Conquer Club

My question is simple I think.

Why when the die rolls a tie does it choose a winner and loser?

Shouldnt a tie be a tie with no winner and no loser?

If you have ever read the rules, you would know that in the case of a tie, the defender always wins.

The outcome of the battle is determined by comparing the highest dice each has rolled. If the attacker's die is higher, the defender loses an army from the country under attack. If the defender's die is the same or higher, the attacker loses an army from the attacking country. The process is repeated for the second pair of dice (if there is one). The computer will do all the dice rolling and determine the outcome of each battle.

Sorry but that just isnt whats happening.

I just had a 5 and two 2's vs a 1 on the white die and I still lost so it appears it really doesnt matter what you roll.

The only thing that seems to matter is which one lights up

Gerazan wrote:Sorry but that just isnt whats happening.

I just had a 5 and two 2's vs a 1 on the white die and I still lost so it appears it really doesnt matter what you roll.

The only thing that seems to matter is which one lights up

How is that a tie die roll?

the tie roll was 2 5's vs 2 5's

But what i also want to know is why show the die if the roll really doesnt make a bit of difference.

Its confusing showing me my die with higher numbers and still losing the roll.

I mean if your going to show rolls at least make them look right.

I mean if I get a 5 and 2 2's and the defender get a 1 why does it get lighted up and he gets the win.

It just looks wrong.

I'm thinking you had to have misread something

You mean becaues the attacker's dice are red and the defender's dice are white? That's just to differentiate between the two.

Oh, I see. I rolled 2 6 1 vs. 4 2

So I won one 6 vs 4 and my opponent won one - 2 vs 2.

Is that what happened?

No I rolled a 5 and 2 2's on the red die and the white had a 1 and the 1 lit up and gave him the win in that roll.

But what Im talking about with the ties is that its said all rolls are totally random but if you give all ties to the defender then randomness is defeated.

Say in a 100 rolls you have 5 to 10 ties.

Thats an extra 5 to 10 percent advantage to the defence.

Gerazan wrote:But what Im talking about with the ties is that its said all rolls are totally random but if you give all ties to the defender then randomness is defeated.

Say in a 100 rolls you have 5 to 10 ties.

Thats an extra 5 to 10 percent advantage to the defence.

They are the same rules as played in the board game.

yeah, defender always gets the advantage in real battles, that was applied to the game when it was made

Since theres the possibilty that ties could go as high as 20 to 25 percent or more in a hundred rolls, id say that why a lot of people are questioning the validity of the randomness of rolls.

Absolute randomness would give no advantage to either side.

Thank you to whoever fixed the way rolls are shown.

Showing the empty square was just the fix we needed.

But what Im talking about with the ties is that its said all rolls are totally random but if you give all ties to the defender then randomness is defeated.

Say in a 100 rolls you have 5 to 10 ties.

Thats an extra 5 to 10 percent advantage to the defence.

Theoretically the attacker has a slight advantagein 3v2. Dice odds were calculated long ago. Discrepancies from this are due to the vagaries of randomness... or the dice aren't random. You choose.

Gerazan wrote:Since theres the possibilty that ties could go as high as 20 to 25 percent or more in a hundred rolls, id say that why a lot of people are questioning the validity of the randomness of rolls.

Absolute randomness would give no advantage to either side.

I'm sorry but none of what you posted in this thread makes much sense. I think thats why no one is answering your questions...

Gerazan is an idiot that is all.

hendy wrote:Gerazan is an idiot that is all.

For once I agree with hendy. I think he just doesn't understand the math behind it. Trust us, it's how the game is played, and it's balanced well enough that you take a risk by attacking or not attacking. Thus the name of the original board game... RISK.

who wins is not supposed to be equaly likey

Hendy you and kc-jake can both KMA.

If you have nothing more to contribute than name calling stay the hell out of my threads.

For one thing this is not the original game its an online imitation of the original.

If we were playing the original we'd be rolling our own die but here we have to accept what the coding says is right.

And IMO there should be no advantage to either side.

If you don't think it should be even then thats fine, but I don't see the reasoning in not wanting an even game.

In this World Domination game, and with nearly all others out there similar to the very first board version of such a game, the defender has a slight advantage of winning near equal attacks (I.E. 2 vs 2, the defender has better odds of winning). It's one of the most standard rules of the game...


--Andy

exactly. and only a blind retard would sit and argue that it's not ok. and anyway, what can you do to make it more 'fair'? make defenders have even numbered die and attackers have odd numbered ones so they never roll the same numbers?

I've also noticed during my playing that there seems to be coded into the game if you attack from a lone continent against a defenders stronghold like an area where the defender has multiple countries you will lose a lot of men taking said country if you can take it at all.

Like my last move in a game where I had a lone spot and cashed in cards for a total of 24 and attacked against 11, to bust a bonus, I had only 4 troops left after the attack.

Now you could say thats just randomness, and it may be, but I've seen it over and over again in the same circumstances and believe it is coded.

Saying your opinion is pointless. Prove it.

The dice analyzer was made to examine this point. By counting both dice rolls and outcomes of those dice rolls.

Loss Aversion - A theory that humans tend to give greater importance is to losses sustained rather than gains made. Lots of people come and complain about the dice rolls they've gotten but few brag about the times where they got great rolls.

Giving the defence wins for all ties gives a 5percent and up advantage to the defence.

You would fix it by making all ties cancel each other out.No loss or gain for either side.

How is that so hard to comprehend.

The defender wins ties, the attacker gets more dice. Is this so hard to comprehend?