Popular Post Lucidicide Posted February 18, 2016 Popular Post Report Share Posted February 18, 2016 The February issue is now available! http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/174818/Wyrd-Chronicles--Ezine--Issue-22 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myyrä Posted February 18, 2016 Report Share Posted February 18, 2016 Hehehee. Professor Pink can't math. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumb Luck Posted February 18, 2016 Report Share Posted February 18, 2016 Cheers Aaron! This'll give me something to read on the coach tomorrow! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucidicide Posted February 18, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2016 Just now, Dumb Luck said: Cheers Aaron! This'll give me something to read on the coach tomorrow! Tell me what you think! PM me! Feedback is helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumb Luck Posted February 18, 2016 Report Share Posted February 18, 2016 5 minutes ago, Aaron said: Tell me what you think! PM me! Feedback is helpful. For starters, more Gremlin fluff is never a bad thing. Just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rathnard Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 14 hours ago, Myyrä said: Hehehee. Professor Pink can't math. Bah, you're right! It should be 13.6%, not 16%. My bad. EDIT: No, my original math still stands - 16% 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myyrä Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 Just now, Rathnard said: Bah, you're right! It should be 13.6%, not 16%. My bad. I'm pretty sure that's wrong too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rathnard Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 By my math, for a given numbered scheme the % chance is (4/52 + 4/51) * 100 = 15.6% (edit: I had it right the first time) 4/52 because you have 4 cards of a given number, then add 4/51 because you have a second chance to flip that number. I haven't done stats for about 15 years though, so if there's a better way of doing it I'd like to know! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myyrä Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 7 minutes ago, Rathnard said: By my math, for a given numbered scheme the % chance is (4/52 + 4/51) * 100 = 15.6% (edit: I had it right the first time) 4/52 because you have 4 cards of a given number, then add 4/51 because you have a second chance to flip that number. I haven't done stats for about 15 years though, so if there's a better way of doing it I'd like to know! You can't just add up the probabilities because they aren't independent. The correct way to calculate this would be 1-(48/52 * 47/51) = 14.9% (Also you really shouldn't multiply by 100. You can multiply by 100% if you want, because that's just multiplying by 1.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math Mathonwy Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 As an aside, that pink font is almost illegible in the light forum scheme. Pink on light grey has awful contrast and is really eye-straining to read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myyrä Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 1 minute ago, Math Mathonwy said: As an aside, that pink font is almost illegible in the light forum scheme. Pink on light grey has awful contrast and is really eye-straining to read. You should get a screen with better contrast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math Mathonwy Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 21 minutes ago, Myyrä said: You should get a screen with better contrast. http://leaverou.github.io/contrast-ratio/#pink-on-light%20grey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myyrä Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 1 minute ago, Math Mathonwy said: http://leaverou.github.io/contrast-ratio/#pink-on-light%20grey That's a different shade of pink and you know it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math Mathonwy Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 1 minute ago, Myyrä said: That's a different shade of pink and you know it. Indeed. That's why the stick-out tongue. Couldn't be arsed to actually check the RGB values. Still doesn't invalidate my point: the pink has a really bad contrast on the light theme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math Mathonwy Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 5 minutes ago, Myyrä said: That's a different shade of pink and you know it. OK, checked the values: http://leaverou.github.io/contrast-ratio/#RGB%28225%2C170%2C225%29-on-RGB%28198%2C198%2C198%29 Still awful, surprise surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengt Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 According to gimp the colours are 238-130-232 (ee82e8) and 192-199-203 (c0c7cb). Or a screenshot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math Mathonwy Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 6 minutes ago, Bengt said: According to gimp the colours are 238-130-232 (ee82e8) and 192-199-203 (c0c7cb). Or a screenshot. I used Paint since I don't have anything fancier on this machine. But interesting that the numbers are that different. OTOH, that screenshot looks quite different from what I see, so there's