Support » Suggestions

Disclaimer 1:
Before reading, please make sure you can comprehend this statement & its entirety so you can understand my point-of-view:
This suggestion is in no-way intended to serve as an offensive remark to YGOrganization, Duelingbook Staff, or anyone associated in any way to the website YGOScope and its development.

Disclaimer 2:
If there's any thread that voices similar concerns for ranked gameplay on Duelingbook, I apologize if I missed over it.
--------------------------------------

In Yu-Gi-Oh!, selecting to go 1st or 2nd can play as a critical factor in deciding who will be victorious.
This approach can be applied very well when taking in regards competitive gameplay, the evolution of the game, & even card design.
So critical, that the entire process of deciding who goes 1st or 2nd is left to be entirely random, most commonly with die/dice.

Duelingbook currently uses RPS (Rock-Paper-Scissors) to decide who goes 1st or 2nd. In theory, there is nothing wrong with this practice.
Over time however, this practice has slowly displayed itself to be a bit (for lack of a better word and keeping court), improper.

RPS remains random still as you won't know for certain what your opponent will pick assuming you're not a hacker, psychic, or your opponent doesn't bluntly tell you & you believe them & you happen to be right, but what if I told you that such randomosity is becoming less and less random, and in some special cases, a certain?

A user acquiring a replay after a duel's conclusion & dueling one of those same persons in ranked immediately is unlikely.
It's unlikely unless you're paired by chance, you both have similar rating, or you exploit the algorithm (which is an offense).
Assume that you do however queue against one of those persons.
In such a case, you the ex-spectator would/should know what that player picked in RPS (& maybe their Deck of choice) if attentive enough.

If you assume that your opponent didn't notice you as a spectator & they don't intend to change their RPS decision (or even deck choice), you could theoretically win RPS. Still unlikely in its own regard, but probable assuming your opponent doesn't "feel pressured".
However, this "unlikely" can be a "likely" by being able to get ANY opponent's replay on hand, not just one you spectated.

YGOScope to put briefly, is a website that acquires analytics for Yu-Gi-Oh! and it updates relatively quickly (in my experience, less than 12 hrs, sometimes instantly).
In it, the latest ranked gameplay replays are featured to whichever user you decide to search (generally speaking).
Now YGOScope itself is not inherently bad & its purpose is great, HOWEVER, the speed at which replays are provided is an issue.
An issue for competitive laddering & gameplay on Duelingbook.

Remember how I told you that the likelihood of countering your opponent's RPS choice was unlikely, unless you watched one of their duels in real-time and they didn't feel inclined to switch RPS choice and/or Deck choice?
Now what if I told you, you could go to YGOScope and acquire their latest pick in less than 1 minute and you could remove the potential factor of being a spectator and removing such that factor of pressure?

Still not a certain and still random, but definitely insightful and much more narrowing & at least in some cases (putting it lightly), it would have to be correct.
Such a tactic unfortunately that is practiced a-lot, which at least from my point-of-view isn't tasteful for competitive gameplay.
Many "Top 16" and higher individual players in both Singles & Matches have admitted to using YGOScope as a method to gain advantage.
This has been the case for multiple different formats varying over a heavy period of time.
To the select couple that have spoken to me directly, they do not look at YGOScope in a positive lighting for this regard specifically.

YGOScope is a website that is only going to gain popularity, and over time, it noticeably has. More and more people will develop using it in the aforementioned way. Opposed to bringing upon this untasteful game style and providing more authenticity to Duelingbook, I suggest that Duelingbook do one of the following.

A) Replace RPS with Die/Dice Roll for the aforementioned reasons. (In my opinion, most practical.)
B) Have Users have the ability to remove their Usernames from being accessible in YGOScope's Database. (Seems extensive, but it works.)
C) Implement a 10-second timer. (Worst option because the website's servers are generally laggy not my words, a Judge's).

While Die roll still will never eradicate the issue of knowing whether to go 1st or 2nd based on replay, it will remove certainty as an element entirely, which in my personal opinion was the intention of randomizing between the players that go 1st or 2nd.
In my personal opinion (not factual), it will provide more "skillful" and "healthy" (take these words with a grain of salt) gameplay.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you've taken time to understand why this suggestion has been posted, I thank you.
If you voice approval and agreeance, please give this thread a reputation point.
For any other purposes such as disagreement, comments or concerns to anything related to advanced gameplay on DB, state it below.
As always, please respectful in the comments and to others' opinions if any.

This makes a lot of sense.

Hey. Im currently doing Uni exams and have no incentive to log into DB besides literal boredom so I wont follow up after this initial post. My thoughts on RPS is I personally am one to follow a pattern in my opponents, and this may well be the case they do with me. A die roll is completely random, someone might get pissed off they got first/second but they cannot blame it on the other person at all while with RPS they can. I fully support a die Roll, especially for singles as it makes the most logical sense.

I personally don't care because I suck in the game anyways :pepega: However, I agree player's should decide if they want their info available in YGOScope or not.

i dont think replacing RPS is a good idea at all.
Pretty much all DB users know about ygoscope, and if you don't change your pattern, then you're basically asking to get scoped.
Why replacing RPS when you can simply change your pick every game? It isn't that hard.

Removing your name from scope isn't a good idea either, if you're worried about people knowing about your deck and you think it is unfair, then let me tell you as an IRL player that in Top Cuts everyone knows which deck you're playing and what techs you're running. What's the difference?

YGOscope is just a tool like many others, there's nothing wrong with using it if you really care about ranked. As i said before if you don't "play around" it, you can only blame yourself.

[quote="Re-Qliate":2yhjp8x3]i dont think replacing RPS is a good idea at all.
Pretty much all DB users know about ygoscope, and if you don't change your pattern, then you're basically asking to get scoped.
Why replacing RPS when you can simply change your pick every game? It isn't that hard.

Removing your name from scope isn't a good idea either, if you're worried about people knowing about your deck and you think it is unfair, then let me tell you as an IRL player that in Top Cuts everyone knows which deck you're playing and what techs you're running. What's the difference?

YGOscope is just a tool like many others, there's nothing wrong with using it if you really care about ranked. As i said before if you don't "play around" it, you can only blame yourself.[/quote:2yhjp8x3]

Naturally, changing a pattern would be the solution most people would think of.
However, alternation still doesn't change the fact that factors are in play that shouldn't be, personally as its meant to be entirely random.
You'll never know for certain, like I mentioned above, but you'll have a pretty decent change of hitting, unless you're applying a pressure.
A pressure that shouldn't be there in the first place.

At least from my perspective, it is not a game (or supposed to be) of who can outmind someone before the game has even started.
I also see no harm in such a conversion to rolls, considering the remaining one has had its respective criticism & problems.

As for privatizing info & Deck choice:
The process could work where Deck names and the users can still be searched and counted as apart of statistics.
I don't mind contributing in that way. After all, I think (I don't know for certain) decoding replays to acquire an entire decklist is entirely possible

imagine spamming same shit every rps and expect not to lose yeah lets totally replace rps cuz of that

[quote="the flaming storm":3ob6g0mb]imagine spamming same shit every rps and expect not to lose yeah lets totally replace rps cuz of that[/quote:3ob6g0mb]
That's not why the suggestion was called upon. I politely request you re-read very carefully.

just change what u do at rps and dont be retarded problem solved. no need to change whole system cuz u cant even use 2 braincells to change what u do at rps

What no if you remove RPS how can I go and get unfair advantage in Rated singles then? Snow trying to kill our beloved RPS format? Smh

[quote="the flaming storm":1i021z22]just change what u do at rps and dont be retarded problem solved. no need to change whole system cuz u cant even use 2 braincells to change what u do at rps[/quote:1i021z22]

Whether this be harsh verbage to convey a point, I'm unsure, but to make it simple, switching patterns isn't the solution and to an extent, worsens the issue. I reiterate, please read everything stated above as condensing it into a "cold" message won't lead to any positivity.

Edit:
Again, I'm not seeing an issue to the conversion, as it helps DB from an authenticity standpoint.

I think this is a decision not only in DUELING BOOK but also on the whole.
It has become a game based on the principle of choosing a first player with a limit more than a second player, but your opponent who will be competing with him must be less or more than you in the rating points.

just be good enough to win even when u lose RPS

I definitely agree with this idea. It doesn't affect me all too much, but I for one would prefer to play with a die roll as it more closely resembles IRL play. I tend to look at the patterns others play i.e. lower players may go for scissors whereas higher tend to go for rock, which isn't always accurate of course, but it's an advantage over a completely random roll nonetheless.

I don't think changing to a die roll would have much of an effect on the platform but I think it's a good change, being very beneficial to more so the tournament scene than rated play.

>Wants to replace RPS with a dice roll simply cause RPS is too random

Bruh.....making it to a die roll is even more random....

[quote="Renji Asuka":2x10yuiu]>Wants to replace RPS with a dice roll simply cause RPS is too random

Bruh.....making it to a die roll is even more random....[/quote:2x10yuiu]

I think you misunderstand the scenario. If anything, the exact opposite is being inferred.

A Dieroll system would definetly be more appropriate as Going second/first are supposed to be entirely random.
And just because "everyone uses ygoscope" doesn't make it appealing to keep Rps, because it adds frustration to a part of the game that should not be frustrating, why must I try to outsmart and figure out my opponent's pattern when it is supposed to be a random outcome.
Not to mention that some people take ages at the start while checking your ygoscope which makes matches start after a minute or two in some cases. It's just not the best route in my honest opinion

[quote="Monarch Snow":74ngl91i][quote="Renji Asuka":74ngl91i]>Wants to replace RPS with a dice roll simply cause RPS is too random

Bruh.....making it to a die roll is even more random....[/quote:74ngl91i]

I think you misunderstand the scenario. If anything, the exact opposite is being inferred.[/quote:74ngl91i]
Nah, Rock Paper Scissors has far more control compared to rolling a die which has a lot more different combinations, which makes it inherently more RNG. Its stupid to think otherwise.

[quote="Renji Asuka":u5tggngw][quote="Monarch Snow":u5tggngw][quote="Renji Asuka":u5tggngw]>Wants to replace RPS with a dice roll simply cause RPS is too random

Bruh.....making it to a die roll is even more random....[/quote:u5tggngw]

I think you misunderstand the scenario. If anything, the exact opposite is being inferred.[/quote:u5tggngw]
Nah, Rock Paper Scissors has far more control compared to rolling a die which has a lot more different combinations, which makes it inherently more RNG. Its stupid to think otherwise.[/quote:u5tggngw]

The purpose for it is to be entirely random (as mentioned by several people above) and you just admitted that RPS is more controlled.......I'm failing to see where you're attempting to make a correlation. Total randomicity is endgame here. Please elaborate on your point-of-view.

Another piece I wanted to bring to light was a conversation that I had with developers of YGO Omega, an up and coming simulator.
A simulator with a lot of popularity attached to its name. (Yes, it's automatic and manual.)

I asked the same question to their developers and a helper. Among the 4, 2 agreed with me, 2 didn't, but understood my approach.
AMM, the project Lead prefers RPS/Janken in disagreement with me.

AMM prefers RPS over die roll and prefers having it, BUT not having RPS recorded in replay exportation.
If they had to make pre-game public (when RPS would occur), then it would be exploitable.
Hence they themselves would rather go with die/dice.




NOTE: This statement does directly correlate to Suggestion A and provides a more probable solution to Suggestion B on privatized data.

Edit:
The images formerly available of the staff chat of Duelists Unite has been redacted per the request since they still don't want a staff channel leaked to avoid photoshop & misinformation, but they would still like to quote what I'm stating above is truthful in its entirety.
If you were quick to this thread or are a DB Staff, you can see such images still to corroborate my claim.

Hello All

After reading this post and most of the comments here, here is my feed back

I hope you understand what I am writing, coming from and here is my take on this from the experiences from playing the game online using DB, some game boy games as well YGO pro and in real life. I don't really write a lot of blogs, post, comment about yu gi oh much but played this game since i was a little boy First Card was "RUDE KAISER"

I do believe the RPS system does have its pros and cons in the online world of YGO, since most games use it to choose who goes first or second. Also I am not saying the dice roll method would be saving this game mechanics.

I feel that the dice roll method would be innovative idea to implement in some rated games such as singles in DB and the evolution of the game as become such a fast pace game as well it can resemble to real life interaction of the game up to an extent. Also it is a totally random outcomes in making you ready for both scenarios which a duelist with experience who has played the game should able to adapt to it and to make the game as fair as possible.(as always just like life "life is never fair" and you can never have everything what you want it to be, as well if the decision is final just suck it up and live with it, unless you have an explanation and proper evidence. One thing that i remember when playing Dueling Network when you use to choose your opponent in rated then having the duel pool which is now random and they able to match you with someone with a similar skill set, experience and wins. You can have 1000 rated/8000 exp and still lose to someone who has 100/0 who knows the game in and out and just because of he got to choose the outcome of the game by winning the RPS. But in any game there are always advantages of choosing first or second which can predetermine/ determining the outcome of the game with using technology to support you such as YGO scope, the duel logs on dueling book (replays as well), spectating the opponent matches and for singles, following them so you can see their pattern of choosing RPS. Even science has shown us of this system. The example is down below. Inclusion changing that will take some time to adjust as well as its up to people ( judges, creator of the games to decide that). I hope that whatever the outcome is, i will support it and people will still continue playing the game. For me this game was part of my childhood.

Thanks you for reading my post, if you happen to have any comments, feedback, question for me as well if i missed anything please Pm me on Dueling Book . I am welcome to listen to your thought.

Cheers ZenonBlade75 4/30/2020


Here the example taken from this website for references . https://futurism.com/science-has-figure ... r-scissors.

Last Round: You Won

And you played rock, play scissors next.
And you played scissors, play paper next.
And you played paper, play rock next.
Last Round: You Lost

And you played rock, play scissors next
And you played scissors, play paper next.
And you played paper, play rock next.
Last Round: You Lost (and the other person saw this article)

And you played rock, play paper next.
And you played scissors, play rock next.
And you played paper, play scissors next.

Honestly, changing RPS is the least thing to be made.
I completely agree with you.

