Jump to content

Limbo Seed: data Summary : Updated 47k bets


Featured Comment

Posted (edited)
On 7/18/2021 at 6:53 PM, seanwattson said:

@GhostnippleKeep this topic hot and alive my friend.  I totally know what you are referring to in this topic. How much you can skem stake using 1.5x payout right!? Jk, lol but I had an idea similar to what you are hinting at. Almost as if there might be a way to manipulate the favor your way just a tad......so I tried it and I hit 9900x in less than 200 rolls, small base of course. I also tried it again a couple of days later.....and it hit again about same number of rolls without changing seed. I tried it one more time going for 4950x and if it didn't hit 100.00 then I would go for9900x after and I hit both. Only one time did I try without a small balance and it didn't hit, but 4/5 going for 9900x on the same seed that many times in a short period of time only tells me that there is some validity to this. Just. Few cents I had to throw in the pot! Stay green guys or should I say stay red....🤣🤣

very nice Sean... Im building funds to continue my current seed on ghostnipple. I have a no deposit policy so it can take a while, but I will continue the seed soon and post whatever data the game delivers.

For genuine data we have to wait as opposed to made up data which could be delivered at the drop of a Litecoin.
 

Edited by Ghostnipple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, VadymSen said:

Thanks to the author! Very interesting information for me, since Limbo is one of my favorite games)))

This is a lucky seed for me, just remember not all seeds will be so lucky. Good luck in your game.

On 7/3/2021 at 8:39 AM, ltcDaddy said:

I always see a lot of 1.01-2.00x players so here is some small sample data for you. I will add a larger sample in a bit that shows positive outcome.


image.png

Here is the larger sample. 41794 bets.
image.thumb.png.5c0eb638f3c72d5bcfab8d7d51bcc835.png
 

I think what would be interesting here is to calculate the total value of payout occurrences above expected frequency minus the value of the payouts that fall below expected frequency. You can then compare this to the expected frequency value of all payouts measured in your example. In this example it looks like they may balance out overall.

Edited by Ghostnipple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Ghostnipple said:

I think what would be interesting here is to calculate the total value of payout occurrences above expected frequency minus the value of the payouts that fall below expected frequency. You can then compare this to the expected frequency value of all payouts measured in your example. In this example it looks like they may balance out overall.

I'll add it to the to-do list... this would be a good addition to my template.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Ghostnipple said:

This is a lucky seed for me, just remember not all seeds will be so lucky. Good luck in your game.

Thank you friend! Good luck with the game and big profits !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ghostnipple said:

I have a no deposit policy so it can take a while, but I will continue the seed soon and post whatever data the game delivers.

For genuine data we have to wait as opposed to made up data which could be delivered at the drop of a Litecoin.
 

Ironically, If you don't post your seed, hashed server seed, and nonce range before collecting the data you could literally just make up the data and none of us would know the difference.

And friendly reminder: because of the provably fair system stake uses, as long as you verify your bets the bet amount and target multiplier have no influence on what number is rolled for each bet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Ghostnipple changed the title to Limbo Seed: data Summary : Updated 47k bets

So I threw together a node.js app that accepts a player seed, server seed, and range of nonces and calculates the results for that range of bets.  I used nodes Crypto module for handling HMAC SHA_256.

There's no interface, maybe I'll build one someday, but it's able to calculate 25 million bets in less than 2 minutes.

 

image.thumb.png.8925df81e444fed222fbb0c9f8857d6f.png

Note: There's a very good chance I've messed something up and there's an off by 1 bug  or a precision issue or something.  I haven't put much effort into testing it yet.

I can't post a link because @MilicaRthinks that's against the rules (or pretends to think that) and might just delete it or ban me, but I posted the code on github, same username there.

If you have linux or using a mac, it should be easy to run.  