that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math Mathonwy Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 Ah yeah, it depends a bit on which background you use. I use the black with the blah-blah imp. But this really is besides the point. Unless someone is actually arguing that pink on light grey has a fine contrast ratio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengt Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 I use the blue Arcanist one, I hadn't thought about that the text section wasn't fully opaque. But anyway, I totally agree that the pink text is annoying to read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solkan Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 Okay, let me see if I understand the math here. For doubles, you flip a card and out of the 51 remaining cards there are three that match the value and twelve that match the suit, so you get 15/51 (or 780/2652) odds, or about 29%. For the odds of flipping a given numeric value, doing it the case by case manner (a.k.a the hard way): Card 1 but not card 2: 4/52 * 48/51 Card 2 but not card 1: 4/52 * 48/51 Card 1 and Card 2: 4/52 * 3/51 Sum of cases = 396/2652 or about 14.9%. In other words, figuring out the odds of not getting the number of either card and then subtracting from it from one is simpler. 1- (48/52 * 47/51). You can't do (4/52 + 4/51) because succeeding on the first flip changes the odds for the second flip, so you have use dependent probabilities (multiplication) instead of independent probabilities (addition). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myyrä Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 13 minutes ago, solkan said: Okay, let me see if I understand the math here. For doubles, you flip a card and out of the 51 remaining cards there are three that match the value and twelve that match the suit, so you get 15/51 (or 780/2652) odds, or about 29%. For the odds of flipping a given numeric value, doing it the case by case manner (a.k.a the hard way): Card 1 but not card 2: 4/52 * 48/51 Card 2 but not card 1: 4/52 * 48/51 Card 1 and Card 2: 4/52 * 3/51 Sum of cases = 396/2652 or about 14.9%. In other words, figuring out the odds of not getting the number of either card and then subtracting from it from one is simpler. 1- (48/52 * 47/51). You can't do (4/52 + 4/51) because succeeding on the first flip changes the odds for the second flip, so you have use dependent probabilities (multiplication) instead of independent probabilities (addition). Your math is correct. But that last paragraph doesn't make much sense. A simpler way to explain it might be: One of four things can happen when you flip two cards: Card 1 is an ace and card 2 is not 4/52*48/51 Card 1 is not an ace and card 2 is 48/52*4/51 Both cards are aces 4/52*3/52 Neither of the cards is an ace 48/52*47/51 We can calculate the probability of getting at least one ace by adding up all the cases in which we flip an ace, but there is also an easier way. We know that one of the four cases must happen, so the probability of at least one of them happening is 1 (or 100%). The cases are separate, so no two of them can happen at the same time, (because card 1 either is an ace or it isn't), so the probabilities are also separate, meaning that they must all add up to 1. That means that we can very easily calculate the probability of getting at least one ace by subtracting the probability neither of the cards is an ace from 1, i.e. 1 - (48/52 * 47/51). Here's the proof for those who doubt: 1 = 4/52 + 48/52 = 4/52*1 + 48/52*1 = 4/52*(3/51 + 48/51) + 48/52*(4/51 + 47/51) = 4/52*3/51 + 4/52*48/51 + 48/52*4/51 + 48/52*47/51 <=> 1 - 48/52*47/51 = 4/52*3/51 + 4/52*48/51 + 48/52*4/51 It is also possible to calculate the probability of getting at least one ace another way by using conditional probability. The probabilities of getting an ace from two different cards is not independent, so you can't simply add up the two probabilities. What you can do however is take the probability of getting an ace when you flip one card 4/52 and add to that the probability of getting an ace on your second flip on the condition that the first card you flipped was not an ace. That gives us 4/52 + 4/51*48/52. That formula can also be written in several different ways: 4/52 + 4/51*48/52 = 4/52 + 4/51 - 4/52*4/51 = 1 - (1 - 4/52)*(1 - 4/51) = 1 - 48/52*47/51 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadeton Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 Sooooo... anyone have any thoughts about the Chronicles, or is it all WCAG contrast standards and basic probability formulas up in here? 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myyrä Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 Just now, Kadeton said: Sooooo... anyone have any thoughts about the Chronicles, or is it all WCAG contrast standards and basic probability formulas up in here? Chronicles was pretty cool, but not quite as cool as probabilities. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absolution Black Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice_cat Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 Uhm, I leave you guys for a couple of hours and find you discussing colours and stats? xD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.