Wholeheartedly agree

I disagree.

For the simple reason that while RPS is not a completely random system (like let's say 90% random, 10% mind games), I would say that it is perfect for an online simulator.
Because it gives the player the feeling of being in control. If they lose they have nobody to blame for the loss but themselves (or the opponent).

However if a dice roll was implemented it suddenly because pure random chance. Nothing is in control anymore and and losing streaks can easily be blamed on the system, which can easily frustrate people!

Now a dice roll works IRL because while the mind game component is no longer present people still feel like they are at least a bit in control, as they do the actual roll. The only thing that could receive the blame in this case is the die. But both parties either using the same die or their own fixes that dilemma too.

So while I understand your desire for the outcome of the decider game to be as random as possible, I don't think it works that well online. For online games RPS is a much better choice.

[quote="BrainStone":3a6v1y4i]I disagree.

For the simple reason that while RPS is not a completely random system (like let's say 90% random, 10% mind games), I would say that it is perfect for an online simulator.
Because it gives the player the feeling of being in control. If they lose they have nobody to blame for the loss but themselves (or the opponent).

However if a dice roll was implemented it suddenly because pure random chance. Nothing is in control anymore and and losing streaks can easily be blamed on the system, which can easily frustrate people!

Now a dice roll works IRL because while the mind game component is no longer present people still feel like they are at least a bit in control, as they do the actual roll. The only thing that could receive the blame in this case is the die. But both parties either using the same die or their own fixes that dilemma too.

So while I understand your desire for the outcome of the decider game to be as random as possible, I don't think it works that well online. For online games RPS is a much better choice.[/quote:3a6v1y4i]


Losing streaks can easily be blamed on the system, which can easily frustrate people!
- People blame the shuffler (sometimes justifyingly) for their losses.
- You can extend this line of text to even Konami decisions if you connect the dots perfectly.
- People are going to be frustrated at times whether they lose or not.

However if a dice roll was implemented it suddenly because pure random chance
- That how who goes first or second is supposed to operate. Not my words, Konami's.

Now a dice roll works IRL because while the mind game component is no longer present people still feel like they are at least a bit in control
- You are not in control at all, whether you feel like you are or not.
- You're not supposed to be in control or have any type of advantage at all.

- The only thing that could receive the blame in this case is the die. But both parties either using the same die or their own fixes that dilemma too.
- The system would have to have both players use a die that's scripted by Duelingbook that both use pre-game.....

Quite honestly, I wouldn't trust a die, neither on DB, nor IRL. So I wholeheartedly agree with BrainStone.
There are so many problems in YGO that need fixing, the pregame Janken is the least of them. Of course it is not the perfect solution,
but neither is a die, because all algorithms are at best pseudo-random. And if you were to use a dice IRL, you could cheat that one just as well.
So I don't really see the point. I mean, I get your reasoning, but all it does is make more work for the programmers, who change the code. The result is the same.

[quote="Monarch Snow":2tttyg5s]
- You are not in control at all, whether you feel like you are or not.
- You're not supposed to be in control or have any type of advantage at all.
[/quote:2tttyg5s]

I know that you are not in control even though it feels like you are at least a certain bit. The thing is being at completely random odd with not control whatsoever (including only percived control) is very frustrating.
And of course, you're not supposed to be in control. Not saying anyone should be IRL.

[quote="BrainStone":3cvv4b84][quote="Monarch Snow":3cvv4b84]
- You are not in control at all, whether you feel like you are or not.
- You're not supposed to be in control or have any type of advantage at all.
[/quote:3cvv4b84]

I know that you are not in control even though it feels like you are at least a certain bit. The thing is being at completely random odd with not control whatsoever (including only percived control) is very frustrating.
And of course, you're not supposed to be in control. Not saying anyone should be IRL.[/quote:3cvv4b84]

I have never from personal experience seen a player at a table think they could feel certain about a roll of the dice without attempting to manipulate the dice. As you know, there isn't/shouldn't be control IRL, the same should apply for DB & if people want to blame it on the system, let them be frustrated.
I'd rather see someone be frustrated losing by chance of the roll, then someone lose, because a user manipulated the outcome of the Duel before it even began.

[quote="Play2X":vwqzzfrp]Quite honestly, I wouldn't trust a die, neither on DB, nor IRL. So I wholeheartedly agree with BrainStone.
There are so many problems in YGO that need fixing, the pregame Janken is the least of them. Of course it is not the perfect solution,
but neither is a die, because all algorithms are at best pseudo-random. And if you were to use a dice IRL, you could cheat that one just as well.
So I don't really see the point. I mean, I get your reasoning, but all it does is make more work for the programmers, who change the code. The result is the same.[/quote:vwqzzfrp]


The perfect solution for DB would be to have ranked replays remove RPS when they are recorded, but having the game chat still legible (for Judge Call report purposes).
I'd be surprised if someone could consistently cheat a die roll on IRL.

