Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Survey of Bagatelle Outcomes


  • Please log in to reply
300 replies to this topic

#276 wikkles

wikkles

  • 556 posts


Users Awards

Posted 15 July 2012 - 11:23 PM

1

1

2

1

1

2

2

3

1

5

2

4

2

1

2

1

3

2

1


1

2

1

1

1

3

1

6

1

3

2

3

1

3

1

2

1

1

1

1



#277 Tristen

Tristen
  • Banned from trading - Do not trade with this user

  • 1,133 posts


Users Awards

Posted 15 July 2012 - 11:24 PM

1
4
1
1
4
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
4
6
2
1
2
5

#278 Parasol

Parasol
  • 52 posts

Posted 18 July 2012 - 04:28 PM

Spoiler


#279 wikkles

wikkles

  • 556 posts


Users Awards

Posted 18 July 2012 - 11:27 PM

3

2

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

2



#280 Parasol

Parasol
  • 52 posts

Posted 19 July 2012 - 05:37 PM

Spoiler


#281 wikkles

wikkles

  • 556 posts


Users Awards

Posted 20 July 2012 - 12:43 AM

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

1

2

3

1

2

1

2

1

2

2

1

3

1



#282 Tristen

Tristen
  • Banned from trading - Do not trade with this user

  • 1,133 posts


Users Awards

Posted 20 July 2012 - 11:08 PM

3
1
3
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
3
1
1
2
1


1

#283 idontknow951

idontknow951
  • 490 posts

Posted 20 July 2012 - 11:31 PM

Is there a point in still keeping this? His last edit was a year and three months ago.

#284 Jun

Jun
  • 907 posts

Posted 21 July 2012 - 12:05 AM

Is there a point in still keeping this? His last edit was a year and three months ago.


Maybe someone else can collect the data from this board in the future to keep it on, who knows..

#285 trizzle

trizzle
  • Deceptive Minx

  • 973 posts


Users Awards

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:37 AM

1

2

3

1

3

3

3

3

1

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

2

2


#286 wikkles

wikkles

  • 556 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 July 2012 - 03:41 PM

1

5

1

3

2

1

2

1

2

2

1

1

1

3

2

2

1

1

3

1



#287 arruinar

arruinar
  • 8 posts

Posted 02 August 2012 - 07:46 PM

2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 2.

hahahaha

#288 Jun

Jun
  • 907 posts

Posted 03 August 2012 - 10:20 AM

1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 3, 1, 2, 4, 1, 1, 2, 3, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1 1, 1

#289 wikkles

wikkles

  • 556 posts


Users Awards

Posted 03 August 2012 - 01:15 PM

2

3

1

4

3

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

3

1

1



#290 xxxccc

xxxccc
  • 10 posts

Posted 12 September 2012 - 11:54 AM

most i ever won is 3000np

#291 Tristen

Tristen
  • Banned from trading - Do not trade with this user

  • 1,133 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 September 2012 - 05:27 PM

1
3
2
3
1
1
2
6
2
1
4
3
1
1
1
1
1
2
2

#292 pyelon

pyelon
  • 73 posts

Posted 13 September 2012 - 10:47 AM

Jeeze. based on this board the chances are terrible huh!

Unfortunately my luck is the same. I've just seen this post and apparently it may not be getting used but I'll probably post some of my data for a few days!

#293 Tristen

Tristen
  • Banned from trading - Do not trade with this user

  • 1,133 posts


Users Awards

Posted 13 September 2012 - 12:47 PM

1
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
3
4
3
2
1
4
4
3
1
1
1

I just like to see if anyone actually got anything good.

#294 beatbox7s

beatbox7s
  • 5 posts

Posted 28 September 2012 - 03:08 PM

1
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
3
4
3
2
1
4
4
3
1
1
1

I just like to see if anyone actually got anything good.

Same, really curious!

#295 Daviid

Daviid
  • 64 posts


Users Awards

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:07 AM

Spoiler

 

my first 6



#296 rikuwe

rikuwe
  • 21 posts

Posted 16 May 2013 - 06:32 AM

So basically bagatelle is nowhere close to being worth it?



#297 Guppie

Guppie
  • 1,285 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 January 2015 - 10:09 PM

Spoiler


#298 arruinar

arruinar
  • 8 posts

Posted 05 June 2015 - 05:06 AM

Spoiler



#299 Dreww

Dreww
  • 552 posts

Posted 02 January 2016 - 03:39 AM

Well then, I'm only about four years late with this reply, but here it is!

