## In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Talk about all things related to Conquer Club

Moderators: Community Team, Global Moderators

Forum rules
Please read the community guidelines before posting.

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

donkeymile wrote:lost the rabbits foot ... and the horseshoe fell out of my ass ... also forgot to sacrifice 13 virgins for the dice gods before every turn ... gotta love the unofficial Cc rules for getting decent dice
13 virgins...lol where im from thats a tall order! but anyways, does anyone else want this dilemma...well for starters my low expectation of dice makes me unable to decide whether to commit to the auto-assault or the regular assault. Assuming i lose in both scenarios, then the auto-assault is one big fatal punch whereas the regular assault button is continuous jabs until i finally succumb to dice failure. I cant decide which is more humane. What do you guys think?

SaMejoHn

Posts: 205
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 3:33 pm
Medals: 36

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Well, there is a difference between what most players consider random and what the physics of the world considers random (Otherwise known as actually random, regardless of whether the randomness has been an asshole to anyone):
Physics/Math/Mother Nature/The Universe considers something to be truly random when all things have an equal chance of being selected in the process. As long as that condition is fulfilled, it doesn't give a metric f**kton about what the actual results are. It only cares whether the process is random or not, and so, if you get sixty-two 1's in a row, as long as the process is random, those results are "random".
However, players like you or I cannot understand, nor observe, nor visualize the process of choosing a random number. Therefore, we can only base our observations on the results we get, and we must recognize that what we use to determine randomness and what true randomness is are not the same two things, and, at times, what seems to not be random is actually random, however counter-intuitive. If we get the aforementioned sixty-two 1's in a row, we cannot see the process of choosing those sixty-two 1's, and therefore don't know if it's random or not, and it could be and could be not, but we can't just say "It's rigged" or "There may exist a bias somewhere in the process" until we observe the process for ourselves. Of course, about 0 people here want to drive over to random.org's HQ and hear atmospheric noise for days on end, so we can only trust that it's random. And so far, due to the LLN (Law of Large Numbers), it has been shown to most likely be random.
Just_essence

Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:45 pm
Medals: 1

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Just_essence wrote:Well, there is a difference between what most players consider random and what the physics of the world considers random (Otherwise known as actually random, regardless of whether the randomness has been an asshole to anyone):
Physics/Math/Mother Nature/The Universe considers something to be truly random when all things have an equal chance of being selected in the process. As long as that condition is fulfilled, it doesn't give a metric f**kton about what the actual results are. It only cares whether the process is random or not, and so, if you get sixty-two 1's in a row, as long as the process is random, those results are "random".
However, players like you or I cannot understand, nor observe, nor visualize the process of choosing a random number. Therefore, we can only base our observations on the results we get, and we must recognize that what we use to determine randomness and what true randomness is are not the same two things, and, at times, what seems to not be random is actually random, however counter-intuitive. If we get the aforementioned sixty-two 1's in a row, we cannot see the process of choosing those sixty-two 1's, and therefore don't know if it's random or not, and it could be and could be not, but we can't just say "It's rigged" or "There may exist a bias somewhere in the process" until we observe the process for ourselves. Of course, about 0 people here want to drive over to random.org's HQ and hear atmospheric noise for days on end, so we can only trust that it's random. And so far, due to the LLN (Law of Large Numbers), it has been shown to most likely be random.
wow! what a buzz kill

SaMejoHn

Posts: 205
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 3:33 pm
Medals: 36

