3 ms·

The full details are here: http://www.classicarcadegaming.com/forums/index.php?topic=4164.0 http://www.classicarcadegaming.com/forums/index.php?topic=41... But

• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
• bhickey 9y ago
  While that thread breaks down the idealized probabilities, it doesn't say anything about the RNG behavior itself. Some generators have bad seeds. It's conceivable that Billy got lucky and hit one of these. I sincerely doubt that's the case. With the source it'd we could definitively confirm or rule this out. Another possibility is that Billy figured out a hitherto unknown RNG manipulation trick. This is how a lot of TAS runs work. Again, I doubt this is the case but with the source it'd be easy to rule out.
• jsnell 9y ago
  I don't get it. "Percentage of points coming from smashes" seems like a worthless metric for detecting cheating via favorable RNG seeds. The relevant metric would instead be average points per smash. And for that Mitchell's results are not particularly out of line with the other entries (the distribution is 464-511, with an average of 480; 491 doesn't look at all suspicious in that context). Wouldn't this rather be a sign of people making different strategic tradeoffs? Mitchell spent more time breaking barrels but at the cost of getting fewer bonus points for finishing the level in time.