As for programmers. I'm no programmer & I assume this would take time to implement, though I do have a Tournament Organizer in my server who has developed a system where users could dictate who goes 1st or 2nd by having them linked to their program.

This program was created and stabilized in 2 days time.
Now obviously, DB Administration likely doesn't have as much leisure (I would think at least) & a simulator (I think) would be more complex.

Though, if creating a program for such can be done in 2 days, I would like to think something like this could be implemented into DB in a short period of time.

If you are worried about ygoscope don't choose the same thing over and over. Ranked replays show everything not sure if the RPS alone can be removed. I don't think there is anything currently wrong with it and think it should remain as RPS.

hello this is off topic but when i log in it and hit duel it says lost connection i treid everything

[quote="Runzy":1ak3x23l]If you are worried about ygoscope don't choose the same thing over and over. Ranked replays show everything not sure if the RPS alone can be removed. I don't think there is anything currently wrong with it and think it should remain as RPS.[/quote:1ak3x23l]


Switching RPS choices is not the solution & I'd recommend reading an earlier in response in the forum not just by myself, but another member on why it is not.

As for nothing currently wrong with it: On a test account and with a player in the Top 16 Matches for Duelingbook (as of the time of this message), massive winning streaks were easily accumulated not due to individual player skill (a-lot of time players were using the same type of Deck), but because they won RPS (using Scope btw). It's an issue that only gets worse over time (& the more poorly Konami manages this game).

I'm still fine with it if you are scared of getting scoped choose differently 4head.

guys theres no issue here no one ygoscopes guys

This is a really hot take I think is probably super wrong but I am going to post it anyways. I saw Genex posting a poll on the main menu about how DB should decide who gets to go first/second (I voted for DB deciding) and I saw this thread so I figured I would revive it as well as just have the thread in my egosearch as well as post a funny of someone randomly pming me today and telling me that ygoscope isn't an issue. fwiw it definitely shouldn't be RPS anymore because no one actually uses RPS to decide who goes first or second rl and you don't get that control rl. Dice is the easiest way to do it but for something like this db should probably decide, but that's not exactly my hot take.

the player with the lowest rating should decide if they want to go first or second. I know in some other games, I'm not sure chess does this but I know League does, they give the lefthand side of the map lower mmr players overall because that team has first pick and other advantages due to being on the left side hand of the map. If you win you win more since the opponents you're playing against are better, and if you lose, you don't lose that much considering the opponents you're playing against are better. Therefore, the logic I'm applying here is that the lower rating player needs more help.

There are probably several reasons as to why this can't exactly work, mostly probably due to how small the website is and how many people actually play rated, or even the other ladders like the goat ladder thats definitely not as popular, so db deciding randomly or a die roll would probably be better (tho I don't see why we're using a die if we have the technology to just let the website decide who goes first or second).

Also why are half of the comments in the thread "just play around it idiot" coming from people who should just know better due to how much they play the game.
Some people may not know of its existence, so how can you play around something you don't know exists?

This also doesn't change the fact that the system just in general is really outdated.
Like we have the technology to impliment a truely random method of deciding who decides to go 1st/2nd. I don't get why players want to feel like they're in control of this when that control is something you were never supposed to have.

I've detected a new growing player consensus for the implementation of die roll instead of RPS.
I will be conducting another survey meant to gather more data centralized around this topic.

But how many seed values does it have?

[quote="greg503":1f219s26]But how many seed values does it have?[/quote:1f219s26]

Seed values? What do you mean?

[quote="Christen57":mve05m73][quote="greg503":mve05m73]But how many seed values does it have?[/quote:mve05m73]

Seed values? What do you mean?[/quote:mve05m73]
Machines are everything but random, I think he means, how many different values are generated to decide the outcome or which are the criteria to decide which outcome.

[quote="Lil Oldman":osy0qndi][quote="Christen57":osy0qndi][quote="greg503":osy0qndi]But how many seed values does it have?[/quote:osy0qndi]

Seed values? What do you mean?[/quote:osy0qndi]
Machines are everything but random, I think he means, how many different values are generated to decide the outcome or which are the criteria to decide which outcome.[/quote:osy0qndi]

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Math/random

It says here the Math.random command generates a random number between 0 and 1, including 0, but not including 1. This means the possible numbers it could generate would be something like 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9.

The code I provided in my other comment is one that uses the Math.random command to generate one of these 10 random numbers, then uses the Math.round command to round it to the nearest integer. Simple as that. This means that if it generates 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, or 0.4, it outputs 0, since any of those numbers rounded to the nearest integer equals 0, but if it generates 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, or 0.9, it outputs 1, since any of those numbers rounded to the nearest integer equals 1.