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Just_essence wrote:Well, there is a difference between what most players consider random and what the physics of the world considers random (Otherwise known as actually random, regardless of whether the randomness has been an asshole to anyone):
Physics/Math/Mother Nature/The Universe considers something to be truly random when all things have an equal chance of being selected in the process. As long as that condition is fulfilled, it doesn't give a metric f**kton about what the actual results are. It only cares whether the process is random or not, and so, if you get sixty-two 1's in a row, as long as the process is random, those results are "random".
However, players like you or I cannot understand, nor observe, nor visualize the process of choosing a random number. Therefore, we can only base our observations on the results we get, and we must recognize that what we use to determine randomness and what true randomness is are not the same two things, and, at times, what seems to not be random is actually random, however counter-intuitive. If we get the aforementioned sixty-two 1's in a row, we cannot see the process of choosing those sixty-two 1's, and therefore don't know if it's random or not, and it could be and could be not, but we can't just say "It's rigged" or "There may exist a bias somewhere in the process" until we observe the process for ourselves. Of course, about 0 people here want to drive over to random.org's HQ and hear atmospheric noise for days on end, so we can only trust that it's random. And so far, due to the LLN (Law of Large Numbers), it has been shown to most likely be random.

Beautifully written and has the added benefit of raising reasonable doubt. You're welcome anytime, JE.

Funkyterrance

Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

donkeymile wrote:I haven't complained for a long time ... but after the fucking bullshit tonight I am going to.

19v2 ... hit auto ... ends 3v2 .... 16 straight losses in a row .... pure bullshit .... astronomical odds of that happening ... guess I should have played the fucking lottery tonight.

Next turn its 9v2 ... ends 3v2 ... 22 straight losses. f*ck this ....

Forgot to mention ... my defense currently stands at

5 wins and 25 losses 3v2
4 wins and 14 losses 3v1

f*ck this ... love dropping hundreds of points with fucking shit dice and nothing to do with strategy ... makes one reconsider the upgrade again

Don't tell me your problems. I just lost 27 troops taking out a 1 and a 3.

There isn't a word for it.

Dukasaur
Head Socialite

Posts: 11165
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
Medals: 136

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Dukasaur wrote:
donkeymile wrote:I haven't complained for a long time ... but after the fucking bullshit tonight I am going to.

19v2 ... hit auto ... ends 3v2 .... 16 straight losses in a row .... pure bullshit .... astronomical odds of that happening ... guess I should have played the fucking lottery tonight.

Next turn its 9v2 ... ends 3v2 ... 22 straight losses. f*ck this ....

Forgot to mention ... my defense currently stands at

5 wins and 25 losses 3v2
4 wins and 14 losses 3v1

f*ck this ... love dropping hundreds of points with fucking shit dice and nothing to do with strategy ... makes one reconsider the upgrade again

Don't tell me your problems. I just lost 27 troops taking out a 1 and a 3.

There isn't a word for it.
Random?

SaMejoHn

Posts: 205
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 3:33 pm
Medals: 36

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

SaMejoHn wrote::-s
Dukasaur wrote:
donkeymile wrote:I haven't complained for a long time ... but after the fucking bullshit tonight I am going to.

19v2 ... hit auto ... ends 3v2 .... 16 straight losses in a row .... pure bullshit .... astronomical odds of that happening ... guess I should have played the fucking lottery tonight.

Next turn its 9v2 ... ends 3v2 ... 22 straight losses. f*ck this ....

Forgot to mention ... my defense currently stands at

5 wins and 25 losses 3v2
4 wins and 14 losses 3v1

f*ck this ... love dropping hundreds of points with fucking shit dice and nothing to do with strategy ... makes one reconsider the upgrade again

Don't tell me your problems. I just lost 27 troops taking out a 1 and a 3.

There isn't a word for it.
Random?

Dukasaur
Head Socialite

Posts: 11165
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
Medals: 136

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

SaMejoHn wrote::-s
Dukasaur wrote:
donkeymile wrote:I haven't complained for a long time ... but after the fucking bullshit tonight I am going to.

19v2 ... hit auto ... ends 3v2 .... 16 straight losses in a row .... pure bullshit .... astronomical odds of that happening ... guess I should have played the fucking lottery tonight.

Next turn its 9v2 ... ends 3v2 ... 22 straight losses. f*ck this ....

Forgot to mention ... my defense currently stands at

5 wins and 25 losses 3v2
4 wins and 14 losses 3v1

f*ck this ... love dropping hundreds of points with fucking shit dice and nothing to do with strategy ... makes one reconsider the upgrade again

Don't tell me your problems. I just lost 27 troops taking out a 1 and a 3.

