

    P(X=x) = c(n,x)*(p^(x))*((1-p)^(n-x)), where c(n,x) = n!/(x!*(n-x)!)

    Get a good sample (say, n=100) and count the number of successes you have (say, N successes).

    If P(X<=N) <= 0.05, then you have cause for worries.

    Else, you cannot conclude that RM is nerfed at 95% confidence.

  7. #7
    Forum Addict RAKIdaRHINO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,337
    well.. first of according to popular belief its not really a binom distribution. (the random feed doesnt seem to be very random they say. well it isnt, question is if its random enough or not) but lets for simplicity assume that it is.. what i dont get is why youre not proposing the use of normal distribution since the bin your talking about will be approximately normal distributed anyway. (Bin(n,p) ~ N (np, V(npq)) if np(1-p) > 10)

    binom calcs for n as large as 100 is a true pain in the ass if we gotta do them by hand :)

    Or did i already forget all the stats from the stat course i never finished last year? =)

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    11
    Now does RM work against all spells or just those that get thru your wpa. The question is does RM reflect all spells cast on you or does it just attempt to reflect spells that get thru your wpa. The numbers would make sense(and makes the spell almost useless) if it only tries to reflect successful spells.

  9. #9
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,496
    >well.. first of according to popular belief its not really a binom distribution. (the random feed doesnt seem to be very random they say. well it isnt, question is if its random enough or not) but lets for simplicity assume that it is.. what i dont get is why youre not proposing the use of normal distribution since the bin your talking about will be approximately normal distributed anyway. (Bin(n,p) ~ N (np, V(npq)) if np(1-p) > 10)<

    The test for randomness to see how close the random number generator is to the uniform distribution can be done separately assuming that it is the problem.

    However, I was assuming that the random number generator was fine and that the desired test was whether p is below the presumed value.

    >Or did i already forget all the stats from the stat course i never finished last year? =)<

    No, you're right.

    A normal distribution can be used as an approximation.

    However, 100 trials is not so large that it can't be computed as a binomial distribution provided that you code the algorithm rather than do all the calculations manually.

    I was assuming that I was talking to someone that has some programming brackground, but 0 background in stats so the normal distribution was a no go.

  10. #10
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,496
    >provided that you code the algorithm rather than do all the calculations manually<

    Now that I think about it, 0.05 is not a lot.

    My guess is that you wouldn't have that much computation do to to compute the cumulative distribution up to 0.05 and stop.

    So a programming background might not even be necessary.

  11. #11
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,496
    >Now does RM work against all spells or just those that get thru your wpa. The question is does RM reflect all spells cast on you or does it just attempt to reflect spells that get thru your wpa. The numbers would make sense(and makes the spell almost useless) if it only tries to reflect successful spells.<

    Thats a good question, but it wouldn't be that hard to test.

    Just do the experiment I outlined above twice.

    First time, consider all spell attempts as a try.

    Second time, consider only the spells that were reflected or that went through as tries.

  12. #12
    Forum Fanatic
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,661
    RM only reflects successful casts. That is why you lose honor when you reflect a spell, as well.

  13. #13
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    236
    Good answer by Zauper.

    Anyway, I think this thread should be made in the Q&As section, not bugs & suggs.

  14. #14
    Forum Addict RAKIdaRHINO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,337
    However, 100 trials is not so large that it can't be computed as a binomial distribution provided that you code the algorithm rather than do all the calculations manually.
    Ofc not, nor would 10000 be if you let computers do the trick.. but the N approx is there for a reason for large n :)

    either way its nice to be able to manually double check your results to see that your alg was right in first place.

  15. #15
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,496
    >Ofc not, nor would 10000 be if you let computers do the trick.. but the N approx is there for a reason for large n :)<

    Actually, my hand calculator won't give me an answer for 10000!

    That's why you have the normal approximation.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •