Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in or
create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 47: |
Line 47: |
|
| |
|
| This is a large number intended for seeding some per-turn number generator, such as picking multiple cards from a deck or calculating damage. | | This is a large number intended for seeding some per-turn number generator, such as picking multiple cards from a deck or calculating damage. |
|
| |
| == Best-effort generation ==
| |
| Bailing out if a player doesn't send a valid input ensures there's two outcomes: No seed, or a seed that each player agrees is fair. Having a fair seed is great, but having no seed is perhaps even worse than an unfair seed.
| |
|
| |
| An interesting property of the protocol is that all player's inputs are generated independently of each other and shown to be independent. Instead of bailing out of generation it's possible to just continue but discard a player's input or lack thereof. This is identical to the player not participating in the generation in the first place.
| |
|
| |
| The main challenge from this approach is convincing a player that they were fairly and necessarily left out of the generation process. A player who disconnects will probably agree it's fair to be cut out of the process. A player who temporarily loses connectively might grumble about fairness if they don't get a say in a roll. A player who keeps getting lag spikes when it's time generate a number and never getting a chance to participate may not.
| |
|
| |
|
| == Prior work == | | == Prior work == |