You break the game, or the game breaks you

"

grepman wrote:

poker thus is NOT deterministic but stochastic. sure, you can design a bot that will always open/call/raise/check/fold in certain situations, but that is a way to lose a lot of money to high-skill players. this bot works fine in low-stakes where theres so many fish playing a certain way (tight/aggressive) will always net you money. but in high stakes your bot will get shat on repeatedly.

so, your statement was incorrect

Sorry, I didn't think that trough, you're right. For some reason I linked independent bots with what poker sites use as AI, which have access to inside info, so would not apply.

"

LMTR14 wrote:

but seriously, I hate it when people talk complete nonsense about Baldur's Gate, not understanding the first thing about how absurd it is to compare a single-player hack & slash to a party-based d&d roleplaying game

d&d classes aren't even SUPPOSED to all be equally strong...

Err, It's as much "party based" as PoE, no one is forcing the player to play BG2 with more then one character. I've finished it from top to bottom with just one character several times.

"

grepman wrote:

oh and throne of baal is okay-ish an addon to a random game, but as an expnsion pack to one of the best RPGs of all time, it sucked. hard. it was basically a linear dungeon crawl, which is great in diablo or poe, but NOT fucking ok for a BG2 expansion pack

it did add some mechanics and layed the groundwork for mods down the road, but BG is first and foremost the main campaign single-player role-playing experience, just like in any CRPG worth a damn.

bg2 and poe are hardly comparable in general. too different genres altogether. thats like comparing planescape:torment and poe or vtm:bloodlines and poe.

Yeah, the campaign in ToB was bad, because of the linearity.

But almost every single mechanical addition was pure gold. Every spell. Every kit. The High Level Abilities were more interesting and way cooler then most Notables in PoE. Improved Alacrity ? Use Any Item? No T_T ?

"

grepman wrote:

poker thus is NOT deterministic but stochastic. sure, you can design a bot that will always open/call/raise/check/fold in certain situations, but that is a way to lose a lot of money to high-skill players. this bot works fine in low-stakes where theres so many fish playing a certain way (tight/aggressive) will always net you money. but in high stakes your bot will get shat on repeatedly.

so, your statement was incorrect

The way poker players play their differents hand is deterministic the outcome of the hands is stochastic, due to how probability works it would be easy to design a bot that could win against any player or at least not lose without taking acount of the taxes.

If you struggle to understand this just think about an "high stakes" player that would design the bot to take every decision as the player would, now tell us why this bot would not work.