The Energon Pub

It's something i've suspected but never bothered to prove.

this thread should be stickied.

oh, and ps. i heard that if you max out your int. you'll be able to figure out who really killed tupac & biggie.

but the feds don't want us to know that so

Jack Hallows wrote:this thread should be stickied.

oh, and ps. i heard that if you max out your int. you'll be able to figure out who really killed tupac & biggie.

but the feds don't want us to know that so

Some say that maxing out Int opens up the Autobot Hyper Mode

Absolute Zero wrote:I knew I was forgetting stuff...

That five courage, is that related to evens are better than odds?

This theory goes some way to explaining Cydonia's faltering form atm might have to keep a closer eye on him and compare him to crueljaw who is rapidly catching him

Burn wrote:Hey Anshin, I got one for you to test.

Get yourself two bots, set them up in a similar manner but give one of them Five Courage.

This is going back many years ago, every time I had a bot (that's bot not 'bot) with five courage they completely sucked. Drop them down to four, or up them to six, and they performed better. I've always felt Five Courage to be "cursed".

Already done, take a look at my builds and you will see that none have 5 courage. I can't prove it of course, but I have a suspect feeling that part of the RNG code that is built off of the game and determines fight/order ranks uses a baseline number set that is effected directly by the weight values associated with each character.

If five is the baseline stat for the game, it could be that it's either being treated as zero or there is an error in the coding that's not treating the negatives right.

Or it could just be that the RNG hates five courage.

Absolute Zero wrote:If five is the baseline stat for the game, it could be that it's either being treated as zero or there is an error in the coding that's not treating the negatives right.

Or it could just be that the RNG hates five courage.

Quiet the opposite. Zero is not even zero. Zero is actually 1% to 10%. However, and I can't prove this or not, but I believe it works like this.

The list is compiled and each player is assigned a number based off of calculations on stats (speed/courage/level). One of several RNG are fired off and your player is chosen. Another RNG is fired off and your opponent is chosen. If you know anything about Random Numbers and Seeds of Random numbers in the generation then there are dead spots in the generated random numbers and there are hot spots or numbers that appear more frequently. If the seed is not refreshed or you can sometimes get the same RNG multiple times depending upon the language you code in or code you have written to use the RNG for that system.

I know, I know, too much detail. But the reason I explained this is because if we looked at each point into a stat was 10% (10 being 100% and 11 being 110%) we would see that the see values between 50 and 59 were the dead spot. This is not to say that they wouldn't occur, but they would occur less frequently than say the 40-49 range or the more favorable 60-69 range.

The sad things is, I understood that. The annoying part is I can't figure out how that works into the formula that was provided several years ago, and I don't even know if the post of it is still around, but I thought the bots had a copy of it in Iacon...

Absolute Zero wrote:The sad things is, I understood that. The annoying part is I can't figure out how that works into the formula that was provided several years ago, and I don't even know if the post of it is still around, but I thought the bots had a copy of it in Iacon...

If you are looking for the damage formula, I have my doubts that is the correct formula. If its the formula for fighting based off the hit, team hit, self hit, miss attack that I think Tammuz or one of the other guys posted back in 2009/2010, it fits into the first part relatively well.

Again I can't prove anything, but just looking at a small collection of fights you will see and it goes along well with why some bots may have 10 courage while some cons have 7 courage but the cons will have 3-4x the attack due to the seed being reused instead of refreshed.

_Anshin_ wrote:

Absolute Zero wrote:The sad things is, I understood that. The annoying part is I can't figure out how that works into the formula that was provided several years ago, and I don't even know if the post of it is still around, but I thought the bots had a copy of it in Iacon...

If you are looking for the damage formula, I have my doubts that is the correct formula. If its the formula for fighting based off the hit, team hit, self hit, miss attack that I think Tammuz or one of the other guys posted back in 2009/2010, it fits into the first part relatively well.

