PSA: Limbo Win% Not as Accurate as Dice

[ltcDaddy]

I just wanted to share an example of this because someone may stumble across this and wonder where that extra win chance ran off to. The target is going to get rounded to two decimals but still show the Win Chance for the unrounded target multi.

 

[Tristan]

Hey mate,

This is because Limbo and Dice are a little bit different.

The maximum multiplier in dice is 9900x whilst in Limbo, it is 1,000,000x. 

This means that the calculations between them both will be slightly different and stretched out for Limbo to accomodate the significantly higher multiplier.

[dupeddonk]

 

1 minute ago, Tristan said:

Hey mate,

This is because Limbo and Dice are a little bit different.

The maximum multiplier in dice is 9900x whilst in Limbo, it is 1,000,000x. 

This means that the calculations between them both will be slightly different and stretched out for Limbo to accomodate the significantly higher multiplier.

I think the issue is that in dice, the 'target' number that your rolling for is not the same as the multiplier, in limbo they are.

So in dice, it would be possible to have a multiplier with more precision than two after the decimal.

In limbo, since the result will never have more than two numbers after the decimal, it's not.

You would have the same issue in dice if you allowed the user to type the number they want to roll over/under, but they can't.

An easy fix would be to restrict the user from typing more than 2 numbers after the decimal in the 'target multiplier' field for limbo.

[Tristan]

On 8/3/2021 at 11:17 AM, dupeddonk said:

 

I think the issue is that in dice, the 'target' number that your rolling for is not the same as the multiplier, in limbo they are.

So in dice, it would be possible to have a multiplier with more precision than two after the decimal.

In limbo, since the result will never have more than two numbers after the decimal, it's not.

You would have the same issue in dice if you allowed the user to type the number they want to roll over/under, but they can't.

An easy fix would be to restrict the user from typing more than 2 numbers after the decimal in the 'target multiplier' field for limbo.

Oh right, i see that now. Ill bring this up.  

[ltcDaddy]

29 minutes ago, Ghostnipple said:

So what you are saying is that stake round up the players target without permission or even informing the player that they have done so, while in the background  rounding down the game result! 

WTF thats border line fraud, no wait it is fraud!

So what you are saying is Stake is spraying roundup directly on targets because doing it to the floor wasn’t enough? 
You’re saying Stake is committing herbicide and players are the weeds. We just want to photosynthesize like all the pretty flowers 🥺

[dupeddonk]

45 minutes ago, Ghostnipple said:

man of action, I like it.

So what is my win chance in Limbo for 2.48x it can't be both 39% and 40%
which is it?

win chance = (100 / target) * 0.99

 

So 39.919354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419 percent.

And yes, they round it  to 39.91935484% in your browser.  

 

 

[ltcDaddy]

1 hour ago, dupeddonk said:

win chance = (100 / target) * 0.99

 

So 39.919354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419354838709677419 percent.

And yes, they round it  to 39.91935484% in your browser.  

 

 

I think you are arguing a different point. I won’t speak for everyone else, but the point I’m trying to make is I wish it would be consistent; update BOTH displayed values for the sake of accuracy. From what I’ve read, no one is questioning the actual calculation, just mostly how it is implemented and presented.
 

These threads always get so snarky. 

[Jazelle]

4 hours ago, Tristan said:

Hey mate,

This is because Limbo and Dice are a little bit different.

The maximum multiplier in dice is 9900x whilst in Limbo, it is 1,000,000x. 

This means that the calculations between them both will be slightly different and stretched out for Limbo to accomodate the significantly higher multiplier.

Same as my analysation. they are bit different but it doesn't matter because the difference is not that much.. I prefer limbo over dice anyway

[toobad2begood]

damn got it, thanks 

[Tristan]

Win chance is not a valid parameter for playing the game, you cant set a win state based on win chance, you can only set a win state based on target multiplier. So technically speaking, the win chance has no influence on the game whatsoever, it's just there to give the player an idea of what kind of luck they need to win.

Sure, yes, the win chance was not calculated correctly on certain circumstances where the target multiplier was outside of the possible scope to play (more than two decimal places) but the win chance has no influence on the game and the discrepancy was merely a calculation of what the win chance would have been if that target range was possible.

[ltcDaddy]

56 minutes ago, Tristan said:

Win chance is not a valid parameter for playing the game, you cant set a win state based on win chance, you can only set a win state based on target multiplier. So technically speaking, the win chance has no influence on the game whatsoever, it's just there to give the player an idea of what kind of luck they need to win.

Sure, yes, the win chance was not calculated correctly on certain circumstances where the target multiplier was outside of the possible scope to play (more than two decimal places) but the win chance has no influence on the game and the discrepancy was merely a calculation of what the win chance would have been if that target range was possible.

Since manipulating the win chance value leads to the multiplier also changing, you can definitely set a win state based on win chance alone. That's just a strange statement altogether.

Regardless, the point is that it is an inaccurate calculation being shown to the player, which we agree upon. And since it can be altered for a win state, I can put either 40% or 39.85% and get the same multi. That's worth discussing with my fellow players since Win chance is stamped on other games such as Dice, Plinko, and Keno. I personally would like to know the number is accurate.
 
I understand many don't care (including Stake) , but this is a PSA to the players that might.

[Blaccxwidow]

I’m editing this because I posted on the wrong topic. I’ll blame it on being tired. Because I need to blame it on something, don’t I? Kekw 
 

Kudos to Greensteen for pointing it out. 

[Geensteen]

12 minutes ago, Blaccxwidow said:

When playing on mobile (specifically Safari), the “bets” button at the bottom of the screen seems to be keeping up better on beta.stake.com versus stake.com. However, it’s impossible to view your multi on beta.stake.com.  On old version, I could at least view when rotating mobile device to landscape mode.  Doesn’t work with Beta though. 

Wrong topic u replied on 😂

[Blaccxwidow]

7 minutes ago, Geensteen said:

Wrong topic u replied on 😂

Omg.  Thanks for making me aware! I appreciate you.