A study of Hut Outcomes

[Scouse Gits]

We concur

The SGs abnormally Strategic Drinking on a Thursday

[solo]

Samson,

This has made me look for the results I got when testing for tech frequency with no starting techs, which I will summarize below:

All tips were made from reloads using deity, raging and 2.42. I tried 3 types of terrain (grass,plains,forest), until I got 100 tech results from each (actually 104 from the forest huts). For each tech, I'll list the number of hits for each of these terrain types, followed by the total percentage for each tech using this 304 tech sample.

Pottery - 17,19,18 - 18%
Alphabet - 13,17,19 - 16%
Warrior Code - 20,20,27 - 22%
Horseback Riding - 29,24,25 - 26%
Bronze Working - 6,9,7 - 7%
Masonry - 15,10,7 - 10%
Ceremonial Burial - 0,1,1 - 1%

When these percentages are compared to your predictions using the gaps from the alphabetical list, there is a very strong correlation EXCEPT for Alphabet, where I was getting it twice as often. It could be my sample was not large enough, or it could be that the list does not wrap as you have suggested. However, tying frequencies to this list is valid and another great find!

It could be inferred from my results that terrain may play a minor role in tech selection, too. For example, Masonry appearing more often in open terrain.

One thing I remember from another test (I can not find the results), is that terrain seemed to be influencing the chances of the type of mercenary produced with open terrain favoring horses, chariots and other fast units, while rough terrain favoring archers and the like. Notice how the associated techs, Warrior Code and Horseback Riding, follow this trend a bit, too.

With terrain (open or rough) being a definite and determining factor for tribes and nomads, it would not surprise me to see it influencing techs and mercenaries a bit, too.

That's a great catch on the nomad frequency, tying it to the number of cities. I really had my doubts about the SP/MP theory as the cause behind this.

The few nomads I get from plains seem to come from spots where food is not abundant, spots never chosen by the game to found AI cities.

All of your other results look good to me! A well presented and very useful summary of what is known about huts, PLUS a few more new things to know about this game.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

I think the ratios are huge, just a huge advantage. At least now you can make a decision based on risk-reward reasoning - and you can even determine the percentage chance out of all results, of getting WarCode, say. Want a 4 legged explorer? Open this hut, but not that one, and your chances improve to get one. Really good

@any SG - have you compared the hut tech numbers here with the starting tech results you garnered during those thousands of deity starts? Perhaps starting techs are determined in a similar way as hut techs?

My only doubt is that I'm sure I get a hell of a lot more barbarian results than 20%!

[samson]

Solo,

Interesting data from your tests. In mine, Alphabet actually came up a bit light.

If the list doesn't wrap at the end, then Alphabet should be very hard to get, having only 1 tech in front of it. I assumed a wrap because Alphabet came up more often than predicted by a non-wrapping model. Also, I don't know if the User-Defined Techs and the Future Tech that appear in the Rules.txt list are used or not. So the total could be as low as 89, not 93.

I don't believe that terrain influences results in subtle ways. With techs, if the wrapping list model is correct, then it was probably used because it was easier to check an existing list of techs from a random point to find one with prerequisites than it would have been to build a list of only techs with prerequisites and then randomly select one. Given the gross effect of other factors that do effect hut outcomes, I tend to believe that subtle patterns are artifacts of small sample sets or caused by anomalies in the random-number generator. But hey, I could be wrong.

The 8 cities/nomad discovery was most satisfying. It explained the observations of two different sets of observers and resolved them. Neat.

SG, Dr Spike -- thanks.

[samson]

STYOM -

The biggest boost in the ratios occurs when the Continent Rule applies. It gives an almost 50% chance of a Tribe outcome.

This suggests a strategy of attacking a new continent with a boatload of fast exploring units, locating and tipping huts on nomad-suited terrain, ferrying the nomads back to your home continent to found new cities while continuing to glean nomads from the new continent. Once that continent has had all its nomads plucked, move on to a third continent and use the nomads from it to found cities on the second continent. Etc.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by samson
STYOM -

The biggest boost in the ratios occurs when the Continent Rule applies. It gives an almost 50% chance of a Tribe outcome.

