magic9mushroom, on 11 July 2018 - 04:43 AM, said:
I am 99.99% sure you're wrong about Arctic and Antarctic. If OpenXCom agrees with you then it's wrong too.
It's not possible to have Terror missions in the Arctic/Antarctic because there are no cities on those regions, that's why you're getting 0 missions. I should have removed those values from the list, like I removed the values for the Atlantic/Indian oceans (no cities there too). Those values are only used for determining Retaliation missions in the case of the Arctic/Antarctic/Atlantic/Indian.
(I tested this 132 times, enough to get 10 instances for every other zone there. Zero for Arctic and Antarctic. The probability of never rolling that 8 out of 119 is 0.000102; that's well into significant territory.)
While testing 132 times is a lot of effort, even if you tested 1000 times you could still get a series of results that doesn't correspond to the theoretical distribution based on the predefined weights, regardless of the probability of that series of results happening. That's the problem with those empirical tests - if you're only relying on those results you could be basing your entire conclusions on flawed data because the sample was not large enough.
OpenXCom reverse engineered the original code, so it determined how exactly the values on the game files (ZONAL.DAT and others) are used by the engine. The developers had to figure it all out by themselves so it's possible that mistakes were made, and Warboy has figured out a couple of them simply because of my questions that made him recheck the original code.
It's a matter of deductive vs inductive logic