%$#&#%*&%^&( DICE

[AndyDufresne]

(new avatar for nietz)

Dice go in, dice go out. Unexplainable indeed.


--Andy

[nietzsche]

Bad dice can happen anywhere...

Sounds like you guys have something in common with this guy:

Those of you who keep saying that don't stop to think about it anymore, you are being arrogants.

You take us like idiots, and make little jokes for others to see.

Do you think I don't understand random? I do.

What I'm saying is that dice is way too streaky here. Over time it does even out, which is normal, but the problem with the streaks is that you might get shitty dice when it matters, and once you are dead, you get super really good dice and the stats even out, but the problem is the fact that it was streaky.

I remember reading somewhere the way it was taken from random.org and how they make some moves to accomodate it that seriously didn't make any sense to me at the time, but I won't say they are wrong in that because I didn't give it much thought, but what it did seem to me is that the numbers could be just taken how they were given by random.org

I'm asking you politely to stop making those "subtle" jokes, to you and to andy. If you want to call me idiot directly, that's fine with me, and it suits me better.

Of course the dice are streaky,as I understand it this is an inevitable feature of any random allocation of numbers, but do you have any evidence that they are streakier for some players more than for others,then you would have an excellent point?

You are right in this, unless there was some way to make a log of every dice battle we really can't. And I believe that's because of the way the code is, it's not possible to implement this without making a big change. The pros of such a change would be that we could get conclusive proof that the dice is or not working correctly, that is not that streaky as some of us think, and that we could replay games, that'd be cool.

The cons, well, a lot of time to implement the changes in the code, the lots of space that would be required (not sure how much really, perhaps 5 times what it takes to log everything else) and of course the I/O reads and writes x 5. Also, we could tell if in a game a player was greatly favored by the dice, which would take some credit from him.. I don't know if that's good or bad...

I know about selective memory, randomness implies that there will be streaks, it's not like you first get a 1, next a 2, a 3, 4, 5 ,6 and then you get a 1 again. Streaks are normal in everything random, the problem is longer than normal streaks.

I too played the board game before joining here, and don't recall the dice being this streaky.

[BigBallinStalin]

(new avatar for nietz)

Dice go in, dice go out. Unexplainable indeed.


--Andy

Andy, why do bad dice happen to good people?

[AndyDufresne]

You are right in this, unless there was some way to make a log of every dice battle we really can't. And I believe that's because of the way the code is, it's not possible to implement this without making a big change. The pros of such a change would be that we could get conclusive proof that the dice is or not working correctly, that is not that streaky as some of us think, and that we could replay games, that'd be cool.

The cons, well, a lot of time to implement the changes in the code, the lots of space that would be required (not sure how much really, perhaps 5 times what it takes to log everything else) and of course the I/O reads and writes x 5. Also, we could tell if in a game a player was greatly favored by the dice, which would take some credit from him.. I don't know if that's good or bad...

The issue really isn't the time to code, it is the size of the data I think. We process more than a 1 million assaults a day.


--Andy

[zimmah]

Bad dice can happen anywhere...

Sounds like you guys have something in common with this guy:

Those of you who keep saying that don't stop to think about it anymore, you are being arrogants.

You take us like idiots, and make little jokes for others to see.

Do you think I don't understand random? I do.

What I'm saying is that dice is way too streaky here. Over time it does even out, which is normal, but the problem with the streaks is that you might get shitty dice when it matters, and once you are dead, you get super really good dice and the stats even out, but the problem is the fact that it was streaky.

I remember reading somewhere the way it was taken from random.org and how they make some moves to accomodate it that seriously didn't make any sense to me at the time, but I won't say they are wrong in that because I didn't give it much thought, but what it did seem to me is that the numbers could be just taken how they were given by random.org

I'm asking you politely to stop making those "subtle" jokes, to you and to andy. If you want to call me idiot directly, that's fine with me, and it suits me better.

you are an idiot but i still agree with you on this subject.

as far as i know, random.org creates a batch of numbers (each of them 5 numbers long) and selects 1 number from the list and than throws away the number after use. however, that's exactly opposite to random. they should not throw away numbers after use.

