Forum

by **natty dread** on Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:01 pm

Dice of CC use random numbers generated by Random.ORG which uses atmospheric noise to generate truly random numbers.

The dice are random. This means they are unpredictable. They can be bad or good, previous rolls do not affect it.

Statistics only come in play when you do thousands of rolls. In the short run, you might have streaks of bad or good dice, but it all evens out in the long run.

by **TheForgivenOne** on Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:26 pm

citizen22 wrote:I suggest the game reinvent their randomizer to be a little more realistic. It's very unlikely for someone to outroll someone, with 1 dice, 10 times (it's happened to me) who is using 3 dice.

You say very unlikely, but that still mean there is a chance. I don't feel like doing math, so say to lose X number of rolls happens 1 out of every 500 000 times. well, consider how many players there are on this site, taking their turns, rolling the dice, it's going to happen more often then you think.

by **kevusher** on Thu Mar 18, 2010 8:07 am

The other reason people seem to remember bad rolls is that generally players don't attack "against the odds" - ie. attack 4v12, 5v18 etc when statistically there is a (admittedly vastly small) chance of these succeeding. This means they only experience bad losing streaks because they're not even giving the dice a chance to have a "bad" winning streak.

by **RADAGA** on Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:33 pm

TheForgivenOne wrote:I've heard of a 42v2 losing, i've seen a 11v1 lose. The dice are random, and thats what happens when they are random, they tend to get streaky. That's why you don't Auto-Assault

Now that makes sense. Almost as much as wering lead belts to swim better.

by **Timminz** on Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:34 pm

Fun fact: streaks are present in truly random number sequences.

by **nikola_milicki** on Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:31 pm

yesterday a guy in my game said he lost 700vs200ish! that is a big fucking streak???!

U wanna bet we could throw real dice till forever and never lose this attack?

by **I8Strudel** on Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:55 pm

nikola_milicki wrote:yesterday a guy in my game said he lost 700vs200ish! that is a big fucking streak???!

U wanna bet we could throw real dice till forever and never lose this attack?

Well, if you round it down it's basically a 7vs2, which might be unlikely but by no means impossible (how did they get that may troops anyways?) :-s

by **knubbel** on Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:41 am

I8Strudel wrote:
nikola_milicki wrote:yesterday a guy in my game said he lost 700vs200ish! that is a big fucking streak???!

U wanna bet we could throw real dice till forever and never lose this attack?

Well, if you round it down it's basically a 7vs2, which might be unlikely but by no means impossible (how did they get that may troops anyways?)

no its totally different. i did not do the math but loosing 7 vs 2 might have a probabilty of ~10%. loosing 700 vs 200 might be around 0,0..(some more zeros)..01% because dice average out.
I hardly believe 700 vs 200 loss ever happened. But nothing is impossible...

by **natty dread** on Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:08 am

nikola_milicki wrote:U wanna bet we could throw real dice till forever and never lose this attack?

I'll take that bet! Nobody can throw dice forever...

by **jaimito101** on Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:21 am

natty_dread wrote:
nikola_milicki wrote:U wanna bet we could throw real dice till forever and never lose this attack?

I'll take that bet! Nobody can throw dice forever...

nice thought, and even if it could be done, you would never have to pay up .

by **Timminz** on Fri Mar 19, 2010 12:11 pm

nikola_milicki wrote:yesterday a guy in my game said he lost 700vs200ish! that is a big fucking streak???!

U wanna bet we could throw real dice till forever and never lose this attack?

I'd sooner bet that that guy in your game was lying to you.

by **danfrank** on Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:01 pm

the game is rigged in favor of the brown nosers and the likes... :lol:

by **shadistic** on Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:33 am

I8Strudel wrote:
nikola_milicki wrote:yesterday a guy in my game said he lost 700vs200ish! that is a big fucking streak???!

U wanna bet we could throw real dice till forever and never lose this attack?

Well, if you round it down it's basically a 7vs2, which might be unlikely but by no means impossible (how did they get that may troops anyways?)

It doesn't quite work that way. You have to think of it statistically, not arithmetically/algebraically.

The more events you have, the more the trend will gravitate towards the true probability of each event. Abnormalities become more pronounced in the smaller numbers.

Here's an example:
If you attack 7v2 and lose 2 on your first round, you're down to 5v2 and the probability remains the same.
If you attack 700v200 and lose 2 on your first round, you're down to 698v200 and the probability remains the same.

I agree with Timminz, though. Let's say the 700 was rounded up from 650, and the 200 was rounded down from 290. That's still rare, but closer.

kevusher wrote:The other reason people seem to remember bad rolls is that generally players don't attack "against the odds" - ie. attack 4v12, 5v18 etc when statistically there is a (admittedly vastly small) chance of these succeeding. This means they only experience bad losing streaks because they're not even giving the dice a chance to have a "bad" winning streak.

Yeah, that's the funny thing. It's more likely for a 10v20 to succeed than it is for a 20v10 to fail, but it happens a lot less because more people try 20v10 than 10v20.

by **macbone** on Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:18 pm

Back in yesteryear when I played more face to face Risk, we'd have solo armies occasionally who'd outlast larger attacking stacks. We'd cheer for that brave soldier in Yakutsk who defeated the imperialist threat. =)

The last time I played the board game, I seemed to get bad dice when I needed it the most. It happens. You'll get the good dice eventually, too, when you can't seem to lose. =)