 

rbFVrdj.png

 

From the 5488 rolls collected, the breakdown was as follows:

   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16
2832 1332  766  269  179   67   25   10    4    1    2    1    0    0    0    0

No rolls above 13 occurred, which is to be expected when dealing with a sample size this small. This resulted in the following actual percentage, which I'll use for extrapolating the hypothetical probabilities:

       1        2        3        4        5        6        7        8        9       10       11       12 
51.6035% 24.2711% 13.9577%  4.9016%  3.2617%  1.2208%  0.4555%  0.1822%  0.0729%  0.0182%  0.0364%  0.0182%

Eyeballing this, the game likely uses the simplest infinite series possible.  The odds we're looking for 2-n would be:

       1        2        3        4        5        6        7        8
50.0000% 25.0000% 12.5000%  6.2500%  3.1250%  1.5625%  0.7813%  0.3906%
       9       10       11       12       13       14       15       16
 0.1953%  0.0977%  0.0488%  0.0244%  0.0122%  0.0061%  0.0031%  0.0015%

Our deviations from the pattern are all due to sampling error, which is a byproduct of using a finite sized dataset.  Emulating these results have a wide range of outcomes that show how much variation occurs purely due to chance:

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   14 
2777 1363  652  345  180   90   42   23   10    4    1    1 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12   13   14 
2764 1346  671  349  179   85   51   16   12    6    4    2    2    1 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12   13 
2723 1398  689  340  159   84   46   19   16    9    2    1    2 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12   13   14   16 
2767 1374  656  340  167   92   43   17   15    8    2    3    1    2    1 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12 
2752 1356  711  338  172   77   41   24   13    1    1    2 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12   14 
2807 1299  710  318  178   94   42   10   15    8    2    4    1 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   13 
2766 1343  694  329  194   83   46   17   10    3    2    1 

Chi-Square Test:

> prob<-2^(-(1:16))
> chisq.test(tab/length(cc),prob)


        Pearson's Chi-squared test


data:  tab/length(cc) and prob
X-squared = 176, df = 165, p-value = 0.2646


Warning message:
In chisq.test(tab/length(cc), prob) :
  Chi-squared approximation may be incorrect

A p-value lower than a cut-off of 1 standard deviation (p=0.05) would suggest the game does not follow this payout pattern.

 

If you paid 250 million to play Bagatelle one million times, and each jackpot ambitiously gave you 500,000 NP, you would only win back between 160 and 165 million NP.  With a jackpot payout of 1,000,000 NP, this goes up to a whopping 161 to 169 million NP.

 

TL;DR : Bagatelle is a pretty predictable game when you play it enough, and pays out 2/3 of the money you put in.

 

 

 


Edited by Dreww, 02 January 2016 - 03:42 AM.


#300 Kaddict

Kaddict
  • 1,659 posts


Users Awards

Posted 02 January 2016 - 11:10 PM

 

Well then, I'm only about four years late with this reply, but here it is!

 

rbFVrdj.png

 

From the 5488 rolls collected, the breakdown was as follows:

   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16
2832 1332  766  269  179   67   25   10    4    1    2    1    0    0    0    0

No rolls above 13 occurred, which is to be expected when dealing with a sample size this small. This resulted in the following actual percentage, which I'll use for extrapolating the hypothetical probabilities:

       1        2        3        4        5        6        7        8        9       10       11       12 
51.6035% 24.2711% 13.9577%  4.9016%  3.2617%  1.2208%  0.4555%  0.1822%  0.0729%  0.0182%  0.0364%  0.0182%

Eyeballing this, the game likely uses the simplest infinite series possible.  The odds we're looking for 2-n would be:

       1        2        3        4        5        6        7        8
50.0000% 25.0000% 12.5000%  6.2500%  3.1250%  1.5625%  0.7813%  0.3906%
       9       10       11       12       13       14       15       16
 0.1953%  0.0977%  0.0488%  0.0244%  0.0122%  0.0061%  0.0031%  0.0015%

Our deviations from the pattern are all due to sampling error, which is a byproduct of using a finite sized dataset.  Emulating these results have a wide range of outcomes that show how much variation occurs purely due to chance:

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   14 
2777 1363  652  345  180   90   42   23   10    4    1    1 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12   13   14 
2764 1346  671  349  179   85   51   16   12    6    4    2    2    1 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12   13 
2723 1398  689  340  159   84   46   19   16    9    2    1    2 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12   13   14   16 
2767 1374  656  340  167   92   43   17   15    8    2    3    1    2    1 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12 
2752 1356  711  338  172   77   41   24   13    1    1    2 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12   14 
2807 1299  710  318  178   94   42   10   15    8    2    4    1 

> table(sample(1:16,5488,replace=T,prob=prob))
   1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   13 
2766 1343  694  329  194   83   46   17   10    3    2    1 

Chi-Square Test:

> prob<-2^(-(1:16))
> chisq.test(tab/length(cc),prob)


        Pearson's Chi-squared test


data:  tab/length(cc) and prob
X-squared = 176, df = 165, p-value = 0.2646


Warning message:
In chisq.test(tab/length(cc), prob) :
  Chi-squared approximation may be incorrect

A p-value lower than a cut-off of 1 standard deviation (p=0.05) would suggest the game does not follow this payout pattern.

 

If you paid 250 million to play Bagatelle one million times, and each jackpot ambitiously gave you 500,000 NP, you would only win back between 160 and 165 million NP.  With a jackpot payout of 1,000,000 NP, this goes up to a whopping 161 to 169 million NP.

 

TL;DR : Bagatelle is a pretty predictable game when you play it enough, and pays out 2/3 of the money you put in.

 

 

 

Bruh, nicely done. I don't ever play this game, but bravo. This is beautiful




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users