Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-ai: April 2002:
[freeciv-ai] Re: Approximate win_chance

[freeciv-ai] Re: Approximate win_chance

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: "Ross W. Wetmore" <rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx>, <freeciv-ai@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [freeciv-ai] Re: Approximate win_chance
From: Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 12:34:57 +0100 (BST)

On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Ross W. Wetmore wrote:

> At 12:57 PM 02/04/19 +0100, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> >On Thu, 18 Apr 2002, Raahul Kumar wrote:
> >
> >> > Power 5 works best (better than 4 or 6).  Not very often.  You can 
> >> > experiment with the code I attached.
> >> 
> >> That's what I don't understand. I assume higher powers should always work
> >> better. More precision, less errors. Yet your results show differently.
> I am
> >> suspicious. I demand an explanation.
> >
> >I have no explanation.  This is the way things are.  In principle it is 
> >possible to play with the win_chance formula (which is essentially 
> >hypergeometric function) and maybe do some expansions and show why 5 is 
> >the best, but I'm not interested in doing it.
> I suspect you will find that most battles are decided in multiples of 5 
> rounds, i.e. 10, 20, 30 hitpoints with firepower of 1 or 2. On a wild
> hunch, this may make the 5th power term of any full expression dominant.

Too wild a guess.  I am giving this question as a degree project, I'm sure 
some poor student will decide to go for it, so if he succeeds we'll know 
the answer in a year's time.


[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]