Difference between revisions of "Talk:Formicid (monster)"
Ion frigate (talk | contribs) |
(Very instructive information, thanks!) |
||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
::Good to know. I definitely agree the stochastically determined values make more sense, I was just curious as to what was happening. -[[User:Ion frigate|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate|talk]]) 00:40, 17 December 2013 (CET) | ::Good to know. I definitely agree the stochastically determined values make more sense, I was just curious as to what was happening. -[[User:Ion frigate|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate|talk]]) 00:40, 17 December 2013 (CET) | ||
+ | |||
+ | :::Very instructive information! We should ask the overall maintainer to introduce the 'thank you' procedure, just like big wikipedia recently (this autumn) did. It provides some positive feedback /spirit. I'd surely use it often to thank e.g. CommandeC for this creative approach of stochastical implementations. -- 18:54, 17 December 2013 (CET) |
Revision as of 18:54, 17 December 2013
Just a question: I've noticed that the knowledge bots and similar sources seem to "clip" HP ranges: for instance, formicid drones have 4 "base" HP and 6 "extra" HP per HD. With 4HD, this gave 16-40 HP, as one would expect, but with 6HD, it gives 26-58, instead of the expected 24-60. Is it just clipping the extreme improbability (total chance is something like 1/3500 for 25, 26, 59, or 60 HP), or is there actually something subtle in the code that prevents the extreme values from occurring? -Ion frigate (talk) 15:59, 16 December 2013 (CET)
- Those extreme cases can occur, but they are uncommon. The hp ranges reported by the knowledge bots (and my program which is just a fork of them) are the minimum and maximum hp values observed in a sample of 1000 monsters of the specified type. When I wrote the program which updates our pages, I decided to keep this algorithm, because the information it provides is more useful than showing the theoretical hp ranges. --CommanderC (talk) 17:54, 16 December 2013 (CET)
- Good to know. I definitely agree the stochastically determined values make more sense, I was just curious as to what was happening. -Ion frigate (talk) 00:40, 17 December 2013 (CET)
- Very instructive information! We should ask the overall maintainer to introduce the 'thank you' procedure, just like big wikipedia recently (this autumn) did. It provides some positive feedback /spirit. I'd surely use it often to thank e.g. CommandeC for this creative approach of stochastical implementations. -- 18:54, 17 December 2013 (CET)