There isn't a word for it.
Random?

I'd say Karma.

Funkyterrance

Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

x-raider wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:The thing about randomness is that it is defined by unpredictabilty. Let's assume there is an infinite, and random, stream of dice. In that infinite random stream, there is contained an infinite stream of 1s. So it is entirely possible to roll nothing but 1s for your entire life.

Proof: If the longest stream of 1s is only 564 1s long, then we know that the 565th roll is not a 1, and it is therefore not random.

Indeed, its' possible. But what's more likely: rolling 1's for the rest of your life in a random situation or the existence of a rigged or not-random system?

I believe the question depends entirely if you "believe" in randomness. If you do believe in randomness, then the possibility of such a scenario appearing in a sort of nested randomness could be entirely possible. Maybe even probable.

It's so weird I can't even tell if it is a conspiracy theory

Not really

The thing is that any finite stream in an infinite stream has a 0% chance of being drawn. So there is actually no chance you roll 1s for the rest of your life. There is no chance you roll anything either, which is one of the problems of dealing with infinite, random numbers.
show

DoomYoshi
Entertainment Coordinator

Posts: 4077
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Termina Field
Medals: 72

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

I believe, however, that the "rolling 1's for the rest of your life" referred to a finite section inside an infinite stream, not a finite stream inside an infinite stream, which is completely possible.
Just_essence

Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:45 pm
Medals: 1

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

I never did understand why people complain so much about dice. Two questions I always asked and no one ever seemed to answer:

1. It is is so true that the dice are unfair, no matter how complicated or justified a reason can be (and I have heard a lot of reasons) then wouldn't it be the same for the other players.
2. I never heard a complaint that actually presented a better solution, just statistics, statistics, and more statistics. It is really sad.

So from these perspectives, I can't really justify any of the complaints, unless that is I am wrong on either of the above two. Just my cents.
"You can't rule the world in hiding. You've got to come out on the balcony sometime and wave a tentacle"

decoulombe

Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 4:39 pm
Location: Here and there
Medals: 4

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Hey guys, I just thought of proof that the dice aren't random: we don't have a random settings option yet, which means that the randomizer doesn't actually work, and they are worried that people would notice with random settings.
show

DoomYoshi
Entertainment Coordinator

Posts: 4077
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Termina Field
Medals: 72

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

The dice are not completely random, nothing ever is quite fair. Just go look at the Casinos in Las Vegas and you know exactly what I am talking about. And for that matter, the person who goes first always has the greater advantage. Nothing is quite fair.

But what people don't realize is the person next to you has the same disadvantage is yourself, If I got three double ones and once a double six then your partner has that same chance. What I am saying is this. I am happy if:

We are playing with the same dice.
We are playing with the same controls.
We are playing with the same set of rules.

People don't remember how CC started out with and it has come a long way. I had a game which was wrong have gave someone else the wrong amount of troops, but that is human error and because humans are imperfect, therefore their creations are imperfect. There is always room for perfection, but if the system is not working, then fix it.

BTW that goes for real dice as they are imperfect too. I don't sympathize with the dice complainers because they never present a solution.

DoomYoshi wrote:Hey guys, I just thought of proof that the dice aren't random: we don't have a random settings option yet, which means that the randomizer doesn't actually work, and they are worried that people would notice with random settings.
"You can't rule the world in hiding. You've got to come out on the balcony sometime and wave a tentacle"

decoulombe

Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 4:39 pm
Location: Here and there
Medals: 4

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

In all seriousness I think the answer is within the power of the dice complainers themselves and no one else. All they need do is document their games by noting when they really needed dice and then provide their dice stats during these critical points and then present this information in an organized and very specific manner explaining the exact circumstances. A "paper trail" is what is needed in order to decide this once and for all. The problem is that dice complainers don't tend to be the type of people who would be so diligent.