So since there are 5 numbers it could generate that lead to an outcome of 0, and 5 numbers it could generate that lead to an outcome of 1, that makes it 50/50. It's equivalent to a coin flip.

[quote="Christen57":1dzmua77][quote="Lil Oldman":1dzmua77][quote="Christen57":1dzmua77]

Seed values? What do you mean?[/quote:1dzmua77]
Machines are everything but random, I think he means, how many different values are generated to decide the outcome or which are the criteria to decide which outcome.[/quote:1dzmua77]

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Math/random

It says here the Math.random command generates a random number between 0 and 1, including 0, but not including 1. This means the possible numbers it could generate would be something like 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9.

The code I provided in my other comment is one that uses the Math.random command to generate one of these random numbers, then uses the Math.round command to round it to the nearest integer. Simple as that. This means that if it generates 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, or 0.4, it outputs 0, since any of those numbers rounded to the nearest integer equals 0, but if it generates 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, or 0.9, it outputs 1, since any of those numbers rounded to the nearest integer equals 1.

So since there are 5 numbers it could generate that lead to an outcome of 0, and 5 numbers it could generate that lead to an outcome of 1, that makes it 50/50. It's equivalent to a coin flip.[/quote:1dzmua77]
Saw the page and it says that
[code:1dzmua77]math.random[/code:1dzmua77]
Is Pseudo random, thats what I (and probably greg) where reffering to. You Cannot just tell a Machine to do x thing randomly, it follows a criteria or a seed based on different factors (like the date and time of the day for example). On paper it may seem like it is 50/50, but in reality it may not be as fair.

[quote="Lil Oldman":l09hz6t1][quote="Christen57":l09hz6t1][quote="Lil Oldman":l09hz6t1]
Machines are everything but random, I think he means, how many different values are generated to decide the outcome or which are the criteria to decide which outcome.[/quote:l09hz6t1]

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Math/random

It says here the Math.random command generates a random number between 0 and 1, including 0, but not including 1. This means the possible numbers it could generate would be something like 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9.

The code I provided in my other comment is one that uses the Math.random command to generate one of these random numbers, then uses the Math.round command to round it to the nearest integer. Simple as that. This means that if it generates 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, or 0.4, it outputs 0, since any of those numbers rounded to the nearest integer equals 0, but if it generates 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, or 0.9, it outputs 1, since any of those numbers rounded to the nearest integer equals 1.

So since there are 5 numbers it could generate that lead to an outcome of 0, and 5 numbers it could generate that lead to an outcome of 1, that makes it 50/50. It's equivalent to a coin flip.[/quote:l09hz6t1]
Saw the page and it says that
[code:l09hz6t1]math.random[/code:l09hz6t1]
Is Pseudo random, thats what I (and probably greg) where reffering to. You Cannot just tell a Machine to do x thing randomly, it follows a criteria or a seed based on different factors (like the date and time of the day for example). On paper it may seem like it is 50/50, but in reality it may not be as fair.[/quote:l09hz6t1]

It's still more fair than rock paper scissors. Besides, if it does in fact use the time of day, that too would be equivalent to a coin flip. In other words, if the current time of day is for example 6 o'clock, you could use the last digit of milliseconds in unix time or the last digit of milliseconds or something before it becomes 6:01, like this: https://currentmillis.com

So if it's 6:01:30:0987, where 6 is the hour, 01 is the amount of minutes after 6, 30 is the amount of seconds after 6 hours and 1 minute, while 0987 is the amount of milliseconds that passed since 6 hours, 1 minute, and 30 seconds, you could use the last digit, which in this case is 7, to determine whether to output 0 or 1. If that last digit is even, you treat that as 0, and if it's odd, you treat it as 1. Since the last digit constantly changes literally every millisecond, a millisecond is equal to 0.001 seconds, and the average human reaction time is only 0.2 seconds, that makes it impossible to accurately and consistently predict what the 50/50 outcome would be.

I assume duelingbook's coins and dice features are already coded this way, where they use the last digit of the amount of the milliseconds of the current time of day, and base heads/tails on the last digit of unix time in milliseconds.

[quote="Christen57":96jmhz35][quote="Lil Oldman":96jmhz35][quote="Christen57":96jmhz35]

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Math/random

It says here the Math.random command generates a random number between 0 and 1, including 0, but not including 1. This means the possible numbers it could generate would be something like 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9.

The code I provided in my other comment is one that uses the Math.random command to generate one of these random numbers, then uses the Math.round command to round it to the nearest integer. Simple as that. This means that if it generates 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, or 0.4, it outputs 0, since any of those numbers rounded to the nearest integer equals 0, but if it generates 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, or 0.9, it outputs 1, since any of those numbers rounded to the nearest integer equals 1.

