Moderator: Community Team
Funkyterrance wrote:I am by no means an expert player but I feel I have a pretty good handle on the dice. I don't use calculators or anything like that but I have found that over time you get a "6th sense" as to what is doable and when to stop. I suppose by this method the randomness of the dice don't really enter into. I do think that calculators work as an alternative as I am one of the believers that yes, the dice are as random as they come. Could I use calculators to improve my game? Maybe, but it's karma that I thrive on and I trust and thoroughly enjoy my method.
So I guess my point is that you can't predict the dice but you can have a sense about them and know their limits in general. That being said, its all about strategy. If the dice just aren't there, you eventually learn to accept it and rest assured that your strategy did the best it could.
Mr Changsha wrote:One thing I would add though...delusional thinking is one of the greatest dangers Risk players face. The classic mentality of 'I won because of strategy they won because of dice' is so widespread on this site that it astounds me. So many seem utterly unable to accept that the other team may be smarter, or know the game better, or be better coordinated.
Mr Changsha wrote:I usually know when I up against a team that is superior to my own (often if I am joining a trips on a map I am unfamilair with) because I am hoping - possibly actually feeling I need - to get good dice in the early rounds. When playing against weaker opposition, I am very blase about going 5 or 10 down on dice, as I assume my deployments and forts will drag my team back into it in the mid.game.
So, and to be honest with you this isn't rocket science, I know I need a bit of luck against better opposition while against weaker I know they will need some luck against me.
One thing I would add though...delusional thinking is one of the greatest dangers Risk players face. The classic mentality of 'I won because of strategy they won because of dice' is so widespread on this site that it astounds me. So many seem utterly unable to accept that the other team may be smarter, or know the game better, or be better coordinated. The dice allow many a ready-made excuse to explain away almost any defeat. I'll give you an example of how I try to think about it: in one of my current trips my man had a 13 on 6 to break the opposition's bonus and more than likely grab full control of the game. He missed in the most abject fashion. From there the game began to slip away. Yet I made sure to recognise that even after his miss, the troop numbers were basically even. I suspect my team will lose this game, and the dice overall have probably not been in our favour (in that in key moments ours have collapsed both offensively and defensively), but I also recognise that the opposition hung in there well when we were on top, that they also had their dice collapses...and also that my own play is not exactly at its best right now (I am a bit distracted with other things). The point of this horribly rambling paragraph? That I consciously try hard to recognise the quality of the opposition's play and that I rarely blame my losses on dice. In the case of this game I think I made the error of basing my team's strategy on the assumption that the 13 on 6 would go through. Everything had been set up on that basis. Once it missed we were exposed. Of course odds are it should have worked, there was some chance my man would go on a tear and end the game there and then. But there was always the possibility he would miss, and I blame myself that I didn't have a plan b.
So that's how I try to think about these things. I know I am not the best teams player here or anything close. I am usually up against teams with FAR more experience than me and I try my best to give a good game to the opposition. When I lose I take my licks and invariably blame myself rather than the dice. I think this basic honesty allows me to improve. I recognise my mistakes and from doing so am able to adjust my strategy.
Finally, once a game is finished win or lose I can usually see the genesis of the result in the opening two rounds. Many things happen in the mid. game that are crucial, but that original basic decision of, for example, whether to deploy in the north and fort in the south or vice versa tends to be what really influnced the result. Round 1 in a trips is not that dice-dependent (often), but the original positioning is what really influences the game. Invariably when I lose I blame my opening strategy...when I win I tend to see the opening as equally key.
rhp 1 wrote:
well said...
Funkyterrance wrote:Mr Changsha wrote:One thing I would add though...delusional thinking is one of the greatest dangers Risk players face. The classic mentality of 'I won because of strategy they won because of dice' is so widespread on this site that it astounds me. So many seem utterly unable to accept that the other team may be smarter, or know the game better, or be better coordinated.
While I agree that this may be the mentality of some beginning/casual players I don't think that very many experienced players fall prey to this delusion. The dice eventually come out in the wash, more or less, so it boils down to strategy on either side. Superior strategy+superior dice equals a win, superior strategy+equal dice equals a win, superior strategy+inferior dice is a possible win given key opportunities as you described. As far as overlooking the fact that other players have superior strategy to oneself, well that becomes evident when your dice are equal or better than your opponent and you end up losing lol. If you are paying attention its a pretty hard fact to deny.
Mr Changsha wrote:We can really only base our views on this from our own personal experience. I have to say that in mine most players experienced or not suffer from this delusion..if only to a certain extent. That when we win it is due to a superior strategy and when we lose it is due to dice. I also believe that this common delusion actively and negatively affects play, for if one naturally blames their losses on dice (and the dice always throw up the odd bad result) then the player doesn't look for the real cause of their loss...blaming the dice is liking wrapping oneself in a comfort blanket of determined ignorance...