Again I can't prove anything, but just looking at a small collection of fights you will see and it goes along well with why some bots may have 10 courage while some cons have 7 courage but the cons will have 3-4x the attack due to the seed being reused instead of refreshed.

I don't know about the damage forumla, but that might be it. It would have originally been posted back in uh... 05-06, but with the wipes and reboot and everything, he likely would have had to repost everything. He and some other guys who sadly no longer play really, went and broke down everything, spending quiet a bit of time testing out everything in the game. Every single weapon, every armor, effects of every stat, and a bunch of other stuff. That was back when you had a whole lot more people posting on the board every day though. I believe the raw data they collected might have been the basis of the current weapon setup, but, well, this was before there was even minicons in the game.

Tammuz and Bun-Bun pretty much broke the game down into hardcore math-porn a few years back, I'll have a rummage around the RDDs old Neo Kaon site and see if it's there.

May take some time though, the gang were never very good at 'organisation'...

Except when a tournament rolled round.

Burn wrote:Except when a tournament rolled round.

Because the Autobots spent to long arguing over who was in charge, and who should be in missions, rather than figuring out strategy and posting up when the tourney missions were up.

And the fact that we ran 99% of them. What can I say - we're a competitive bunch.

FAO _Anshin_:

Look what I found...

Tammuz via the RDD wrote:The Weapons Table


Light = 1-5%
medium = 6-10%
heavy = 11-15%
very heavy = 16-20%
devastating = 21-25%
Incredible = >26%

Weapon Damage Mechanics
% Damage = RANDOM[minD~maxD] x [1+(Str x 0.1)] x [1.5-(End x 0.1)] x [Armour]

Armour is an unknown Quantity as yet

Accuracy of all weapons/punchs/kicks;
([attacker's speed] - [defender's speed] + 16)/ 20

Brawling damages
NEED TO CALCULATED

Taken from a non-Tammuz thread wrote:Stats to Tactic relationships
Ram = Strength(+)/Courage(+)/Opp:Strength(-)/Opp:Endurance(-)
Strafe = Firepower(+)/Courage(+)/Speed(+)/Opp:Endurance(-)
Repair = Intelligence(+)/Courage(+)/Opp:Endurance(+)
Avoid = Speed(+)/Courage(+)/Opp:Speed(-)

- Ram and Repair upon successful activation is believed to be a guaranteed hit
- Strafes opening strike is a guaranteed hit, all others are determined by Speed
- Avoid is a reactionary tactic and therefore only has a chance of activating upon a successful melee strike by an opponent. It has been suggested but not proven that courage increases likelihood of Avoid activating

Ram Mechanics
frequency= ([ram] x 3) / 100
Ram Damage% = RANDOM[19~33] x [1+(Str x 0.1)] / [1+(End x 0.1)]
the stun mechanics are as yet Unknown, they are suspected to be based on attackers strength, and targets endurance


Repair Mechanics
frequency= ([repair] x 3) / 100
Repair% = RANDOM[19~33] x [1+(Int x 0.1)] / [2-(End x 0.1)]


Strafe Mechanics
frequency= ([strafe] x 3) / 100
First shot Damage% = RANDOM[8~25] x [1+(FP x 0.1)] / [1+(End x 0.1)]
Following Shot damage% = RANDOM[5~10] x [1+(FP x 0.1)]/ [1+(End x 0.1)]

in a strafe you always get 1 first shot(which always hits a bot), and then a number of following shots equal to double your strafe(6 strafe, 12 following shots) Following shots are aimed at all TFs in the mission, any that hit cons are ignored; only hits against bots show up in logs. so if the missions has equal numbers for each side, you should get about 1+strafe shots in each strafe attack.

Tammuz goes on to say that there is a flaw in the mechanics somewhere but at the time of this post he hadn't discovered it. I'm sure there is a more up to date version somewhere but, it could be on one of 3 or 4 old websites we used to use to stay ahead of the old Mods, this is from the old core RDD site. The weapons table is also an old copy so is missing a bunch of the new weapons.

