--- In [email protected], David Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 04 September 2007 09:40, John Van Pelt wrote:
> > I will surmise the answer thusly: No.
> >
> > You may have mistaken Quackle for something like the Scrabble CD,
which is
> > an entertainment version of the "good time family fun game" or
whatever
> > Hasbro calls it. Quackle is primarily an analysis tool. If you
want to
> > have more even competition, the answer is not to weaken Quackle,
but to
> > strengthen your own play.
>
> Related question: are the tiles drawn truly randomly?
I'm surprised you would ask, even out of jest, but tiles are drawn as
pseudo-randomly as they need to be. If you want to further
investigate, all tile drawing goes through this one function that
draws one letter from the bag:
[bag.cpp]
Letter Bag::pluck()
{
return erase(DataManager::self()->randomNumber() % m_tiles.size());
}
Which uses:
[datamanager.cpp]
int DataManager::randomNumber()
{
return rand();
}
This is called when quackle starts up:
void DataManager::seedRandomNumbers(unsigned int seed)
{
srand(seed);
}
Indeed, two quackle instances started at the same millisecond might
exhibit similar tile drawing, but aside from that, the tiles are
plenty random.
--Jason
>
> The last time I played Quackle I found myself with AAEEINS and
nothing to play
> through. I decide to play off the AE keeping AEINS. I draw AO, and
Quackle
> slams down some easy bingo such as SEATING. Now my turn with
AAEIONS. I
> play off the AO, and Quackle slams down another bingo. My next draw
gives me
> a bingo, but I'm still down 100 points.
>
> At the end of the rout I review my plays and find most of them to be
top,
> maybe losing 5 pts or so when they're not top. And this happens
more often
> than not. I have good results (maybe 30% but I'm happy with that)
if I get
> my share of the tiles.
>