- Clone the repository

-cd into the Limbo directory from your terminal

- check to see if you have node installed with $node -v (if not, google how to install node for your OS)

-open app.js and edit the variable values on lines 5-8, for the screen shot above they looked like this:

image.thumb.png.1f115056c362a8d15c5b98ee97a95399.png

(you can set the finalNonce as high as you want,  but if it breaks and you get a bunch of memory errors, that means you set it too high.  50 million seems to be my machines limit, sometimes it works, sometimes it breaks)

- save the file and run $node app.js

If you don't have access to linux or a mac, you'll need to google how to either enable the linux subsystem on Windows, and then install something like Ubuntu, or google how to run node in Windows.  I can help with the first option if you run into problems.

Edited by dupeddonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, dupeddonk said:

So I threw together a node.js app that accepts a player seed, server seed, and range of nonces and calculates the results for that range of bets.  I used nodes Crypto module for handling HMAC SHA_256.

There's no interface, maybe I'll build one someday, but it's able to calculate 25 million bets in less than 2 minutes.

 

image.thumb.png.8925df81e444fed222fbb0c9f8857d6f.png

Note: There's a very good chance I've messed something up and there's an off by 1 bug  or a precision issue or something.  I haven't put much effort into testing it yet.

I can't post a link because @MilicaRthinks that's against the rules (or pretends to think that) and might just delete it or ban me, but I posted the code on github, same username there.

If you have linux or using a mac, it should be easy to run.  

- Clone the repository

-cd into the Limbo directory from your terminal

- check to see if you have node installed with $node -v (if not, google how to install node for your OS)

-open app.js and edit the variable values on lines 5-8, for the screen shot above they looked like this:

image.thumb.png.1f115056c362a8d15c5b98ee97a95399.png

(you can set the finalNonce as high as you want,  but if it breaks and you get a bunch of memory errors, that means you set it too high.  50 million seems to be my machines limit, sometimes it works, sometimes it breaks)

- save the file and run $node app.js

If you don't have access to linux or a mac, you'll need to google how to either enable the linux subsystem on Windows, and then install something like Ubuntu, or google how to run node in Windows.  I can help with the first option if you run into problems.

wow thats cool

why dont you make a separate topic about it?

someone posted a hilo app yesterday along with a github link. Dicebot and mydicebot both post their links to github.

Edited by Ghostnipple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/28/2021 at 10:35 AM, Ghostnipple said:

why dont you make a separate topic about it?

If I get around making a UI and cleaning it up, I might make a thread specifically about the app I built.  But for now I intend to just add to this thread since it's about the limbo data.

From forum guidelines:

Before you create a topic, scroll through the sections and see if such a topic has already been created. If you have something to add, then write in it, duplicate topics will be deleted, as they make the forum unorganized and cluttered. 

 

On 7/28/2021 at 10:35 AM, Ghostnipple said:

someone posted a hilo app yesterday along with a github link. Dicebot and mydicebot both post their links to github.

Yeah, I know it wouldn't be against the rules.  The only rule about posting links is 

The publication of links to fraudulent and hacker sites and resources that distribute viruses and other malicious programs is prohibited.

But @MilicaR has decided to make up her own rules and has already given me a 'permanent infraction' for 'posting links to other websites' (a science journal and a bitcointalk post explaining how the provably fair crash algorithm works).

So... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Anyway back to the topic, I realized I did make a mistake in my code.  You may have noticed above that the expected loss over 25 million $1 bets was $250,000, but the results for the lower multis were all closer to $500,000 and the hit rate was consistently lower than advertised:

image.thumb.png.efe00e4c96b5f1b45155f536870fbc42.png

1.01 hit 97.0585%, but should be 98.0198%

1.5 hit 65.5709% but should be 66%

etc...

Was actually almost convinced that @Ghostnipplewas on to something with all of his graphs showing all hitrates below what they should be.

Turns out I was looking for rolled numbers that were lower than than the target number and if the target was hit, I was calling it a loss:  if ( rolled number > target) { win }

But the rules say:

Quote

Target payout must be below the limbo result to win.