So since there are 5 numbers it could generate that lead to an outcome of 0, and 5 numbers it could generate that lead to an outcome of 1, that makes it 50/50. It's equivalent to a coin flip.[/quote:96jmhz35]
Saw the page and it says that
[code:96jmhz35]math.random[/code:96jmhz35]
Is Pseudo random, thats what I (and probably greg) where reffering to. You Cannot just tell a Machine to do x thing randomly, it follows a criteria or a seed based on different factors (like the date and time of the day for example). On paper it may seem like it is 50/50, but in reality it may not be as fair.[/quote:96jmhz35]

It's still more fair than rock paper scissors. Besides, if it does in fact use the time of day, that too would be equivalent to a coin flip. In other words, if the current time of day is for example 6 o'clock, you could use the last digit of milliseconds in unix time or the last digit of milliseconds or something before it becomes 6:01, like this: https://currentmillis.com

So if it's 6:01:30:0987, where 6 is the hour, 01 is the amount of minutes after 6, 30 is the amount of seconds after 6 hours and 1 minute, while 0987 is the amount of milliseconds that passed since 6 hours, 1 minute, and 30 seconds, you could use the last digit, which in this case is 7, to determine whether to output 0 or 1. If that last digit is even, you treat that as 0, and if it's odd, you treat it as 1. Since the last digit constantly changes literally every millisecond, a millisecond is equal to 0.001 seconds, and the average human reaction time is only 0.2 seconds, that makes it impossible to accurately and consistently predict what the 50/50 outcome would be.

I assume duelingbook's coins and dice features are already coded this way, where they use the last digit of the amount of the milliseconds of the current time of day, and base heads/tails on the last digit of unix time in milliseconds.[/quote:96jmhz35]
true, a roll/coin is more fair than RPS. I was just answering the question of "Seed values? What do you mean?".

If you acknowledge who goes first or second should be random, and then look at two methods, one of which is random and the other one is "random" but has room open for manipulation (knowing a persons patterns because you follow them, ygoscope, etc...), there is no reason to not go with the more random method, unless you take advantage of the old system.

I think RPS has a little bit of skill in it, even without the whole YGOscope aspect. Throw YGOScope out of the picture, and you have no issues, and I'd even argue that having RPS rewards people who are good at prediction. It throws another aspect of strategy in the game, but not in a way that seems unfair. IRL, RPS would NEVER work, because of how easy you can cheat at it, but considering how none of that is possible on DB, I think it's pretty clear what the issue is. Allowing people to remove their names from YGOScope is fine I guess, but it then largely defeats the purpose of that part of YGOScope in the first place, since pretty much everyone would instantly remove their name from it. Instead, I think a timer for picking is fine, however, instead of merely making it so that the person is forced to lose the RPS if they do not chose in time, make DB automatically pick a random option when that time is up. This way, even if lag occurs, a viable option will be chosen, and the person wouldn't suffer an unfortunate consequence for something out of their control, but also wouldn't have enough time to check the other person's YGOScope and see their replays, unless by some chance they manage to tie RPS (which depending on how quick they can check the replays, they may have to tie RPS twice).

[quote="itsmetristan":3f3cyxn9]I think RPS has a little bit of skill in it, even without the whole YGOscope aspect. Throw YGOScope out of the picture, and you have no issues, and I'd even argue that having RPS rewards people who are good at prediction. It throws another aspect of strategy in the game, but not in a way that seems unfair. IRL, RPS would NEVER work, because of how easy you can cheat at it, but considering how none of that is possible on DB, I think it's pretty clear what the issue is. Allowing people to remove their names from YGOScope is fine I guess, but it then largely defeats the purpose of that part of YGOScope in the first place, since pretty much everyone would instantly remove their name from it. Instead, I think a timer for picking is fine, however, instead of merely making it so that the person is forced to lose the RPS if they do not chose in time, make DB automatically pick a random option when that time is up. This way, even if lag occurs, a viable option will be chosen, and the person wouldn't suffer an unfortunate consequence for something out of their control, but also wouldn't have enough time to check the other person's YGOScope and see their replays, unless by some chance they manage to tie RPS (which depending on how quick they can check the replays, they may have to tie RPS twice).[/quote:3f3cyxn9]

Skill isn't supposed to be a factor though. The method is supposed to be entirely random.

[quote="Monarch Snow":3slmgo0a][quote="itsmetristan":3slmgo0a]I think RPS has a little bit of skill in it, even without the whole YGOscope aspect. Throw YGOScope out of the picture, and you have no issues, and I'd even argue that having RPS rewards people who are good at prediction. It throws another aspect of strategy in the game, but not in a way that seems unfair. IRL, RPS would NEVER work, because of how easy you can cheat at it, but considering how none of that is possible on DB, I think it's pretty clear what the issue is. Allowing people to remove their names from YGOScope is fine I guess, but it then largely defeats the purpose of that part of YGOScope in the first place, since pretty much everyone would instantly remove their name from it. Instead, I think a timer for picking is fine, however, instead of merely making it so that the person is forced to lose the RPS if they do not chose in time, make DB automatically pick a random option when that time is up. This way, even if lag occurs, a viable option will be chosen, and the person wouldn't suffer an unfortunate consequence for something out of their control, but also wouldn't have enough time to check the other person's YGOScope and see their replays, unless by some chance they manage to tie RPS (which depending on how quick they can check the replays, they may have to tie RPS twice).[/quote:3slmgo0a]

Skill isn't supposed to be a factor though. The method is supposed to be entirely random.[/quote:3slmgo0a]

So can xteven or any of the admins implement this now or do we have to have a poll/vote on it first?