[nietzsche]

[Jdsizzleslice]

Bad dice can happen anywhere...

Sounds like you guys have something in common with this guy:

Those of you who keep saying that don't stop to think about it anymore, you are being arrogants.

You take us like idiots, and make little jokes for others to see.

Do you think I don't understand random? I do.

What I'm saying is that dice is way too streaky here. Over time it does even out, which is normal, but the problem with the streaks is that you might get shitty dice when it matters, and once you are dead, you get super really good dice and the stats even out, but the problem is the fact that it was streaky.

I remember reading somewhere the way it was taken from random.org and how they make some moves to accomodate it that seriously didn't make any sense to me at the time, but I won't say they are wrong in that because I didn't give it much thought, but what it did seem to me is that the numbers could be just taken how they were given by random.org

I'm asking you politely to stop making those "subtle" jokes, to you and to andy. If you want to call me idiot directly, that's fine with me, and it suits me better.

you are an idiot but i still agree with you on this subject.

as far as i know, random.org creates a batch of numbers (each of them 5 numbers long) and selects 1 number from the list and than throws away the number after use. however, that's exactly opposite to random. they should not throw away numbers after use.

No, he is not really, I lost an 11v2 on Das Schloss that would have given me a secured bonus. This was against someone who did not know how to play the map Very well. So, obviously, it burned me up when he won the game, all because of round 3 or 4, when I lost an 11v2

[chang50]

Bad dice can happen anywhere...

Sounds like you guys have something in common with this guy:

Those of you who keep saying that don't stop to think about it anymore, you are being arrogants.

You take us like idiots, and make little jokes for others to see.

Do you think I don't understand random? I do.

What I'm saying is that dice is way too streaky here. Over time it does even out, which is normal, but the problem with the streaks is that you might get shitty dice when it matters, and once you are dead, you get super really good dice and the stats even out, but the problem is the fact that it was streaky.

I remember reading somewhere the way it was taken from random.org and how they make some moves to accomodate it that seriously didn't make any sense to me at the time, but I won't say they are wrong in that because I didn't give it much thought, but what it did seem to me is that the numbers could be just taken how they were given by random.org

I'm asking you politely to stop making those "subtle" jokes, to you and to andy. If you want to call me idiot directly, that's fine with me, and it suits me better.

you are an idiot but i still agree with you on this subject.

as far as i know, random.org creates a batch of numbers (each of them 5 numbers long) and selects 1 number from the list and than throws away the number after use. however, that's exactly opposite to random. they should not throw away numbers after use.

No, he is not really, I lost an 11v2 on Das Schloss that would have given me a secured bonus. This was against someone who did not know how to play the map Very well. So, obviously, it burned me up when he won the game, all because of round 3 or 4, when I lost an 11v2

Not obviously at all,things like that happen to me fairly regularly and I would never let a bit of bad luck in a mere game 'burn me up',how will you react when you have real problems?

[JustCallMeStupid]

I had an awesome bad streak and I accidentally deleted my cookies My bad streak consisted of nearly 31% win rate on 3v2 attacks with well over 500 rolls of 3v2 attacks. I rolled 6's at about 15% of the time and the defender rolled 6's at about 17.5% (it was 18% for a long time).

This is an old snap of it.

Click image to enlarge.

So my cookies started over tracking my dice as you can see below. I will try not to let CCleaner delete them next time.
Here is my most recent since my cookies were deleted

Click image to enlarge.

This should make u feel a little better.

[JustCallMeStupid]

Quick update if u like bad streaks:

Click image to enlarge.

[nietzsche]

Ok, I was playing a british isles games and I had a 9 to kill a 2, and couldn't.



Immediately later, a doubles game and red breaks SA with a 6, killing a 5 and a 4, ending up with a 3. That was the key to the game.

In the very net game, I have a 7 next a two 1s in south america Game 11253683, and this guy deploys 4, making a stack of 5, and kills my 7 without losing 1 single army, and by that move he secures SA and wins the game.

