Anonymous user
RNG correlation (Generation I): Difference between revisions
Added a graph to further confuse readers (hopefully not). Probably takes too much space (if only we have PDFEmbed, maybe I could have handled the size better), but everything below that is "for nerds" anyway. (Wait, aren't we all nerds?)
>Bbbbbbbbba (A lot of analysis that may not be easy to understand...) |
>Bbbbbbbbba (Added a graph to further confuse readers (hopefully not). Probably takes too much space (if only we have PDFEmbed, maybe I could have handled the size better), but everything below that is "for nerds" anyway. (Wait, aren't we all nerds?)) |
||
Line 37:
# The last iteration of the rejection sampling, which must be in the range 0 ~ 45 to have a chance to catch the Tauros.
# The second random byte, which must be in the range 0 ~ 87 to actually catch the Tauros.
Denoting those values as r<sub>1</sub>, r<sub>2</sub>, and r<sub>3</sub>, we have (r<sub>3</sub> - r<sub>2</sub>) - (r<sub>2</sub> - r<sub>1</sub>) = 93 or 94 (depending on the "sub-rDIV" value). However, those ranges are very "misaligned",
[[File:Tauros RNG correlation.png|center]]
From the graph, it can be seen that the only way for all three values to be in their respective ranges is that:
* r<sub>1</sub> must be in the range 151 ~ 184,
* r<sub>2</sub> must be in the range (r<sub>1</sub> - 94) / 2 ~ 45.
| |||