[quote="Christen57":dz40divc][quote="Monarch Snow":dz40divc][quote="itsmetristan":dz40divc]I think RPS has a little bit of skill in it, even without the whole YGOscope aspect. Throw YGOScope out of the picture, and you have no issues, and I'd even argue that having RPS rewards people who are good at prediction. It throws another aspect of strategy in the game, but not in a way that seems unfair. IRL, RPS would NEVER work, because of how easy you can cheat at it, but considering how none of that is possible on DB, I think it's pretty clear what the issue is. Allowing people to remove their names from YGOScope is fine I guess, but it then largely defeats the purpose of that part of YGOScope in the first place, since pretty much everyone would instantly remove their name from it. Instead, I think a timer for picking is fine, however, instead of merely making it so that the person is forced to lose the RPS if they do not chose in time, make DB automatically pick a random option when that time is up. This way, even if lag occurs, a viable option will be chosen, and the person wouldn't suffer an unfortunate consequence for something out of their control, but also wouldn't have enough time to check the other person's YGOScope and see their replays, unless by some chance they manage to tie RPS (which depending on how quick they can check the replays, they may have to tie RPS twice).[/quote:dz40divc]

Skill isn't supposed to be a factor though. The method is supposed to be entirely random.[/quote:dz40divc]

So can xteven or any of the admins implement this now or do we have to have a poll/vote on it first?[/quote:dz40divc]

Xteven is open to the idea of implementation and with a survey.
I've conducted 3 surveys and have also used someone else's poll.
I'm waiting to conclude my final survey. I must acquire 58 more responses before I can break down the data and report my findings.

Three individual surveys and a poll created to address this issue found that participants in them all favored Dice (plural 2) for the method of being selected for RPS.

[quote="Monarch Snow":1luxybg5]Three individual surveys and a poll created to address this issue found that participants in them all favored Dice (plural 2) for the method of being selected for RPS.[/quote:1luxybg5]

Can you link me to this?

[quote="Christen57":2i7yj80e][quote="Monarch Snow":2i7yj80e]Three individual surveys and a poll created to address this issue found that participants in them all favored Dice (plural 2) for the method of being selected for RPS.[/quote:2i7yj80e]

Can you link me to this?[/quote:2i7yj80e]

I can link you to the public opinion poll and one of the surveys.

https://strawpoll.com/sbszhf8xc (Poll - Created by Genexwrecker.)
https://www.survey-maker.com/Q4L2XUAOC (Survey #3)

For survey data, I'd have to export it on Discord.

[quote="Monarch Snow":58bdv07f][quote="Christen57":58bdv07f][quote="Monarch Snow":58bdv07f]Three individual surveys and a poll created to address this issue found that participants in them all favored Dice (plural 2) for the method of being selected for RPS.[/quote:58bdv07f]

Can you link me to this?[/quote:58bdv07f]

I can link you to the public opinion poll and one of the surveys.

https://strawpoll.com/sbszhf8xc (Poll - Created by Genexwrecker.)
https://www.survey-maker.com/Q4L2XUAOC (Survey #3)

For survey data, I'd have to export it on Discord.[/quote:58bdv07f]

You should have made it be on this forum instead of an external site like strawpoll. Also aren't the "Coin toss" "Die roll" and "Let duelingbook automatically decide" options the same? If duelingbook tosses a coin or rolls a dice, it's the same as duelingbook automatically deciding.

[quote="Christen57":12ueo7j4][quote="Monarch Snow":12ueo7j4][quote="Christen57":12ueo7j4]

Can you link me to this?[/quote:12ueo7j4]

I can link you to the public opinion poll and one of the surveys.

https://strawpoll.com/sbszhf8xc (Poll - Created by Genexwrecker.)
https://www.survey-maker.com/Q4L2XUAOC (Survey #3)

For survey data, I'd have to export it on Discord.[/quote:12ueo7j4]

You should have made it be on this forum instead of an external site like strawpoll. Also aren't the "Coin toss" "Die roll" and "Let duelingbook automatically decide" options the same? If duelingbook tosses a coin or rolls a dice, it's the same as duelingbook automatically deciding.[/quote:12ueo7j4]
It's about the feel