How does this compare with your results? I'd be interested to know if you have anything beyond this.

The weapons tables have been changed. I can verify that without a doubt. Alldarker and N_V Helped with that a while ago. The Weapons Damage formula I have found before, but it has never worked for me. There is a small alteration that I have been doing where the armor is not part of the damage increase but part of the reduction for damage. The Accuracy seems similar but instead of +16)/20 I have found at least where I have looked you can substituted a 9)/25 and it seems to work better for me.

As for tactics, I went about it the wrong way, or rather a different way. I approached it based off of the attack formula.

I have not been including math into any of my posts because every time that I have talked to Tammuz I have been told that he can't mention the game math anymore or talk about anything. I always assumed that posting formulas and math would be grouped in the same manner as writing scripts and posting the scripts for any kind of scraping or automatic gaming

I don't claim to understand what you have said above but if it helps, more power to you.

_Anshin_ wrote:I have not been including math into any of my posts because every time that I have talked to Tammuz I have been told that he can't mention the game math anymore or talk about anything. I always assumed that posting formulas and math would be grouped in the same manner as writing scripts and posting the scripts for any kind of scraping or automatic gaming

That indeed used to be the case, but IMO Tammuz was persecuted (to a great degree) by the games previous administration becuase he wanted to make this information public. Everything I have written above has been with the RDD and AWC *spit* for years and was posted in both Darkmount and Iacon a long time ago (look for the iAcon Index thread by neliz), so the secret isnt exactly under wraps anymore.

The game is currenty without a programmer or admin (or a certain future) to clear it with so I figured 'knock yourselves out'. If I can help a budding programmer understand more about the game so they can step up and have a go at fixing it, what's to lose?


Scripts are a different matter, those remain banned without express permission of site admin.
HMW game mechanics however are legitimate discussion points and until I am told otherwise are fair game.

should sticky this. helped me immensely to understand the game better. especially when it came to my strafers. i was gettin pissed off when a dude with 6 strength was only strafin for 2-3% at a time.. not so much anymore...

I agree, this is a good Discussion to sticky, just the comments of AZ and burn on page 3 alone are enough for me to plan out my bots a little better so that I won't have to waist to many points on the low levels.

I'd say I'd love to take a crack at updating some of the programing. I'm a Computer Science major, but i'm only at 200 lvl classes, and I havn't worked in PHP or SQL, so it would probably take a couple more years before I could tackle something like this on my own. but I don't want to say to much I'd hate to promise something I couldn't deliver.

redoutlander wrote:I don't want to say to much I'd hate to promise something I couldn't deliver.

bro, i wish there were women who thought this way. like my whore of an ex fiance.

Jack Hallows wrote:

redoutlander wrote:I don't want to say to much I'd hate to promise something I couldn't deliver.

bro, i wish there were women who thought this way. like my whore of an ex fiance.

yea I had one of those but then I married her.....
that and the whole XX chromosome thing

...wow, that's epically off-topic, even for us.

Can we please steer it back to Stats (be imaginative) and away from Hallows needing either a Lawyer or a Shrink?

redoutlander wrote:

Jack Hallows wrote:

redoutlander wrote:I don't want to say to much I'd hate to promise something I couldn't deliver.

bro, i wish there were women who thought this way. like my whore of an ex fiance.

yea I had one of those but then I married her.....
that and the whole XX chromosome thing

He's gonna need a ton of endurance for the beating he'll receive if said missus ever reads that line

Jack Hallows wrote:should sticky this.

redoutlander wrote:I agree, this is a good Discussion to sticky

Jack Hallows wrote:"ex fiance joke"

de-rail

redoutlander wrote:"wife joke"

insert foot in mouth

ummmm I rescind all previous comments of dubious nature on this thread!

someone mentioned a doobie?

Psychout wrote:Can we please steer it back to Stats (be imaginative) and away from Hallows needing either a Lawyer or a Shrink?

When Psychout wants things back on topic, it's best to listen.