I may have been converted, but I still don't see that comparison

A player knowingly smashes off a break shot in Arcade because it is totally plausible for a red to go in..More often than not, a red does go in I would guess..so I wouldn't say it was random? Anyhow, I am still waiting for a random shot break-off to pot a red, maybe it might happen today considering my luck!

I'd say the smash break, or "power" break, is a fundamental shot to any player on here with regards to Arcade.

I disagree from experience. Obviously I don't know what the code looks like but I'd be interested to see where exactly the seed for a random shot comes from. It just seems that at times, it's far too accurate (which leads to "flukes"), yet other times it's the complete opposite and just smashes the white anywhere. It would be difficult to generate a very random shot, so my guess is that Nick has generated the seed through various other shots played throughout the game, or something similar?? Meaning the "random shot" is actually based on shots made by real players?? Just a guess obviously and I could, and probably am way off but I just find the random shots on here a little strange.

Is power taken into account for random shots by the way?? For example, could a random shot simply tap the white mm's away?? I'm pretty sure spin isn't taken into account, so perhaps it should be?? I'm against the whole random shot thing but if it is going to stay then why not add random spin & power as well?? That would probably prevent quite a few flukes from occurring.

Random power is in as far as I know. And we were always taught at uni that a computer can't generate truly random numbers.

I know, it can't, the seed it generates has to come from somewhere, which is what I'm curious about.

We had the interesting one on one programme where it used the same random numbers every time haha. So if you wanted 100 random numbers, it would give you them. Then if you asked again, you would get 100 different ones. But then if you came back the next day and generated 100, you got the same first 100 .

So every time the program started up it would give the same "random" numbers?? Wow that sounds awful lol.

Yeah I know haha. Considering it's one of the best programs of its type out there it's a bit worrying haha!

We have two choices here
If the shot time ends for you...
1. its a foul, and white ball will be left where it is (the other player will have option here, like every time a foul has been made) and he will be awarded 4 points.
2. computer will take a random shot.

In all seriousness people, if we were making this game from the scratch which one would you pick, and which one make more sense? Its not a big deal or anything, but still I would like to see a change in this rule. I just cant see how an argument can be made here that the number 2 choice would be the better one. I read most of this thread, but I still cant. Well humans often oppose change just for the sake of opposing a change, I guess its no different in here. No offense to anybody.

How about if a player doesn't take his shot in time, the shot passes to the opponent but there is no foul? They can pass it back of course though?

Probably a flaw to the idea, admins always find flaws to good suggestions

The flaw with that would be that it can be used as a time wasting tactic when snookered, since there's no penalty. I guess if you do it 3 times in a row, you'd still lose like with the random shot.

We could do if like, no shots were taken for 3 shots, the frame restarts?

well, the person to time out 3 times would be the one who loses the frame. The other person is only passing the shots back.

Yep, we could do what normally happens with randoms so like, if they dont do a shot in time 3 times, the frame ends and the player loses. But with no random happening, just the balls staying in the same position

Bumpy

Just played a game, 0-0.. guy is snookered... hes aiming for a cushion then boot RANDON TIME PENALTY... white smashes against a cushion rebounds into the reds, knocks 1 in... hes on break and makes a nice 44. So he exceeded his TIME that we BOTH AGREED TO prior to the game, and then gains 44 points from it.

Fair eh?

Can we please have some common sense and remove the Stupid Random Shot Penalty.

I've noticed that sometimes when a ball is potted from the random shot clock (which the player was originally aiming for), the cue ball travels through the same spot from where the player was aiming i.e the white ball travels through the shadow ball? Is this just a coincidence or is there something here where it 'recognises' the players path he/she was going to take?

I think its coincidence (although there is no such thing). I've actually had the cue pulled back ready to shoot many times when i've been random shotted and never had it go where ive been aiming!

Interesting. Funnily enough I was going to add that it was at the precise moment that the player is about to shoot that the shot clock sometimes carries through with it! It's just something I've witnessed\played myself a few times now..

Yes i have had on occasion over the last 6 years on pool/snooker had a random shot pot the ball i was about to hit, id be winding up to shoot then random shot, and it pots it. Had that happen at least 6 times but id like to say 10 maybe..jus cant remember each time, but it has happend quite a few times in these years.

Coincidence i think not

You have a good memory!