|
|
Post by Zinnia on Sept 29, 2018 19:06:12 GMT -5
Has the discussion changed? I wasn't following the original very closely.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lala on Sept 29, 2018 19:30:52 GMT -5
It's possible we were having different conversations all along, Zinnia.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Sept 29, 2018 21:01:50 GMT -5
A gambler who is losing keeps betting because he thinks his luck will turn around. He's only looking at wins vs. losses. 2 sides of a coin. He isn't looking at 2 of a kind, 3 of a kind, 4 of a kind, full house, flush, etc. etc. He is only interested in wins and losses. Two things. Gambler's Fallacy would certainly be considered if Skelda said, "I've lost my last 9 games. I'm going to keep playing because my luck is bound to turn around and I'll win the next one." That's not what we are talking about. We are talking about how unlikely it is for someone to roll scum 10 times in a row when only 25 percent of the roles offered are scum. Whether it's losing or rolling scum, it makes no difference. Each individual role is not affected by the roles that preceeded it or are paired with it. Certain combinations may in fact be less likely, but once you know past roles they have no effect on future roles. So yes, rolling scum, scum, scum, scum, scum, scum, scum isn't particularly likely, but saying that the next game is less likely to be scum because of it is fallacious. Humans are also pattern seeking creatures and randomness feels like it should look more random than it is. When you are scum many times in a row or get offered two unusual roles as your options in Greater Idea that seems super unusual, but the odds are good with true randomness that that will happen sometimes and it would be strange if it didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Sept 29, 2018 21:07:54 GMT -5
The Gambler's fallacy has infected you too Lala!!! lol Could you please do a percentage of it? You aren't good at math, I'm not either. Maybe someone who does. Gambler's fallacy has more to do with odds/evens, wins/loss, red/black than say an 11 player game with 3 scum and 8 town. There's a smaller chance of getting scum than getting town...therefore, the odds that you would roll scum 10 times a row are lower than the odds you would roll town 10 times in a roll or a mixture of the two. Is that not correct? I know there's not an even chance of getting scum or getting town. In most games at least. Everything you said is true. Going on a scum streak is less likely than going on a Town steak. You still can't draw any conclusions within a game based on that though. As soon as you know the outcomes of all previous roles or of all discards, it becomes meaningless. I'm okay at math. I'm not a math expert or anything but I feel like I understand this. |
|
|
|
Post by Lissa on Sept 29, 2018 21:38:44 GMT -5
skelda dragged me in here
the thing is, yes, it's not likely to roll scum 10 games in a row, but when you get to game 10, games 1-9 have already happened. the chance of them having happened no longer factors in. the chance of scum rolls in games 1-9 is 100%
so the collective chance of it happening becomes the chance of rolling scum in the last game
uh
i'm not sure this directly addresses the core thing from what skelda just told me?
the same principle applies
yes when you're rolling the cards the distribution is... let's take 80/20 ratio as an example, multiples of 10 make it easier. 64% town/town, 32% town/scum, 4% scum/scum
problem is, that has a baseline of not having either already determined
when you're looking at someone's alignment based on their discard, you know 1 of their cards was that alignment already
so... say someone discarded town. does that mean you just look at the town/town and town/scum worlds and decide which one you're living in? 2/3 to 1/3?
no, the problem is that assumes you're consistently on exactly one side of the pair (the second, the way i'm ordering it). to put it in a way that reconciles with the distribution of pairings above, a key thing is that the town card could be either side of the town/town. so that's 2x as many worlds as it looks like, from a pov of "1 town card". which works out to 128-32 which is... 80-20.
same with scum. 32-8, 80-20
which is the same as how it'd be if entirely individually determined, which is... how it actually works
i hope this is coherent
|
|
|
|
Post by HungryPony27 on Sept 30, 2018 2:21:53 GMT -5
Even if that is true, and it probably is since Skelda went out of his way to prove his point, guess what?
I'm not changing my ways.
The only thing you've achieved is me not sharing my stats ever again. I don't think that the end result is worth it.
So long my results are Gucci, I'm happy.
Besides, I had a lot of fun with this and learned that annoying Skelda makes him easier to read. Maybe I'll bring some flat earth theory next time.
Good game, thank you for hosting and Praise the void.
|
|
|
|
Post by HungryPony27 on Sept 30, 2018 2:33:31 GMT -5
As an addendum to that, since I believe that the discussions Skelda and I keep having are rather Toxic for the games in general, I'll give it my best shot not to engage in them if they're not productive and fun for the game.
I think thinking of everyone elses positive vibrations is quite important before this inevitably gets out of hand.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lala on Sept 30, 2018 5:30:41 GMT -5
Could you please do a percentage of it? You aren't good at math, I'm not either. Maybe someone who does. Gambler's fallacy has more to do with odds/evens, wins/loss, red/black than say an 11 player game with 3 scum and 8 town. There's a smaller chance of getting scum than getting town...therefore, the odds that you would roll scum 10 times a row are lower than the odds you would roll town 10 times in a roll or a mixture of the two. Is that not correct? I know there's not an even chance of getting scum or getting town. In most games at least. Thank you  Lissa, thanks for coming in and explaining. I admit I didn't read everything that's been written. I might later today when I'm awake, but I appreciate your input. |
|
|
|
Post by Lala on Sept 30, 2018 5:31:39 GMT -5
Even if that is true, and it probably is since Skelda went out of his way to prove his point, guess what? I'm not changing my ways.
The only thing you've achieved is me not sharing my stats ever again. I don't think that the end result is worth it. So long my results are Gucci, I'm happy. Besides, I had a lot of fun with this and learned that annoying Skelda makes him easier to read. Maybe I'll bring some flat earth theory next time. Good game, thank you for hosting and Praise the void. Don't. You're great. |
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Sept 30, 2018 11:05:12 GMT -5
As an addendum to that, since I believe that the discussions Skelda and I keep having are rather Toxic for the games in general, I'll give it my best shot not to engage in them if they're not productive and fun for the game. I think thinking of everyone elses positive vibrations is quite important before this inevitably gets out of hand. I'm sorry if anyone felt this was toxic, I was having fun but I just like arguing, I get that some people don't. If I'm annoying anyone, people should definitely tell me. And you do you Legend.  You add an interesting element to games and I like playing with you, please don't think that I don't enjoy you |
|
|
|
Post by HungryPony27 on Sept 30, 2018 12:24:38 GMT -5
As an addendum to that, since I believe that the discussions Skelda and I keep having are rather Toxic for the games in general, I'll give it my best shot not to engage in them if they're not productive and fun for the game. I think thinking of everyone elses positive vibrations is quite important before this inevitably gets out of hand. I'm sorry if anyone felt this was toxic, I was having fun but I just like arguing, I get that some people don't. If I'm annoying anyone, people should definitely tell me. And you do you Legend. You add an interesting element to games and I like playing with you, please don't think that I don't enjoy you I can just imagine people being like... I'll not post because these two are crazy. I also love discussing and playing with people who play hard. |
|