Funkyterrance

Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Well, the reason the dice complainers don't have a solution is because what they're doing is just complaining. Several don't have the skills to make a better solution and some just want an outlet for their anger. Atmospheric noise is as random as it gets, really. However, I would like to know how exactly they take the noise, where, and under what conditions.
Just_essence

Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:45 pm
Medals: 1

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Just_essence wrote:Well, the reason the dice complainers don't have a solution is because what they're doing is just complaining.

This has yet to be proven. Innocent until proven guilty. Etc., Etc., Etc..

Funkyterrance

Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

We have documented our trails, we have proven the states, so what is the next move?

Funkyterrance wrote:In all seriousness I think the answer is within the power of the dice complainers themselves and no one else. All they need do is document their games by noting when they really needed dice and then provide their dice stats during these critical points and then present this information in an organized and very specific manner explaining the exact circumstances. A "paper trail" is what is needed in order to decide this once and for all. The problem is that dice complainers don't tend to be the type of people who would be so diligent.
"You can't rule the world in hiding. You've got to come out on the balcony sometime and wave a tentacle"

decoulombe

Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 4:39 pm
Location: Here and there
Medals: 4

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Funkyterrance wrote:
Just_essence wrote:Well, the reason the dice complainers don't have a solution is because what they're doing is just complaining.

This has yet to be proven. Innocent until proven guilty. Etc., Etc., Etc..

On second thought, I think I interpreted your post incorrectly. You were saying that they aren't providing any evidence of their own AKA the burden of proof is up to them since they are the ones complaining?
If so, that's not how it's done in a court of law. The accusors in this case are the dice complainer antagonists and the dice complainers the accused of being crazy.
There are plenty of threads defending the dice but lets consider this one a counter suit.

Funkyterrance

Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Funky, I take back what I said:

A more accurate statement would be that I have yet to see anyone making a complaint against the dice come up with a solution better then the one we are currently using

To blame the dice is ludicrous since they only do what their programmers have told them what to do, unless we take the dice and place them in the "Flame Wars" forum (which oddly enough doesn't exist.). A more productive means of energy is to look at the programming itself and figure out a better way to make the dice "fair"

If anyone who previously made a complaint, yet has come with a solution, I take back what I said and humbly apologies, however in my view, it is a waste of time complain about the dice unless some solution can be met. It is my biggest "pet peeve" against dice complainers.

In short, this is what I hear from the dice complainers. (My paraphrase)
I find the dice guilty because of all the technological evidence I can find. Just flame them to death. That will teach 'em to be fair
"You can't rule the world in hiding. You've got to come out on the balcony sometime and wave a tentacle"

decoulombe

Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 4:39 pm
Location: Here and there
Medals: 4

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

decoulombe wrote:Funky, I take back what I said:

A more accurate statement would be that I have yet to see anyone making a complaint against the dice come up with a solution better then the one we are currently using

To blame the dice is ludicrous since they only do what their programmers have told them what to do, unless we take the dice and place them in the "Flame Wars" forum (which oddly enough doesn't exist.). A more productive means of energy is to look at the programming itself and figure out a better way to make the dice "fair"

If anyone who previously made a complaint, yet has come with a solution, I take back what I said and humbly apologies, however in my view, it is a waste of time complain about the dice unless some solution can be met. It is my biggest "pet peeve" against dice complainers.

In short, this is what I hear from the dice complainers. (My paraphrase)
I find the dice guilty because of all the technological evidence I can find. Just flame them to death. That will teach 'em to be fair

While I myself have never publicly complained about the dice I usually follow dice complainer threads and I have actually given suggestions to a more fair system. The threads containing these suggestions are probably a year or so old though so I will have to go digging. I'll post as soon as I have ample time to look for them.

Funkyterrance

Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Funkyterrance wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
Just_essence wrote:Well, the reason the dice complainers don't have a solution is because what they're doing is just complaining.

This has yet to be proven. Innocent until proven guilty. Etc., Etc., Etc..