So the code should actually read: if (rolled number >= target) { win }

So before, any time 1.01 was the rolled number, 1.01x was considered a loss when really it should be a win.

Now the numbers are pretty much exactly where you would expect them to be after 25 million rolls:

image.thumb.png.0598dc5d560baea0c4447f21bc6298ee.png

 

And here's 25 million more from another server/client seed pair:

image.thumb.png.2b36925ead52b89fcec5c3d7aa3e1993.png

If anyone wants me to run 25 million on a specific server/client seed, just post them and I will.

Haven't pushed the change up to github yet, but I will later today.

 

Edited by dupeddonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2021 at 11:57 AM, Ghostnipple said:

very nice Sean... Im building funds to continue my current seed on ghostnipple. I have a no deposit policy so it can take a while, but I will continue the seed soon and post whatever data the game delivers.

For genuine data we have to wait as opposed to made up data which could be delivered at the drop of a Litecoin.
 

Like I said, let me know if I can help. 2 heads are better than 1, also my current seed is 250k+ rolls!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Trimliko said:

I like see limbo data presented in a chart so it can easily be visualised. @dupeddonk could you tell me how useful will this stat be while playing limbo?

Depends on what you mean by useful.  It's kind of just interesting data to look at, there's really no way to get an edge in a game like this unless you find a bug and exploit it or something.  If anything, it may help to see that your only hope of coming out ahead over a large sample size is to go for big multis - the lower the variance, the less hope you have.

I added a few stats and refactored some of the code to make it easier to add whatever multis you want.  Each different multi significantly increases the cpu demand though.  Here are the results all of the same multis @Ghostnipple has in his graph after 2 million bets.

 

 

image.thumb.png.880da33426724e24fafe352dbe35f77e.png

expectedHitRateVsHitRate is just (Hit Rate - Expected Hit Rate) and same for ExpectedHitsVsHits.  So a negative number means the target was hit fewer times than expected.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, dupeddonk said:

If I get around making a UI and cleaning it up, I might make a thread specifically about the app I built.  But for now I intend to just add to this thread since it's about the limbo data.

From forum guidelines:

Before you create a topic, scroll through the sections and see if such a topic has already been created. If you have something to add, then write in it, duplicate topics will be deleted, as they make the forum unorganized and cluttered. 

 

Yeah, I know it wouldn't be against the rules.  The only rule about posting links is 

The publication of links to fraudulent and hacker sites and resources that distribute viruses and other malicious programs is prohibited.

But @MilicaR has decided to make up her own rules and has already given me a 'permanent infraction' for 'posting links to other websites' (a science journal and a bitcointalk post explaining how the provably fair crash algorithm works).

So... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Anyway back to the topic, I realized I did make a mistake in my code.  You may have noticed above that the expected loss over 25 million $1 bets was $250,000, but the results for the lower multis were all closer to $500,000 and the hit rate was consistently lower than advertised:

image.thumb.png.efe00e4c96b5f1b45155f536870fbc42.png

1.01 hit 97.0585%, but should be 98.0198%

1.5 hit 65.5709% but should be 66%

etc...

Was actually almost convinced that @Ghostnipplewas on to something with all of his graphs showing all hitrates below what they should be.

Turns out I was looking for rolled numbers that were lower than than the target number and if the target was hit, I was calling it a loss:  if ( rolled number > target) { win }

But the rules say:

So the code should actually read: if (rolled number >= target) { win }

So before, any time 1.01 was the rolled number, 1.01x was considered a loss when really it should be a win.

Now the numbers are pretty much exactly where you would expect them to be after 25 million rolls:

image.thumb.png.0598dc5d560baea0c4447f21bc6298ee.png

 

And here's 25 million more from another server/client seed pair:

image.thumb.png.2b36925ead52b89fcec5c3d7aa3e1993.png

If anyone wants me to run 25 million on a specific server/client seed, just post them and I will.

Haven't pushed the change up to github yet, but I will later today.

