Talk:Back of the House

Out of 3682 adventures, I got:

• 680 capos
• 714 guards
• 714 launderers
• 699 orbs
• 765 noncombats
• 110 villains

Combat chances is 79.2 ± 1.3%, coherent with all adventures having even chances 1/5 Patojonas 12:24, 3 April 2013 (PDT)

• do we *know* that villains only hapen on "combat" encounters (i.e. game first rolls combat/noncombat, and villains are only possible on a "combat")? Because that would slightly contradict the "Villain appearance is unaffected by Combat chance modifiers." on Villains. Also, if villains are rolled separately, combat chances would be 81.7 ± 1.3%. (simple check: get another large sample of noncombat rate with villains disabled, use a test like the one on http://onlinestatbook.com/2/estimation/difference_means.html to see whether the difference is likely to be close to the villains/total ratio) --XKiv (talk) 04:23, 4 April 2013 (PDT)
• Actually, excluding villains, combat chances would be 78.6 ± 1.4%.
  You have a point though; I'm not sure, just assuming that hypothesis. I believe that unaffected was stated due to zones with full noncombats still having either random or static villains of their own. Or, if with modifiers you could get 100% noncombats in one location, villains would still get through, like the UR in the sky over TH for example.
  In any case, regarding this area's combat chance, it should be easy to verify if 80% is the right number, just wear +20% combat chance modifiers and see if you get 0 noncombats. Patojonas 08:12, 4 April 2013 (PDT)
• I've been excluding Villains from my combat rate spading. Well, for the three or four locations where I've actually adventured without combat modifiers. --hoyifung04 (talk) 14:23, 4 April 2013 (PDT)