On second thought, I think I interpreted your post incorrectly. You were saying that they aren't providing any evidence of their own AKA the burden of proof is up to them since they are the ones complaining?
If so, that's not how it's done in a court of law. The accusors in this case are the dice complainer antagonists and the dice complainers the accused of being crazy.
There are plenty of threads defending the dice but lets consider this one a counter suit.

In An AMERICAN court of law. In a Yoshi court, we use a wheel of justice. It has about the same accuracy.
Law is pretty much the most random aspect of life.
Witness Testimony is apparently a gold standard even though there is no evidence that witness testimony is accurate (and there is lots of experimental evidence proving it is not).
Expert Testimony is held to a high degree, even though in every realm of assessment, statistics are better than experts at predicting something.

The laws themselves are generally dumb.

I would take the CC intensity cubes over any modern legal system any day.
show

DoomYoshi
Entertainment Coordinator

Posts: 4077
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Termina Field
Medals: 72

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

I have played many a game the old fashioned way, and these dice are unreal. The overall averages come out even, but that proves nothing. If the defender rolls the exact same thing as you do 14 times in a row, you lose 14 times in a row but they will still average out at 3.5. If they use the same random number generator for offense and defense, it appears at times they sink up. The number of times I was winning and then got beat by the dice is ridiculous. 14 versus 2 for the guys last spot and his 5 spoils for an easy run at the game and lose, makes me want to throw my laptop out the window because it happens more than it should. perhaps odds should be taken on how often certain losing runs are made and compare that to real stats, say 7/1 and lose, how many times does it really happen versus what the true odds are.
uno13

Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 9:24 am
Medals: 17

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

Funkyterrance wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
Just_essence wrote:Well, the reason the dice complainers don't have a solution is because what they're doing is just complaining.

This has yet to be proven. Innocent until proven guilty. Etc., Etc., Etc..

On second thought, I think I interpreted your post incorrectly. You were saying that they aren't providing any evidence of their own AKA the burden of proof is up to them since they are the ones complaining?
If so, that's not how it's done in a court of law. The accusors in this case are the dice complainer antagonists and the dice complainers the accused of being crazy.
There are plenty of threads defending the dice but lets consider this one a counter suit.

Oh, no. What I mean is that the only purpose of their post is to complain about how there's "bias" and how we should get a more random dice generator, but they don't actually post on the basis of trying to find a solution. They just want to have an outlet for their anger at their own misfortune, not a solution. Well, they want one, but none of them post expecting a "solution" to rise up.
Just_essence

Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:45 pm
Medals: 1

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

uno13 wrote:The overall averages come out even, but that proves nothing. If the defender rolls the exact same thing as you do 14 times in a row, you lose 14 times in a row but they will still average out at 3.5.
When looking at dice stats be sure to look at the page for battle outcomes.
uno13 wrote:If they use the same random number generator for offense and defense, it appears at times they sink up.
The dice are actually read from a list so this isn't a thing.
show
uno13 wrote:perhaps odds should be taken on how often certain losing runs are made and compare that to real stats, say 7/1 and lose, how many times does it really happen versus what the true odds are.
Back in the day somebody did some analysis and "streaks" didn't appear any more often than they should statistically. Perhaps someone less lazy than I could dig up a link.

spiesr
Suggestions Moderator

Posts: 2809
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:52 am
Location: South Dakota
Medals: 24

### Re: In Defense of Dice Complainers: Reasonable Doubt

So I just lost 8 armies to a 1 army tert a few minutes ago. Not complaining, just figured: "When in Rome".

I would just like to reiterate that I'm not saying it's impossible for the computer to roll at least as good as all of my dice for 8 rolls in a row, I'm just saying there will always be an element of doubt when dealing with a system not derived from "actual dice" and you can't fault someone for doubting an outside source's absolute randomness. Create a system where the stats are taken from actual rolls taken from legitimate casinos from throughout the world where there are many levels of checks to make sure the dice are fair and I'd gamble that less people would doubt it. Obviously this example is probably not cost effective but you get my point. Atmospheric noise is just way too far from most people's comfort zone when it comes to randomness.

Funkyterrance

Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users