what is 50% in real life

[oblowsky]

hi everyone
this is my first post on this forum, and I came here for only one purpose: to share with you my analysis about dusk mantle, the "50%" card
I did have some extra time during last week... so here are results of my little research:

2002 times!
yeah right: 2k times. not a small number for serious stats
so 2002 times my creatures attacked into dusk mantle
1288 times attack was 'miss' 
724 times was good

that is not even near 50%.  this is bug or just very bad design.
and again, I'm not talking about one game. I'm talking about cca 150 games and result is cca 64%

ty for your time and sry for my bad english

regards

[daccoo]

M8 it has 50% chance to miss or hit ...
That is chance it can hit 1000 times and it can miss 1000 times it depends of how much luck you have .
For example fog has 40 % chance but i played a lot of games when they miss me 4 or 5 times in a row.
It is all mater of luck

[oblowsky]

I know that m8
but after 2000 attacks it's very wrong to have that kind of difference
very, very, very wrong

and again, I'm not talking about one or two games. I'm talking about counting 2000 attacks

[regen2k9]

In order to tell if there is statistical significance to the results of this large sample (2002 trial sample), you must first conduct a t test.  If the community wants one done I'd be more than happy to do it, but until one is conducted, we cannot judge whether or not this inaccuracy is valid.

[Aves]

The larger the sample size, the more ideal your results will be (generally speaking- there is always a chance for it to go the other way). 2k is not sufficiently big a sample size. In order to prove that the chance is not 50%, you'd need to make your sample size much larger, like tallying the community's entire count, as regen suggests.

[daccoo]

The larger the sample size, the more ideal your results will be (generally speaking- there is always a chance for it to go the other way). 2k is not sufficiently big a sample size. In order to prove that the chance is not 50%, you'd need to make your sample size much larger, like tallying the community's entire count, as regen suggests.

True.

[oblowsky]

@regen2k9

I understand your scepticism and I don't blame you
I would also like to see other players results.
maybe I'm just so unununununbelievable unlucky???   

[oblowsky]

@aves

sry m8 but 2k is good enough size for that kind of statistic...

[ralouf]

You can ask about how much this is coded but I'm sure it's 50% for real, it just that luck is a big issue when you play this card.

[oblowsky]

I was not expecting fifty-fifty results. no way.
the bigger the sample size, the more likely results will be 50-50
I'll be all right with 55-45, or even more, but after 2000 attacks: 64,5% - 35,5%????
something is wrong....

[bogtro]

Using the game simulator (http://xenocidius.allalla.com/simulator/), I got, in a quick sample of 399 attacks, 202 misses and 197 hits. While this is a small sample size, this is a large enough sample to suggest that nothing is broken (I will repeat this again later). You should expect variance when flipping a coin. 2000 times is not a strong enough sample to prove unfairness either way.

[teffy]

The sample size of 2000 is high enough. We would get more problems, if p~0, or p~1. But here:

For normal distribution, we often demand : var = sd^2 = n*p* (1-p) > 9.  500,5 >3.
Other formulas which say when I can use normal distribution give similar results.

Using normal distribution for coin toss, and the 3-sigma rule, we get the result:

The chance is  ~ 99,73 % , that      number blocked creatures / number of creatures    is in the intervall  [0,5 - 0, 033524 , 0,5+ 0, 033524]

( 0,5 +/-   3/ (2* sqrt(n)) ,  sqrt (n) = n^(1/2) )

We have 1288 / 2002 ~ 0,643 > 0,533524!

That means, the result above is very very unlikely!
That´s either a wrong measurement, or an algorithm mistake or very very bad luck.

Edit: missed a "3". Mistake corrected.
0,1117*3=0,033524