Rolling Thunder Forums

5 minutes work or so and I got the GFI and bonehead rolls out. These are nice to analyse as they are ALWAYS a 2+ to pass, unlike say dodge where a if elves rolled all 2's that's a lot luckier than a dwarf team rolling all 2's.

One caveat, somehow cracker chaos made it into the result set so I may need to tweak the code slightly.

Expected failure rate = 16.666%

Boneheads
One Hit Wonders 22/110 = 20%
Team Shrek = 94 / 528 = 17.8%

GFI's
The Nermal Distribution - 6/24 - 25%
The Mastercheesers - 17/75 - 22.667% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A Fistful of Boomstick - 4/20 - 20%
Fables! - 7/37 - 18.919%
Team Shrek - 7/38 - 18.421%
Bad for Thy Elf - 18/102 - 17.647%
MarS Spiders - 9/62 - 14.516%
Orkly Ducklingz - 9/67 - 13.433%
One Hit Wonderz - 8/64 - 12.5%
Punch Dummies - 8/74 - 10.811%


I can take a few other requests for dice stats if you want? One day this will all be on the website, but the fact that I can get these numbers out so quickly shows the power of having it all in a database. I'm going to do injury rolls for and against, as I'm pretty sure the Ogres got royally screwed there.

Putting a spreadsheet together... the injury inflicted numbers don't make much sense though (ie they don't correlate at all with BBDB's numbers) so I'm still looking at that. Here's a taster of the injury sustained numbers though.

On an injury roll you need 10+ to cause a casualty (assuming no mighty blow / stunty). This is a 16.66% chance roll. The gap in the luck of this roll between the luckiest and unluckiest is really quite big, surprisingly so given the large-ish sample size.
Team Shrek: 24 / 107 (22.43%) 6 more than expected
The Mastercheesers : 17 / 132 (12.88%) 5 less than expected.

I was expecting a bit more interest than zero, given that last time there was something like this (someone put together loads of numbers manually retrieved from BBM - I think it was la? 4-5 seasons ago?) there was a fair degree of interest.

Well, I try to avoid the topic now as 1/ I didn't want to say ha! I told you so I was robbed (I was ) but also 2/ I try to ignore the dice when I lose to instead concentrate on my own failings and thereby improve. Doesn't always work on either the ignoring or improving sides, but it helps me not get so attached to the injustice of it all.

Tis a silly game, as King Arthur said.

That's not to take away from what is an impressive stat collection which I couldn't help myself from playing about with the other day

I only get notifications about threads I've subscribed too, and don't often check for new posts, so sorry about the Gandalf.

But as you know, I'm also not that fussed about statistics and only really care about probability to the point where I can say there's a 2/6 chance of option A failing, and a 4/6 chance of option B failing, so I should do option A. If A doesn't work, then B certainly wouldn't have and that's just the dice. Regardless of whether the failure was part of a larger statistically unlikely series of dice rolls, there's nothing I could have done to change that.

Thanks for the replies...

I just assumed people would be interested because there was interest in the past. Seems like there isn't interest in season-long dice reviews anymore so I shan't bother. Stuff like I showed above - how Ogres got injured very easily and Skaven survived injuries a lot - can be seen from BBDB anyway by looking at the knock-down vs casualties charts on the team page.

@la I like to improve too... but sometimes... it was Nuffle and Nuffle was all that it was, and if that's the case I like to have some evidence for that. My brain likes to have an explanation for every result, be that the dice were terrible, or I made a stupid play(s), or opponent played well... or some combination of them.

This does raise the question of the value of doing any more dice work in BBDB. I'll ask that question of you guys when the time comes.

That's not to take away from what is an impressive stat collection which I couldn't help myself from playing about with the other day

Ah yes, the stats from the databases (as opposed to the dice rolls from the log files) are fun & add to the value and fluff of the game IMO. Whether that be admiring a snotling who got knocked down 6 times in 1 match but didn't get injured, the touchdown-scoring exploits of the big names, or being annoyed that certain wood elves seem immune to being injured... It's also fun to see what Morg or dribblesnot got up to during the season.

Gandalf wrote:This does raise the question of the value of doing any more dice work in BBDB. I'll ask that question of you guys when the time comes.

