Moderator: Community Team
2009-02-14 11:36:11 - Barum Boy deployed 20 troops on 352nd German Infantry 3
2009-02-14 11:36:13 - Barum Boy assaulted Easy Beach 6 from 352nd German Infantry 3 and conquered it from RADAGA
2009-02-14 11:36:18 - Barum Boy assaulted Easy Beach 3 from Easy Beach 6 and conquered it from RADAGA
2009-02-14 11:36:23 - Barum Boy assaulted U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 3 from Easy Beach 3 and conquered it from RADAGA
2009-02-14 11:36:27 - Barum Boy assaulted U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 6 from U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 3 and conquered it from RADAGA
2009-02-14 11:36:30 - Barum Boy assaulted U.S.S. Texas 3 from U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 6 and conquered it from RADAGA
2009-02-14 11:36:42 - Barum Boy assaulted U.S.S. Texas 4 from U.S.S. Texas 3 and conquered it from RADAGA
2009-02-14 11:36:46 - Barum Boy assaulted 916th Flyover from U.S.S. Texas 4 and conquered it from RADAGA
2009-02-14 11:36:55 - Barum Boy assaulted U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 5 from U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 6 and conquered it from RADAGA
2009-02-14 11:37:00 - Barum Boy assaulted U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 4 from U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 5 and conquered it from RADAGA
2009-02-14 11:37:05 - Barum Boy assaulted U.S.S. Arkansas 4 from U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 4 and conquered it from RADAGA
2009-02-14 11:37:41 - Barum Boy reinforced 916th German Grenadiers 4 with 2 troops from 916th Bunker 1
2009-02-14 11:37:41 - Barum Boy gets spoils
2009-02-14 11:53:38 - RADAGA assaulted Easy Beach 6 from Easy Beach 2 and conquered it from Barum Boy
2009-02-14 11:53:43 - RADAGA assaulted Easy Beach 3 from Easy Beach 6 and conquered it from Barum Boy
2009-02-14 11:53:47 - RADAGA assaulted U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 3 from Easy Beach 3 and conquered it from Barum Boy
2009-02-14 11:53:51 - RADAGA assaulted U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 6 from U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 3 and conquered it from Barum Boy
2009-02-14 11:54:11 - RADAGA assaulted U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 5 from U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 6 and conquered it from Barum Boy
2009-02-14 11:54:57 - RADAGA assaulted U.S.S. Texas 3 from U.S.S. Thomas Jefferson 6 and conquered it from Barum Boy
RADAGA wrote:I am giving up!
Timminz wrote:RADAGA wrote:I am giving up!
I'm surprised it took you this long.
RADAGA wrote:Timminz wrote:RADAGA wrote:I am giving up!
I'm surprised it took you this long.
I dont like to give up things. One of my flaws, it seems.
Timminz wrote:RADAGA wrote:Timminz wrote:RADAGA wrote:I am giving up!
I'm surprised it took you this long.
I dont like to give up things. One of my flaws, it seems.
That pesky masochistic streak....
anomalystream wrote:Anyone notice in a 3 on 3 attack, the attacker loses 2 armies over 75%+ of the time
Dave67 wrote:Actually, I'm starting to believe that it is the dice.
Dave67 wrote:1-in-216 chance.
Bones2484 wrote:Dave67 wrote:1-in-216 chance.
These odds should never happen on a site where hundreds of thousands of turns are taken each day.
Timminz wrote:Bones2484 wrote:Dave67 wrote:1-in-216 chance.
These odds should never happen on a site where hundreds of thousands of turns are taken each day.
Hell. I roll more than 200 times a day, sometimes. Does that mean I'm going to see awful results like THAT every day?
Mr Changsha wrote:Here is a good tip for all you conspiracy theorists out there....
Forget randomn and trust in fate!
It seems that most of the people who write about dice don't really understand what 'randomn' means. Our esteemed contributors can't even agree on how often 3 dice should beat 1.
"You have a 76.45% chance."
"No, you stupid pube. You have a 72.35% chance and I must be right - I studied statistics at High School."
"You're both wrong! It is a 73.38% - just check random.org!"
"Randomn.org is OWNED by Lack. Didn't you know that? Anyway, it's a 74.22%" chance.
...and so on.
Why the debate? Because science and technology (and certainly maths!) has reached a level whereby almost no one can properly understand it anymore. I would guess that maybe 3 people in CC Land truly understand just what randomn means. Many think they do...on both sides of the argument. If someone asked me "Do you understand the concept of 'infinity'?" I would say no. I know what it means of course, but that doesn't mean I understand what it is . This concept of 'randomness' presents similar difficulties for the layman. Sure, we know the meaning of the word, but it doesn't therefore follow that we understand what 'randomness' is.
