Cheats in Twilight:2000, v2.x, 2d6-2 system
Aproximation of distribution
How to detect cheating and prove that the person/group has
cheated when rolled up their charachters...
Next table will be easy to read, and are for those who wants an example...
How to read:
The last (the most to your right) is a table that are very inaccurate, the reason is there
is not much tables that covers the values I try to use. So there are many errors within
these values. Check last table on this page...
But the 7 others is so near the thruth you can come...
Players: How many players there are in the group.
Left column of Best of #%: This value is the total value of the groupstats they roll up.
Right column of best of #%: This is the value of the individual of the group,
only to compare that the value get lower when many players roll up.
Table for those who doesn't like Math
|
Players
|
Best 10%
|
Best 1%
|
Best 0.1%
|
8th on all stats
Best of # groups
|
|
Group
|
Individual
|
Group
|
Individual
|
Group
|
Individual
|
|
1
|
39
|
38.6
|
45
|
44.9
|
50
|
49.5
|
1 000
|
|
2
|
73
|
36.3
|
82
|
40.8
|
88
|
44.0
|
25 000
|
|
3
|
106
|
35.3
|
117
|
39.0
|
125
|
41.6
|
One Miljon
|
|
4
|
139
|
34.7
|
151
|
37.9
|
161
|
40.2
|
human world population
|
|
5
|
171
|
34.3
|
186
|
37.1
|
196
|
39.2
|
10 times of Bill Gates dollars
|
|
6
|
204
|
34.0
|
219
|
36.6
|
231
|
38.4
|
2/3rd of US of A:s Budget in $US
|
|
7
|
236
|
33.7
|
253
|
36.1
|
265
|
37.9
|
1% of USA Purchasing power in $US
|
|
8
|
268
|
33.5
|
286
|
35.8
|
299
|
37.4
|
whole USA Purchasing power in 10-cents
|
|
9
|
300
|
33.4
|
320
|
35.5
|
333
|
37.0
|
65 times the earths age in seconds
|
|
10
|
333
|
33.3
|
353
|
35.3
|
367
|
36.7
|
Spending Bill Gates fortune every second, it takes 32 years to come up to this number in 1-dollarbills
|
Well, I have long time now used a formula to detect cheating in the when the group rolled
their charechters. And it comes handy what gametype we are talking about. You should use your common sence
when useing this infopage on cheating. you can messure one person or the whole group. you should not
use it to for example messure cheating for the two of six best rolled charachters. But you can use the formula
to just tell how good they really are.
How to read the and imterpred the ALFA-value
After looked at Table 3, the number says roughly that for example we got 2.33, 1 % says that the probability for the group to roll whatever they rolled is in the range of
1 percent or better, a normal value for the whole group should be -1.64 to 1.64 that covers 90 percent of the probability roughly.
For a single player that you put your eyes on it is little different, you have choosed one that distinguish from the group, that is a factor that must be counted for. But you can consider
following if you get a absurd value for a single charachter, like ALFA above 3.89 then you can say
"I must roll 20000 and if I don't cheat I could maybe roll one as good as that you rolled,
can you explain how you rolled ?"
- First you have to gather some info what they have rolled up we call it GAMMA
- Add all attributes of charachter(s)/group
- Use Table 1 to find SIGMA
- Use Table 2 to find ALFA
- Use Formula 1 to find BETA
- Use Table 3 to find how good the charachter/group is
this number tells you how how many percent that is better then
then the rolled up charachter/group
Table 1 & 2
|
|
|
|
Players
|
SIGMA
|
ALFA
|
|
1
|
6.06
|
30,8
|
|
2
|
8.57
|
61.6
|
|
3
|
10.50
|
92.4
|
|
4
|
12.12
|
123.2
|
|
5
|
13.55
|
154,0
|
|
6
|
14.84
|
184.8
|
|
7
|
16.03
|
215.6
|
|
8
|
17.14
|
246.4
|
|
9
|
18.18
|
277.2
|
|
10
|
19.16
|
308.0
|
Formula 1 - Flowchart
- (GAMMA) - (ALFA)
- divided.with(SIGMA)
Now you have the BETA-value
Table 3
After
Formula 1
|
Percent that is
better than rolled
|
After
Formula 1 |
Percent that is
better than rolled
|
|
0.0
|
50 %
|
|
|
|
0.26
|
40 %
|
-0.26
|
60 %
|
|
0.53
|
30 %
|
-0.53
|
70 %
|
|
0.84
|
20 %
|
-0.84
|
80 %
|
|
1.28
|
10 %
|
-1.28
|
90 %
|
|
1.65
|
5 %
|
-1.65
|
95 %
|
|
2.05
|
2 %
|
-2.05
|
98 %
|
|
2.33
|
1 %
|
-2.33
|
99 %
|
|
3.09
|
1/1 000
|
-3.09
|
1/1 000
|
|
3.72
|
1/10 000
|
-3.72
|
1/10 000
|
Table of Extreme: When the function colapse
After
Formula 1
|
Fraction that is
better than rolled
|
After
Formula 1
|
Fraction(aprox) that is
better than rolled
|
|
3.9
|
1/20 000
|
5.3
|
1/10 000 000 000
|
|
4.1
|
1/50 000
|
5.8
|
1/100 000 000 000
|
|
4.3
|
1/100 000
|
6.5
|
1/1 000 000 000 000
|
|
4.8
|
1/1 000 000
|
8
|
1/1 000 000 000 000 000
|
|