 

While its very interesting to run a seed test over 25 million rolls. The reality for most players is that they will never make 25million rolls on a seed. I'd estimate that most players will change their seed within 10 - 50k rolls. Some will change every few hundred rolls.

Quoting stats relating to 25million rolls to a player is not reflective of the player's experience. Only the Casino operates in those kinds of numbers.

My own topic here is about my own personal journey through a seed. You can't draw reliable and generalized conclusions from one players experience but also you cant deny a player's experience because it doesn't confirm exactly to a an averaged theoretical principle.

You may have never seen a black swan, but that doesn't mean that "all swans are white".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Ghostnipple said:

While its very interesting to run a seed test over 25 million rolls. The reality for most players is that they will never make 25million rolls on a seed. I'd estimate that most players will change their seed within 10 - 50k rolls. Some will change every few hundred rolls.

Quoting stats relating to 25million rolls to a player is not reflective of the player's experience. Only the Casino operates in those kinds of numbers.
 

Ok here are the results from 47k rolls:

 

image.thumb.png.975bf1154254b437b04aede9149a1a04.png

16 of the 30 target multipliers had a hit rate less than advertised.  2x was the most off it hit 56 times less, or  0.0011915% less than it should have 

I know you don't like me, but hope you appreciate that now you have access to an easy tool to transparently verify the data behind the graphs you've been posting.  If you don't want to run the numbers yourself, all you need to do is post the client/server seed pair and nonce range and I'll run the numbers for you.  

24 minutes ago, Ghostnipple said:

My own topic here is about my own personal journey through a seed. You can't draw reliable and generalized conclusions from one players experience but also you cant deny a player's experience because it doesn't confirm exactly to a an averaged theoretical principle.

You may have never seen a black swan, but that doesn't mean that "all swans are white".

Perhaps write a blog or something if you want to have control over who discusses a topic you're interested in?  This is a forum, where people discuss things and share ideas.  

 

 

Edited by dupeddonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, dupeddonk said:

Ok here are the results from 47k rolls:

 

image.thumb.png.975bf1154254b437b04aede9149a1a04.png

I know you don't like me, but hope you appreciate that now you have access to an easy tool to transparently verify the data behind the graphs you've been posting.  If you don't want to run the numbers yourself, all you need to do is post the client/server seed pair and nonce range and I'll run the numbers for you.  

Perhaps write a blog or something if you want to have control over who discusses a topic you're interested in?  This is a forum, where people discuss things and share ideas.  

 

 

I challenge assumptions in any discussion. That's part and parcel of discussion and debate. Every comment you have made is based on false assumptions. I may agree with your point, but if its made on the back of a false assumption I'm going to challenge it. This is part of my professional work, it's never personal. 

"I know you don't like me" - assumption

"an easy tool to transparently verify the data"- assumption (I know how to verify and have never challenged the verification process)

"if you want to have control over who discusses a topic you're interested in?" - assumption (I have no control nor do I want to control who posts here)

- This is a forum, where people discuss things and share ideas.  - isnt that what we are doing?

 

14 minutes ago, Ghostnipple said:

I challenge assumptions in any discussion. That's part and parcel of discussion and debate. Every comment you have made is based on false assumptions. I may agree with your point, but if its made on the back of a false assumption I'm going to challenge it. This is part of my professional work, it's never personal. 

"I know you don't like me" - assumption

"an easy tool to transparently verify the data"- assumption (I know how to verify and have never challenged the verification process)

"if you want to have control over who discusses a topic you're interested in?" - assumption (I have no control nor do I want to control who posts here)

- This is a forum, where people discuss things and share ideas.  - isnt that what we are doing?

 

I think the work you did on that bot is probably the most useful thing to come out of this entire discussion.

Discussion based on perspectives that are underpinned by assumptions are of little value. For a productive discussion to happen all assumptions need to be either tested and verified or withdrawn. You cant have a useful discussion if all perspectives are based on assumptions.

The difficulty we have in communicating is that I wont enter debate that is built on assumptions. You are perfectly happy to make assumptions, assume them to be true and then proceed to arguing a case based on those assumptions.