Funkyterrance wrote:rhp 1 wrote:
well said...
Not for nothing but did you have to quote his whole novel? I am not saying either way but it's just hard to tell the difference between actual agreement/comprehension and ass kissing when someone makes a huge quotation and then offers two words of their own that don't have any particular meaning in themselves. It also takes up a shitload of space.
Mr Changsha wrote:I usually know when I up against a team that is superior to my own (often if I am joining a trips on a map I am unfamilair with) because I am hoping - possibly actually feeling I need - to get good dice in the early rounds. When playing against weaker opposition, I am very blase about going 5 or 10 down on dice, as I assume my deployments and forts will drag my team back into it in the mid.game.
So, and to be honest with you this isn't rocket science, I know I need a bit of luck against better opposition while against weaker I know they will need some luck against me.
One thing I would add though...delusional thinking is one of the greatest dangers Risk players face. The classic mentality of 'I won because of strategy they won because of dice' is so widespread on this site that it astounds me. So many seem utterly unable to accept that the other team may be smarter, or know the game better, or be better coordinated. The dice allow many a ready-made excuse to explain away almost any defeat. I'll give you an example of how I try to think about it: in one of my current trips my man had a 13 on 6 to break the opposition's bonus and more than likely grab full control of the game. He missed in the most abject fashion. From there the game began to slip away. Yet I made sure to recognise that even after his miss, the troop numbers were basically even. I suspect my team will lose this game, and the dice overall have probably not been in our favour (in that in key moments ours have collapsed both offensively and defensively), but I also recognise that the opposition hung in there well when we were on top, that they also had their dice collapses...and also that my own play is not exactly at its best right now (I am a bit distracted with other things). The point of this horribly rambling paragraph? That I consciously try hard to recognise the quality of the opposition's play and that I rarely blame my losses on dice. In the case of this game I think I made the error of basing my team's strategy on the assumption that the 13 on 6 would go through. Everything had been set up on that basis. Once it missed we were exposed. Of course odds are it should have worked, there was some chance my man would go on a tear and end the game there and then. But there was always the possibility he would miss, and I blame myself that I didn't have a plan b.
So that's how I try to think about these things. I know I am not the best teams player here or anything close. I am usually up against teams with FAR more experience than me and I try my best to give a good game to the opposition. When I lose I take my licks and invariably blame myself rather than the dice. I think this basic honesty allows me to improve. I recognise my mistakes and from doing so am able to adjust my strategy.
Finally, once a game is finished win or lose I can usually see the genesis of the result in the opening two rounds. Many things happen in the mid. game that are crucial, but that original basic decision of, for example, whether to deploy in the north and fort in the south or vice versa tends to be what really influnced the result. Round 1 in a trips is not that dice-dependent (often), but the original positioning is what really influences the game. Invariably when I lose I blame my opening strategy...when I win I tend to see the opening as equally key.
Mr Changsha wrote: I also believe that this common delusion actively and negatively affects play, for if one naturally blames their losses on dice (and the dice always throw up the odd bad result) then the player doesn't look for the real cause of their loss...blaming the dice is liking wrapping oneself in a comfort blanket of determined ignorance...
rhp 1 wrote:
heh... You obviously don't know me at all... I don't kiss anyone's ass... but it's interesting that that is what enters your mind.. if you don't like, don't pay attention to it... and yea.. it's a real nightmare to scroll past a long post... real, real sorry about that bubb..
AslanTheKing wrote:On some maps, its really a big deal if u start first
( and dice kills strategy or what ever was your plan, strategy comes in hand to rethink all over again)
Mr Changsha wrote:It is an interesting concept to suggest that I am equally delusional, in that I feel I have a level of control greater than I actually have. To answer it, one must consider one's experience as well as the perception of that experience.
In my experience my trips games, the majority of my dubs games, most of my large standard games and my 8 man dubs games have not seemed to be overly affected by dice. Of course they were a factor, but I feel that most were won through strategy (whether I won them or not) and the exploitation of another's weaker strategy. Some were won through dice, and I of course accept that, but most weren't.
But is this (perfectly genuine) belief based on my faulty perceptions? Do I over-emphasise the level of control I have over the result? Do I unconsciously forget the dice-related events and focus on those due to strategy? Am I the opposite side of Natty's delusional dice zealot?
Am I the fundamentalist athiest to his raving believer?
I have to accept that is possible.
Funkyterrance wrote:AslanTheKing wrote:On some maps, its really a big deal if u start first
( and dice kills strategy or what ever was your plan, strategy comes in hand to rethink all over again)
I don't play those maps. Considering our earlier discussion about strategy being key it stands to reason that you would avoid any options that add more of the element of luck to a game because they lessen your ability to control the outcome. I suppose the reverse is true if you looking to get the jump on someone who you think may be more skillful.
Return to Conquer Club Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users