The reason for the note was that of my 40+ whatever games in the last 10 years, I’ve had the coincidental misfortune to get 1 bonus in my first 4 characters every time as a rule full stop period. Never more, never less. 1 of the starters and 1 of the next 4. I’ve always since assumed that it was the way it was coded such that if I didn’t get a bonus in my first 3 I was that much more excited about the 4th - and I’ve never been disappointed because it’s always come.
A new game started and I got 4/4. Another game started and I’m 2/3 there. There is simply a very clear demarcation here timewise. Thus my ask. Complete freaky coincidence for 10 years till now and then 2 consequetive games of great fortune? Well, let’s see if I go 7/8 tomorrow…
Hard to say… some nations have Sna’s for challenge rank these nations seems to get a larger number but that would be becuase they have 2 chances… Even in case of nations with Stealth often miss the stealth… But got a few more other bonus’s… I think your just on one of those unsual streaks where the random number generator is beeen freakishly kind to your nation… where onther nations in same game are unsually stingy… Now if every nation in that was on booming success then it time to ask questions…
You know Brad, if there has been a real change in behavior, there are more explanations than changes in the actual application code.
Almost all software is linked with “libraries”. These are code that does common functions across many applications on the computer. Some library functions are low-level and included as a part of the operating system distribution. Some are higher level and are linked in by the application developer.
When the original code was ported from the age-old platform that it ran on to a new platform, it’s likely/possible that more than one such library function changed behavior in some subtle way. Perhaps a random number generator that was not working perfectly on the original platform actually now generates a real random number (or some other math function works a wee bit differently). The net result could manifest itself in ever so slight changes in combats, encounter frequencey, result of encounters, character bonuses, etc etc. And all of these changes, however so slight (or not) would result not from the change of application source code, but from the change of the library to which the application is linked, or the OS on which it resides.
I’m fine with believing Clint that he hasn’t changed source and will notifiy/query us when he intends to do so. But I do think they’re trying to port it? Is that right Clint? Has the application been ported to an upgraded platform? That’s only natural and obvious and probably economically mandatory.
Dave
p.s. And I’m not saying (in the last paragraph) that Clint has stop beating his wife. I never thought he’d change anything on us without discussion. I think Clint & company are very customer oriented. you know, it’s hard to have this conversation without some of the mud getting under the fingernails…
Thanks for that idea Dave. Who knows, I said at the top that between RNG and my good luck, there you go. Been more written than necessary since methinks. Regardless, I’m just going to take some pills and relax, as I’m obviously an overwrought ninny panicking at any hint of variance.
I wasn’t planning on responding to the original question, but this thread keeps going (on an odd tangent). In response to the original poster, you were lucky. But it’s probably not pure luck.
I have my own theory about character bonuses, going all the way back to GSI.
(1) There’s a base random chance.
(2) The random chance is enhanced if your characters are under-powered relative to the other nations.
#2 is entirely anectodal, but I’ve noticed it again and again. If your character base is getting creamed, (say, you’re down 8 characters, and you keep replacing them with 10c/20a or 30a) I’ve noticed a significant increase in character bonuses. I assume that this is a slight effort to help smashed nations “catch up” built into the programming. It’s also why nations with weak character sets at the beginning seem to get more bonuses than others (Cardolan versus Noldo, for example). I’m playing Harad right now (very weak characters at start) and I’m getting bonus after bonus. I don’t have proof, and and I’ve never talked to GSI on it but this is what I’ve seen. Nothing stops you from being “unlucky” and not getting any bonuses, even with weak character sets.
Since you can only get one bonus per character, if you have “increased challenge” or “stealth” etc. as a nation advantage you’ll tend to get those in lieu of the actual increased ranks.
So…the obvious is to have your Harad join my Quiet Avenger and we’ll let our mutant X-Men conquer Middle Earth together! Let the Age of the Bonus Rule over simple Man, Elf and Orc!
But I do think they’re trying to port it? Is that right Clint? Has the application been ported to an upgraded platform?
We’re testing it in game 77 at present, one week turnaround game now (2 turns per week was too much for some players!) Ironing out some of the bugs there, but otherwise the system is the same one that GSI used many years ago, same machine even… robust machines the Macs! :eek: Simultaneously we’re testing two mapping programs that will work with the new XMLs (they can then just skip the PDF reading that some of the mapping programs do).
With the conversion, it’s a direct 1-1, but KS has some upgraded bits and pieces (note not changes to the code, other than how the information is accessed). The print routine is new though, as we needed to get it printed to XMLs and then use them to convert to pdf, a much more efficient and computer friendly system on the whole allowing potential for the future. It doesn’t actually do anything other than grab the data, now in database format rather then the old system, and present it in the XML, the actual process and initialise of the game are the same mechanisms. Hope that’s clearer… So code changes none.
I’m not 100% au fait with it all, I just over see it at present.
Part of the testing process is to see that it is the same game etc. We can look at upgrading/changing/modifying it later for actual game mechanics. It looks correct with around 8 turns run so far (Sam and I played the first test, g437, and didn’t find any game mechanic surprises, bug surprise yeh (BS navy on 2924 on turn 1 was the biggest bug!)) Note bugs are still causing problems, but we’re close, the encounters are a bit of a pain to get sorted right now as we had to create a system that ran the old style and one that would work for KS simultaneously…
I’m not sure how the random number generator will work on the new system, I suppose it will be more nearly random, but I’m not techie enough to be sure. It should be fine though. No encounter responses, algorthyms etc have been or will be changed without prior discussion. I know as a player I once had 4 items within 1 hex of each other, and else where another 4, which seemed strange for example.
