An exploration of randomness.
  • 266 posts
  • Page 13 of 18
dough_boy wrote:
As I stated previously: "My ultimate ask was to ensure no bonus on the first round. This could either be accomplished by the method above, checking when assigning the last territory in a region to ensure it is different or not allowing bonus on the first round."
aeronautic wrote:
I consider it all pointless. Even if you don't allow the region bonus on the first round, if the lucky player with a region goes first, you still have virtually no chance of stopping them from getting their bonus from round 2 onward. They will reinforce and fortify their borders.
If they go 2nd then everyone else will rely on the 1st player to break the region bonus.
There will always be other things in 1000's of combinations that hinder one player and help another, including more importantly, how other players play and what they choose to do.
Hyd yn oed er fy mod Cymraeg , dim ond yn siarad Saesneg, felly yr wyf yn gobeithio y bydd y cyfieithu yn gywir.
Damage_Inc wrote:
Sorry, but I was bored and re-reading the forums, and I saw this post made buy Dcups, over a year ago, and the reply stung me:

Dcups wrote:           Posted: 15 Mar 2017, 15:00        Post #168
I still don't believe it. I've tracked my last 100 attacks. On a 3-3 match up, I lose 2 and the defender loses 0, 61 times. I lose 1 and the defender loses 1 37 times(On the 2 - 2 battles I lose 1 & defender loses 0 34 times, the remaining 3 we each lost 1). So, 98 times out of 100, I lose on a 3-3 match up. I realize that this is far from the 10,000 roles you mentioned in your response and I'm not expecting it to be a 50-50 split or even a 60-40 split, but I do expect better than a 98-2 split. On average it costs me 2.1 troops to defeat a single enemy troop. I've had multiple battles of 10+ against 3, where I lose all but 1 troop and the defender has lost either 0 or 1.

My defensive stats are no better than my attacking stats. tracking 100 3-3 matchups, with me on defense, the attacker looses 2 to my 0 only 27 times, we each lose 1 34 times, and I end up loosing the country 64 times out of 77.


Matty wrote:          Posted: 15 Mar 2017, 17:51         Post #169
You have bad luck. You are expected to lose about 80 out of 100 on a 3v3 fight (assuming do or die here). It happends.

I'm sorry, but a 100 rolls really doesn't mean much.


lmao. Seriously? No offnse, but this is the rule rather than the norm. I kept a running tally as well, but stopped short of 100 because I got tired of never winning a 3v3 battle. To be specific, the sample size of my test was a little smaller, but the 5's were about the same. Additionally, when I have tried these stupid and ill fated attacks, it has spurred conversation with the others in the game, and to a man they have all related similar statistics, although they didnt keep a running tally. 

The suggestion I have been making to everyone who is completely baffled by this and other statistical anomalies, is to use the Balanced Dice setting. While you cant set it as your default, and it is somewhat hidden in the More Options section at the bottom, it is a viable option to making a more realistic and enjoyable game. I am not sure who the programmer was that created the algorithms for them, but obviously they were considered valuable enough to include in the options, and can provide a much more enjoyable game experience.

It is that simple. There ARE options available to players, other than just complaining about them and posting absurd attack reports in the main lobby. If you choose not to avail yourself of them, then it is on YOU, not the site. The maps here are absolutely beautiful, and options like Fog of War, Capitals, and Assassination are also available to make games more enjoyable. Lets start using this corrective feature a bit more, and complaining about the same thing, over and over again.

Lets give peace a chance! - Damage
lazer36 wrote:
Spoiler (click to show)

Edit: I put the message in a spoiler due to its length (aero)
ban for life glad its not real life or why try to improve one self
lazer36 wrote:
thats just a few roll but same in most my games
ban for life glad its not real life or why try to improve one self
aeronautic wrote:
It's annoying to not kill any defenders when you outnumber them 7 to 3, but remember that if your dice weren't high on every roll, it was purely bad luck that put the odds in the lap of the defender, who didn't have to roll anything exceptional to kill you.

Here's a little clarity for dice expectation.
Dice, friend / foe? (click to show)
Hyd yn oed er fy mod Cymraeg , dim ond yn siarad Saesneg, felly yr wyf yn gobeithio y bydd y cyfieithu yn gywir.
Matty wrote:
In case anyone is looking for raw statistics, there is a page (mostly only accessable by me) that runs a dice experiment. It just performs a lot of attack situations, and records the results.
The higher the amount of attacks we run, the closer it should come to the expected values.

I posted a screenshot a while ago on a different thread, but it got deleted for some reason. So I reran the test, and here are the results (02 oktober 2019):

Results for a 3 vs 2 dice battle. (click to show)

Results for a 3 vs 1 dice battle. (click to show)
"Strength doesn't lie in numbers, strength doesn't lie in wealth. Strength lies in nights of peaceful slumbers." ~Maria
OldDogGen wrote:
ouch ! Brescia (OldDogGen) attacked Bergamo (k0canada613) killing 274, losing 271
Sygmassacre wrote:
I remember attacking with 1000+ and losing more than i took. Maybe one day ill try to find that game
A Harmonic Generator Intermodulator
 Σ
aeronautic wrote:
It is actually possible to lose 1000 and kill 0, but not probable unless you do the same attack about 1 million times.
But, that's what I like about randomness, you could be the player that is the Jackpot winner/loser and get the lose all/kill none or kill all/lose none... it all adds credence to the perception of "luck", both good & bad.
There is definitely something in luck though! I have had days when I cannot do anything wrong and days where I cannot do anything right. Perhaps it's a frame of mind or some sort of cycle, who knows, but most humans believe in it.
Hyd yn oed er fy mod Cymraeg , dim ond yn siarad Saesneg, felly yr wyf yn gobeithio y bydd y cyfieithu yn gywir.
Sebastien wrote:
don't believe any of this. I say, AWAY with the tyranny of dice, away with the dice all together. freedom players unite.
Sebastien is online.
Felixio wrote:
I don't buy this. Have lost count of the number of times, just in the past few days, where my 10 has attacked a three and it's ended up 1-1. Today that has happened three times, and I've played 6 games. This is simply not how the real dice would land.
Felixio wrote:
I don't buy this. Have lost count of the number of times, just in the past few days, where my 10 has attacked a three and it's ended up 1-1. Today that has happened three times, and I've played 6 games. This is simply not how the real dice would land.
dough_boy wrote:
Are you sure you are not playing a balanced dice game? That is a higher probability of a 1 v 1 loss.