Don't let us stop you doing it, there's bound to be other people who find it valuable. As a programmer, I think it's worth doing something even if I'm the only one who will get value from it.

Gandalf wrote:Ah yes, the stats from the databases (as opposed to the dice rolls from the log files) are fun & add to the value and fluff of the game IMO. Whether that be admiring a snotling who got knocked down 6 times in 1 match but didn't get injured, the touchdown-scoring exploits of the big names, or being annoyed that certain wood elves seem immune to being injured... It's also fun to see what Morg or dribblesnot got up to during the season.

Even I'll admit to having a slight interest in these statistics.

id3nt1ty wrote:

Gandalf wrote:This does raise the question of the value of doing any more dice work in BBDB. I'll ask that question of you guys when the time comes.

Don't let us stop you doing it, there's bound to be other people who find it valuable. As a programmer, I think it's worth doing something even if I'm the only one who will get value from it.

Agreed... but there are competing priorities, so it's a combination of how easy a task is, how impressive the output will be, how fun it will be and will people use it. The latter one is a big part of what motivates me; I like to see the results of my code used.

Gandalf wrote:@la I like to improve too... but sometimes... it was Nuffle and Nuffle was all that it was, and if that's the case I like to have some evidence for that. My brain likes to have an explanation for every result, be that the dice were terrible, or I made a stupid play(s), or opponent played well... or some combination of them.

Oh, I don’t mean to apply these standards to anyone else, it’s just a better way for me personally to deal with the injustices of the game. I prefer to think “what an idiot, why did I do that” than get disgusted at the dice, because I think that would be a way for me to get disillusioned with even playing the game at all. And as I said, it doesn’t always work.

Gandalf wrote:Ah yes, the stats from the databases (as opposed to the dice rolls from the log files) are fun & add to the value and fluff of the game IMO. Whether that be admiring a snotling who got knocked down 6 times in 1 match but didn't get injured, the touchdown-scoring exploits of the big names, or being annoyed that certain wood elves seem immune to being injured... It's also fun to see what Morg or dribblesnot got up to during the season.

I didn’t mean just the season long stats – I also put the dice stats from my 3 non-victories this season into Excel and worked out that I had 45% luck over those games (i.e. not 50%) – that’s what I meant that I can’t help myself sometimes BUT still I found it more useful to concentrate on the horrific things I did wrong.


Regarding continuing to develop the dice stats/prioritising – I am 1 of x amount of people who will use this if you expand it further. In my other league there are 120 bb1 coaches playing a match every week. There are continual references to dice as explained by the inbuilt upload app or previously bbm – people like this kind of thing, and if people want a comprehensive match manager, there will be a large number who want that kind of stat: you can't leave it out.

I like the season-long dice stats (and as I've said elsewhere the single-game dice stats :-D ); I just didn't feel a need to post anything on this page hithertofore. There may be others in the same boat (?).

I am now liking this thread as it enabled an unforced use of hithertofore, a word surely underappreciated.

Gandalf wrote:Putting a spreadsheet together... the injury inflicted numbers don't make much sense though (ie they don't correlate at all with BBDB's numbers) so I'm still looking at that. Here's a taster of the injury sustained numbers though.

On an injury roll you need 10+ to cause a casualty (assuming no mighty blow / stunty). This is a 16.66% chance roll. The gap in the luck of this roll between the luckiest and unluckiest is really quite big, surprisingly so given the large-ish sample size.
Team Shrek: 24 / 107 (22.43%) 6 more than expected
The Mastercheesers : 17 / 132 (12.88%) 5 less than expected.

I was expecting a bit more interest than zero, given that last time there was something like this (someone put together loads of numbers manually retrieved from BBM - I think it was la? 4-5 seasons ago?) there was a fair degree of interest.

Did you get anywhere with your spreadsheet?

i'd be interestedf

notjarvis wrote:Did you get anywhere with your spreadsheet?

i'd be interested!

No, nobody expressed an interest at the time & I'm on a break from BBDB work now (apart from support issues).

Okey dokey, enjoy your (well earned break)

I haven't been posting/checking on the forums so much lately as life is absurdly busy, so i noticed this thread, but didn't get around to having a proper read until today :-)