Every response I make is challenging the assumptions in your posts. You take that as disagreement with your arguments and continue arguing a case that I'm not challenging. This is how you are driving debate off topic. 

Edited by Ghostnipple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghostnipple said:

I challenge assumptions in any discussion. That's part and parcel of discussion and debate. Every comment you have made is based on false assumptions. I may agree with your point, but if its made on the back of a false assumption I'm going to challenge it. This is part of my professional work, it's never personal. 

"I know you don't like me" - assumption

"an easy tool to transparently verify the data"- assumption (I know how to verify and have never challenged the verification process)

"if you want to have control over who discusses a topic you're interested in?" - assumption (I have no control nor do I want to control who posts here)

- This is a forum, where people discuss things and share ideas.  - isnt that what we are doing?

 

I think the work you did on that bot is probably the most useful thing to come out of this entire discussion.

Discussion based on perspectives that are underpinned by assumptions are of little value. For a productive discussion to happen all assumptions need to be either tested and verified or withdrawn. You cant have a useful discussion if all perspectives are based on assumptions.

The difficulty we have in communicating is that I wont enter debate that is built on assumptions. You are perfectly happy to make assumptions, assume them to be true and then proceed to arguing a case based on those assumptions.

Every response I make is challenging the assumptions in your posts. You take that as disagreement with your arguments and continue arguing a case that I'm not challenging. This is how you are driving debate off topic. 

Going to stick with my assumption that you think Stake is rigged, and you're hoping people look at your graphs and consider them as evidence that Stake is rigged.  And you are going to keep being cagey about backing up any of your claims because the graphs in this thread, like all the graphs you've posted in other threads, are cherry picked or fudged data.

What I can do though is provide you a very easy way to prove me wrong.  All you have to do is be transparent about your data.

I mean think about it from the perspective of everyone else in the community.  You could literally just be making all the numbers up and there'd be no way for anyone to know - despite the fact that it would be incredibly easy for you to prove that the data was collected with integrity.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, dupeddonk said:

Going to stick with my assumption that you think Stake is rigged, and you're hoping people look at your graphs and consider them as evidence that Stake is rigged.  And you are going to keep being cagey about backing up any of your claims because the graphs in this thread, like all the graphs you've posted in other threads, are cherry picked or fudged data.

What I can do though is provide you a very easy way to prove me wrong.  All you have to do is be transparent about your data.

I mean think about it from the perspective of everyone else in the community.  You could literally just be making all the numbers up and there'd be no way for anyone to know - despite the fact that it would be incredibly easy for you to prove that the data was collected with integrity.

 

 

If you are that confident in your allegations accusations and your assumptions that "I am making all the numbers up"

I suggest you put a dollar value on your position, and we can see who is genuine and who is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Ghostnipple said:

If you are that confident in your allegations accusations and your assumptions that "I am making all the numbers up"

I suggest you put a dollar value on your position, and we can see who is genuine and who is not.

Because if my assumptions are correct you would never agree to terms that you would lose, you would just troll me like you've been doing all along.  

 

 

 

Edited by dupeddonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, dupeddonk said:

Because if my assumption are correct you would never agree to terms that you would lose, you would just troll me like you've been doing all along.  

 

 

 

and if they are incorrect?

3 minutes ago, dupeddonk said:

Because if my assumption are correct you would never agree to terms that you would lose, you would just troll me like you've been doing all along.  

 

 

 

"you would never agree to terms that you would lose,"
another assumption, but by your own logic your assumptions are false.

Edited by Ghostnipple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ghostnipple said:

and if they are incorrect?

"you would never agree to terms that you would lose,"
another assumption, but by your own logic your assumptions are false.

I can send the bet archives relating to the 47,000 bets from which I produced the graphs.

2 minutes ago, dupeddonk said:

Then I would just be paying huge troll that's been a dick to me for months and that would suck too.

hmm it becomes a little clearer as to who is taking things personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...