I think it is ridiculous that lackattack doesn't fix this, and that he doesn't think its a problem. Furthermore Andy laughs at me.

I'm not paying premium never again.

I want to make this clear, I not saying dice are not random, they are, but they are very streaky.

[nietzsche]

We should make an alliance and not pay premium until things about the dice are make clear, that'll put pressure and make lackattack make it a priority, and even if we are wrong, it'll be settled forever. All we need is that the dice challenges are logged, then, volunteers here would make nice plugins to graph and study the dice.

[Robinette]

We should make an alliance and not pay premium until things about the dice are make clear, that'll put pressure and make lackattack make it a priority, and even if we are wrong, it'll be settled forever. All we need is that the dice challenges are logged, then, volunteers here would make nice plugins to graph and study the dice.

It will likely not have the desired effect, but I encourage and admire anybody's dedication to go freemium as a protest. I have done it myself several times for other reasons, but this dice thing has the potential to be heard more since it is likely the top complaint by a huge margin.

We know mathematically that there will be streaks using dice, but if I understand you correctly, you think there should be less of them.

Logically, there can be only 2 things happening... l1) there could a broken algorithm which is causing excessive streaks, or 2) it could be that this level of streaks is mathematically inherent in the dice (as someone with a good understanding of mathematics and probabilities, I happen to subscribe to the latter view)

Now lets take this a step further... if the dice prove true, then the streaks remain as they are, and you are just as frustrated as ever. So perhaps what you are really advocating for is something other than our 5 dice system. And I doubt that you want to play without some element of luck (at another site they have a fixed result with no dice, and trust me, few people would want that)


The simple way to REDUCE streaks is to reduce the variables. Using 2 of the 3 attacking dice gives you 21 possible combinations (same as a set of dominoes without the blanks), and the defender has the same 21 possible combinations. This huge number of combinations often results in some crazy streaks, as we all know.

But if it were 1 dice vs 1 dice, where a tie is a push, then the 21 counts are reduced to just 6. There would still be streaks, but it is not hard to do the math and find that this results in a reduction in the probability of larger streaks. Although, this would eliminate the slight mathematical "attacker advantage" that we have now.

And if you wanted to further reduce the streaks, then reduce the number to 2. Win or Lose. One army at a time instead of 2 per roll. As in a simple coin toss. Heads you win, Tails you lose. Again, this will not eliminate streaks, but it will reduce them to the lowest level possible while maintaining randomness. Oh I should clarify... The probability of short streaks would be nearly the same between random dice and random coin flips, but the probability of large streaks are what would be greatly reduced. So your enemy could still win a 5v7 attack without losing a man, and a 6 could still take a 5 and a 4. This is what some would call "LUCK". Not a bad thing if you ask me.

[JustCallMeStupid]

I think he like I want streaks not to be so long. 500 rolls at 31% win rate is a freaking long loser streak. Maybe after 100 rolls of being significantly (4%) above or below the 37% average rate of winning your dice are somehow skewed towards slightly better or worse dice for 40 rolls to help balance things out or maybe ur next 100 rolls are somehow barely skewed higher so that you might still roll worse than 37% it is less likely.

From my perspective of rolling 500 rolls at 31% it seems so statistically unlikely that somehow I feel like I am being punished whether I am or not. It makes the game very frustrating.

[jgordon1111]

I think he like I want streaks not to be so long. 500 rolls at 31% win rate is a freaking long loser streak. Maybe after 100 rolls of being significantly (4%) above or below the 37% average rate of winning your dice are somehow skewed towards slightly better or worse dice for 40 rolls to help balance things out or maybe ur next 100 rolls are somehow barely skewed higher so that you might still roll worse than 37% it is less likely.

From my perspective of rolling 500 rolls at 31% it seems so statistically unlikely that somehow I feel like I am being punished whether I am or not. It makes the game very frustrating.

+1 streaks on losing seem to last longer than the winning streaks for some reason. I think Robinnette is showing the best advantage to leveling this out.