Mass LB-X flak in games

[Charistoph]

Most computer based RNG's have this tendency to 'get stuck' for won't of a better term, on certain numbers, MM does have a work around in their card system, but you have to manually select it.

It's how the software generates a "random" number.  There are ways to affect it a little bit to make it a bit more random, such as "seeding" the generator before it happens, but it is limited.

[Cannonshop]

Sounds like 90% of the TW or AS games I've played in the last...over a decade, now, with the addition that you also never knew beforehand the faction, tech level, or even era of your opponent's force. :)

It should be noted that a lot of the weapons that are effective at countering a Cannonshop or Me-style force are also effective at hurting mechs, albeit sometimes in different ways(plasma, for example).

With that in mind, there's not much reason to NOT prepare as if you're going to face a conventional-heavy force.

we always treated it as 'part of the challenge", you roll with the army you've got, rather than an army tailored to a specific situation.  FSM changed things a LOT-because it created a situation where the optimal solution if you actually wanted to play, was to dump everything into as few units as possible and hope for a duel.

which gets boring quick, since both sides end up in Clan energy-boat-assaults parked at 'medium' rolling dice until someone falls over.

Our group dumped FSM from BV calcs as it took the bulk of the actual 'fun' out of the game, and moved to using a change to the initiative rules instead, setting the initiative order to a 'front loaded' system that inherently limits 'initiative sinking' effects for asymmetrically numbered forces.

(For some reason, this still wound up with roughly even chances of victory-when the smaller, and usually heavier/more advanced forces were played right.  I've lost more than a few weekend fights while still tehnically outnumbering the other side. esp getting sloppy with my tactics.)

but the point is, massed LBX isn't a bad way  to go, if you  have the dice to do it.  I'll echo others in that the transparent 'fishingtackle' box with 2 dice in each compartment, shaken-shaken-slam! (shake multiple times, slam on the table to drop 'edges' onto flats) is a great way to handle massed hit locations, and a nice little 'dice tower' for your to-hits or PSR's are nice additions, and can be a real boon for speeding up turns, even in lance/company battles or fights where you've got lots of weapons firing instead of just one.

We used to have a display-board with the hit location chart and cluster charts displayed at large scale, just so that it was easier to quick-reference for new players and spectators when Dave was doing 'gamestore' matches for his Commando credit. 

With all the supplementary charts in TW now, I think we'd need a bigger display board.

[SCC]

It's how the software generates a "random" number.  There are ways to affect it a little bit to make it a bit more random, such as "seeding" the generator before it happens, but it is limited.

The problem is that computers normally use the system clock to generate the seed, so even if your generating a new seed every time a dice is rolled it's not going to be very different from the last seed.

[Charistoph]

The problem is that computers normally use the system clock to generate the seed, so even if your generating a new seed every time a dice is rolled it's not going to be very different from the last seed.

True, and that is the point I was making.  Some programmers allow for a seed to be manually installed, which gets around clock generated one, but it is still rather limited.

[Empyrus]

Unless we're talking about the very bottom mud pseudo-random number generators, you won't see biases unless you play a lot, like hundreds of games. They are just fine for normal gaming.

It is not like normal dice are accurate either, they're not exactly manufactured to high precision.
In our RPG that has lasted for years, everyone's dice have their quirks we've become familiar over the years. One friend's d20 seems to roll more 1s and 20s and 19s than it probably should, while my brother's d20 on the table seems to be landing 16s quite a lot. Ultimately the biases are minor enough they never affect games in practice, even if they aren't statistically what they should be.

[Colt Ward]

Lol my agent looks at his GenCon dice and what they roll . . . then stares across the table to see what the GenCon dice he brought back for me roll.  His complaint that the dice he brought back for others roll better usually is valid . . .

[Jellico]

There is a story about a local player who sat down with a couple of hundred dice and tested them until he had a couple of sets that matched his dice rolling needs.

[truetanker]

There is a story about a local player who sat down with a couple of hundred dice and tested them until he had a couple of sets that matched his dice rolling needs.

I heard it was Hellbie... Or was it Jelico?  ;D

TT

[massey]

There is a story about a local player who sat down with a couple of hundred dice and tested them until he had a couple of sets that matched his dice rolling needs.

I thought this was standard practice.

[garhkal]

As someone, who while learning the game had 5 out of 7 mechs i was using sporting lots of SRM/LRMs, and having to roll all those things out, i wouldn't say having a # of mechs with LBs would be any worse.. 

[Cannonshop]

There is a story about a local player who sat down with a couple of hundred dice and tested them until he had a couple of sets that matched his dice rolling needs.

I thought everybody did that.  (well, except me, I don't have that kind of patience.)

[garhkal]

I don't.  I just grab 4-6 pairs of d6, and go with it.

[Empyrus]

I switch dice if the previous ones roll badly :P

D6s only though, have two 36-packs of those.

[SCC]

True, and that is the point I was making.  Some programmers allow for a seed to be manually installed, which gets around clock generated one, but it is still rather limited.

The thing is that then you'd have to give a new seed for every roll. Or at least a new seed every round.

[Sabelkatten]

The thing is that then you'd have to give a new seed for every roll. Or at least a new seed every round.

Actually it's the other way around. A new seed will likely end up biasing the rolls, a good RNG will provide a perfect distribution over its (large) number of results.

Of course there are a lot of bad RMGs too, but the #1 problem people have with computer "dice" is almost certainly that the results are there to see for longer. Roll twenty to-hit rolls with dice and most people won't remember that ten of them was one short, but see the printout in MegaMek and they'll be swearing to high heaven... ::)