One might relate our problem here to the issue of global warming. Notice again how there are two sides both absolutely loaded with scientific evidence and a hell of a lot of conjecture on top. The real truth is in there somewhere, but how can one realise it when it is surrounded by competing theories all to some extent validated by chaps with numerous letters after their name?
We can't, hence the debate.
So I give you the truly ancient concept of fate. We can all wrap our heads around it and for the purposes of CC it works pretty well at explaining what will happen/should happen/has happened. It also has the advantage of making you less unhappy when your 14 stack tanks on a 9 (lost the first 4 roles soundly) to take a game. Instead of thinking "Lack, cheating premiums/high rankers, not really fucking randomn is it, how can THAT be randomn I quit this fucking game, cheating bastards!!!!!", you can just think "Ah, it wasn't meant to be..." Think Sting, think tantric sex, think zen, peace and calm. That's what I do and do you ever see me bitching about anything? You don't, because I've got my concepts sorted. You see?![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Fruitcake wrote:Mr Changsha wrote:Here is a good tip for all you conspiracy theorists out there....
Forget randomn and trust in fate!
It seems that most of the people who write about dice don't really understand what 'randomn' means. Our esteemed contributors can't even agree on how often 3 dice should beat 1.
"You have a 76.45% chance."
"No, you stupid pube. You have a 72.35% chance and I must be right - I studied statistics at High School."
"You're both wrong! It is a 73.38% - just check random.org!"
"Randomn.org is OWNED by Lack. Didn't you know that? Anyway, it's a 74.22%" chance.
...and so on.
Why the debate? Because science and technology (and certainly maths!) has reached a level whereby almost no one can properly understand it anymore. I would guess that maybe 3 people in CC Land truly understand just what randomn means. Many think they do...on both sides of the argument. If someone asked me "Do you understand the concept of 'infinity'?" I would say no. I know what it means of course, but that doesn't mean I understand what it is . This concept of 'randomness' presents similar difficulties for the layman. Sure, we know the meaning of the word, but it doesn't therefore follow that we understand what 'randomness' is.
One might relate our problem here to the issue of global warming. Notice again how there are two sides both absolutely loaded with scientific evidence and a hell of a lot of conjecture on top. The real truth is in there somewhere, but how can one realise it when it is surrounded by competing theories all to some extent validated by chaps with numerous letters after their name?
We can't, hence the debate.
So I give you the truly ancient concept of fate. We can all wrap our heads around it and for the purposes of CC it works pretty well at explaining what will happen/should happen/has happened. It also has the advantage of making you less unhappy when your 14 stack tanks on a 9 (lost the first 4 roles soundly) to take a game. Instead of thinking "Lack, cheating premiums/high rankers, not really fucking randomn is it, how can THAT be randomn I quit this fucking game, cheating bastards!!!!!", you can just think "Ah, it wasn't meant to be..." Think Sting, think tantric sex, think zen, peace and calm. That's what I do and do you ever see me bitching about anything? You don't, because I've got my concepts sorted. You see?![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
You don't half talk a load of bollocks sometimes mr C.
My argument isn't about how random the 'dice'are, it has not been for a long time. My argument is that the delivery of these results is where the flaw lays.
Mr Changsha wrote:when your 14 stack tanks on a 9 (lost the first 4 roles soundly) to take a game. Instead of thinking "Lack, cheating premiums/high rankers, not really fucking randomn is it, how can THAT be randomn I quit this fucking game, cheating bastards!!!!!", you can just think "Ah, it wasn't meant to be..." Think Sting, think tantric sex, think zen, peace and calm. That's what I do and do you ever see me bitching about anything? You don't, because I've got my concepts sorted. You see?![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Timminz wrote:Bones2484 wrote:Dave67 wrote:1-in-216 chance.
These odds should never happen on a site where hundreds of thousands of turns are taken each day.
Hell. I roll more than 200 times a day, sometimes. Does that mean I'm going to see awful results like THAT every day?
RADAGA wrote:See? Even my 3x1 are off the media, with over a thousand of rolls (over 4.000 dice involved)
3v1 █████████████████████████ 775 / 417 (65.02% / 34.98%) (65.97% / 34.03%)
And it is getting worse. On monday they were about 34.6%
They will, eventually, reach 50-50, I believe, if things go like that for a while.
Return to Conquer Club Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users