1) It changed cubing on the basis of my play to where beavering would ALWAYS trigger to max
on my initial proffer. Match basis. Which I have to proof/prove to you at least via screenshots;
which would still not proof either faking on my side or alteration of the net inside or
other perturbations. Harder to document averrably when remote.
2) I will have to review the replay of saved games and document with screenshots; I have already had one play sent in
with an end game variance (the "bug" under my name) that was different on arrival (pipcount sufficed to disaver)
from what I saw. More as I have it.
3) What does the engine do on equivalent moves? (They occur often).
If the engine is deterministic and single thread fixed order selective, then I assume any variant move
on a fixed net with fixed game sequences (dice reinput) would prove the assertion something untoward was
happening: though this _should_ prove to you that the SW is in error during my execution (Or I am faking/lying),
or to me that a viral attack (external third party having nothing to do with gnubg.
More to the point:
A) What should be looked at would be two different games, matches, sessions, across two different
oppositions (me as one, you as another, for example) where gnubg played a different result for the same position
and roll WHEREVER in the roll sequence it ever occurred.
B) Against all such history.
C) Another are would be to check to see if roll play against game backup at a point of play
has any deterministic sequence: since the rolls change when you back up, there will
be a different play coming on each different roll.
The deterministic pattern (where the net can "hide") is at a game backup
to see alternative play which should maintain probability over short and long sequences,
and have a hump in the mid region
which can be seen is:
of gnubg throws a roll a novice would or might say is cooking the dice
back up the game
force a reroll
play to end but not final bearoff
o as to see who wins
then back up to each "unfair" roll point and reroll
to determine who would likely win by _playing_
and then compare against _random_ roil ordering
and note if the following pattern erupts at each such point:
At at least three levels (of 3/9/27 rolls maybe deeper)
where the start of each level is not synched: they are aphasal
so that a loss of gnubg at the level above would trigger the lower level
already PAST the point of winning back or re-gaining the loss or more
see if you do or do not see:
2 of 3, 5-6 of 9, 14-18 of 27, with the other chances half tie, half loss
of rolls that _win_ for gnubg
(all of which to this point is roughly possibly normal by position & chance)
BUT that occur 75-95% in the order:
win, win, loss/tie
(2/3rs of 5-6) win, (balance of 5-6 of 9), (balance of loss/tie)
(2/3rds of 14-18 of 27) ((2/3rds of remaining wins) some of the remaining wins to 18),
(the rest of the wins,mainly losses) to 27.
the top level occurs where the naive players state "unfair!" about 3/2s more probably than
positions and chance would dictate FOR THAT ORDER (win, win, loss/tie)
the second level 2/3rds of that difference, the third 4/9ths of the difference.
If you do not see the pattern: it is different than what I observe:
When a major game shift occurs, it will almost 100% of the times
at those points a naive player might cry "unfair!"
the next 1-2 rolls have a highly probable result of still gaining most of the gain
deterministically, with the 2nd-4th alternative roll being loss/tie
and so froth.
This is not a random sequence: it is the net successfully synching and triggering
on a hidden characteristic of the PRNG
This also occurs on the random.org
sequences, at about 75% of the probability.
Which means there is still a characteristic in that data at a less reliable chance
of recognizing and triggering.
Since this occurs at the point of backup/replay, the only way to show it woud be to
trap and save over the entire game
all of such alternatives
to see that the rolls fall in such an order
and to do this across many games
because; gnubg does not log the alternative plays or the PRNG string: you would have to
know the entire match sequence and method/seed to be able to see this.
Or a massive effort of Save's to reduce and analyze.
IF present and not due to the game itself: I reiterate:
I have a viral attack sequence going on at that level of expertise:
and trapping the dice roll of a particular game is a trivial event for a hacker.
I also hate the fact that I cannot choose my seeds: the game on Windows overrules and uses the system clock.
So I cannot replay by regeneration using exactly the same setup.
Is there a method to generate and save the dice roll sequence fro the PRNG method/seed as a whole?
If not, then a "hiding" point exists.
All of this is not possible at all if the net has no hysteretical properties. Or: should not be.