Moderator: Community Team
ManBungalow wrote:Very interesting...
In summary, the trend so far seems to be like this:
2 and 4 are most rolled
followed by 3 and 5, then 6
and 1 least rolled by a wide margin
macbone wrote:My most common dice are 5s, and my opponents most often roll 2s.
Ahhh, the joys of mod dice. =)
degaston wrote:Here are the dice stats for the five players with the most completed games:
Also this from MBManBungalow wrote:Paddy The Cat wrote:Here's something curious... for ALL of you, except for one case, you AND your opponents roll 1s the least. I've checked out about 10 other members (inluding mageplunka69 because he has played the most games and has the largest roll sample size) and EVERY SINGLE ONE of them roll 1s the least as do their opponents. And the one exception to this is very close, with a low sample size.
CC's dice - not as random as they claim?
I think you're seriously onto something here.
I made a graph using mageplunka's attacking dice rolls, and put on the average line with +/-1 standard deviation. That's not precisely how standard deviation should be used, and it's been a long time since my last stats class, but it gives a nice window of where the results should be. Numbers across the bottom correspond to the number on the dice face (ignore the last column), and the numbers up the left axis are simply how many times each number has been rolled:
degaston wrote:Here are the dice stats for the five players with the most completed games:
It looks like 1's are showing up about .26% less often than they should. It's not a huge difference, but it definitely looks like a pattern. From what I've seen, it's the same for every player with a large sample size, so there's probably no "favoritism" going on, but I think that this would make the battle outcomes slightly different from the expected win/loss percentages.
I didn't do the math, but logically it's as if the players are using 5-sided dice .26% of the time. Having fewer numbers to chose from will slightly increase the number of ties, which would favor the defender.
I think this should be fixed ASAP.
Agent 86 wrote:Thankyou for looking into it..1 is rolled less by everyone on the site. Cause for concern, I just keep rolling 2's more than everything else by some margin. Combined with horrible drops I will never advance past colonel with the current maps I play, currently only strategy keeps me at major
ManBungalow wrote:degaston wrote:Here are the dice stats for the five players with the most completed games:
[img]http://i614.photobucket.com/albums/tt230/degaston/Public/DiceStats_zps4a337798.jpg[/img
It looks like 1's are showing up about .26% less often than they should. It's not a huge difference, but it definitely looks like a pattern. From what I've seen, it's the same for every player with a large sample size, so there's probably no "favoritism" going on, but I think that this would make the battle outcomes slightly different from the expected win/loss percentages.
I didn't do the math, but logically it's as if the players are using 5-sided dice .26% of the time. Having fewer numbers to chose from will slightly increase the number of ties, which would favor the defender.
I think this should be fixed ASAP.
This is a lovely graph, thank you.
degaston wrote:Agent 86 wrote:Thankyou for looking into it..1 is rolled less by everyone on the site. Cause for concern, I just keep rolling 2's more than everything else by some margin. Combined with horrible drops I will never advance past colonel with the current maps I play, currently only strategy keeps me at major
If one of your dice was replaced with a five sided die with 2 through 6 on it once every 133 attacks and once every 200 times you defend, and the same thing happened to every player, I don't really think it would affect anyone's score very much.
But as a programmer, I find it slightly disturbing.
Maybe the best one's do.BigBallinStalin wrote:Do programmers have a fetish for perfection?
No, I wouldn't go that far, but I can't ignore a consistent bias in the pseudo-random number generator.BigBallinStalin wrote:or does degaston have a fetish for perfection?
degaston wrote:Maybe the best one's do.BigBallinStalin wrote:Do programmers have a fetish for perfection?No, I wouldn't go that far, but I can't ignore a consistent bias in the pseudo-random number generator.BigBallinStalin wrote:or does degaston have a fetish for perfection?
BigBallinStalin wrote:How could this bias be corrected?
What even causes it?
rdsrds2120 wrote:...the dice are read from a finite sheet randomly, perhaps there are a fewer number of ones than the rest.
Return to Conquer Club Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users