This suggests a strategy of attacking a new continent with a boatload of fast exploring units, locating and tipping huts on nomad-suited terrain, ferrying the nomads back to your home continent to found new cities while continuing to glean nomads from the new continent. Once that continent has had all its nomads plucked, move on to a third continent and use the nomads from it to found cities on the second continent. Etc.

I always sort of 'knew' that driving along the shore of a new continent with a ship full of explorers would yield a lot of nomads and tribes, just from experience. Come to think of it, though, I just thought the tribe numbers were unusual, not the nomads. Still, I didn't know the exact ratios, so that makes ratios like what you described, very valuable.

One wonders how many advanced tribes you could discover on an archipeligo map with lots of small islands. I assume there's no limit to the AT, unlike nomads (1/8 cities).

Open a hut in city safe radius - get a unit
Open a hut on new continent - get AT/nomad

Tactically, quite useful.

[DrSpike]

Hey, what happened about tipping in relation to the oedo year? That didn't come up here.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by DrSpike
Hey, what happened about tipping in relation to the oedo year? That didn't come up here.

For some reason I got some wacky numbers when tipping huts in 3850.

edit: I think all the smilies ought to look embarassed in those Santa hats

[Boco]

Barbarians

I hesitate to post this FYI link, in case it's already obvious to the experts, but a good scenario designer, William Keenan, wrote a tip sheet that contains some information about goody huts and barbarians - unit types, influencing techs, etc. It can be found at:

Scenario League Barb Tech Tips.

Newer version at:

http://coc.apolyton.net/guides/barbarian_paper.shtml

Original version is a little old, so if you know of any inaccuracies or additional information, I'd be grateful to learn it.

[Scouse Gits]

Playing on a Giga Map the tile with the chariot gave a nomad … no shortage of food here.

----------------

SG(2) for both Gits

[Scouse Gits]

From a programmer's point of view, the choice of tech by wrapping (at some yet to be determined point) sounds good - a tech is chosen from the 'full' list using a 'uniform' distributed random variate and then the list is parsed from that point until an 'available' tech is found.

Good catch, SG[1]

[atawa]

One thing I remember from another test (I can not find the results), is that terrain seemed to be influencing the chances of the type of mercenary produced with open terrain favoring horses, chariots and other fast units, while rough terrain favoring archers and the like. Notice how the associated techs, Warrior Code and Horseback Riding, follow this trend a bit, too.

In my experience thet chances of getting an archer on forrest are at least 75% .

Only seldom do I get a horse/chariot from a 2+ movement tile.

[samson]

SG -

From your picture it looks like the hut square was a rivered Forest which would explain why it gave up a nomad. Tribes appear only on Grass or Plains. Can you confirm this as a Forest square? If it isn't, could you post the save?

DrSpike & STYOM -

Oedo years do not affect hut outcomes. If you still have the tests from your study, STYOM, please examine the conditions in light of the six rules above to see if they account for any skewed results.

Atawa -

The notion of terrain as a determiner of mercenary type is an attractive one, but unfortunately it is a myth.

Boco -

Thanks for the links. The Barbarian Paper is a good read. The only thing presented there that I would dispute is the notion that mercenaries from "Group A" and "Group B" occur in a 67% to 33% ratio. They do not. It is 50-50.

[Scouse Gits]

samson - nope it was rivered grass - hence our amazement

SG[1]

[cover back mode] or we were more drunk than we thunk [/covers back mode]

[atawa]

Originally posted by samson
Atawa -

The notion of terrain as a determiner of mercenary type is an attractive one, but unfortunately it is a myth.

Its my observation from playing 1000+ games.

Not that I get an archer every time from a forrest but I get much more archers from forrest then horsies or chariots.

If I have time this weekend I'll test this.