Conquer Club

One more thing about the dice.

Talk about all things related to Conquer Club

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the community guidelines before posting.

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby Mr Changsha on Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:20 am

RADAGA wrote:
Mr Changsha wrote:
RADAGA wrote:
I don't have to since it isn't commonplace here on CC either...


then why it happened again, today?

deployed 13 just to lose 8 in a row for a 1.

Not common, happens once every 5 rounds or so, given I am a freemium.


I'm sure your used to being insulted RADAGA (judging by your posts) and I really don't want to insult you now, but consider two propositions.

1. Your poor rank is based on a conspiracy to punish freemiums by giving them poor roles.

Or

2. You just aren't that good at the game.


I would accept it, if I have not observed the following: I have never changed the kind of games I play:

Freestyle, 3-6 players, flat rate and no spoils

For several MONTHS I usually win 30% of the games I play

then out of the blue I start to lose them ALL. there were a time where I got NOT A SINGLE VICTORY in 3 months in a row. That, just before winning 12 games on the previous month.

Considering the opponents are pretty much the same, that I dont change game type, and that whose win/losses are cyclical, so there is not "getting better" or "getting worse" at the game, I must assume there is something else affecting the overall win/loss ratio.

If I were not that good, how can you explain the medals and the 22% win rate, overall?

Yours are better because of the doubles and triples you play, rigged games with the same buddies, on the same maps, to trap newbies and uncoordinated opponents.

I challenge you for 20 1x1, random map, standard turns, no spoil games. Lets see how well you perform.


Ok first, my singles play literally leaves you standing. I've always maintained over a 40% win rate at singles with probably an average of 6 players per game. I now only play 8 man no cards games. You can map rank me to realise that. Secondly, I make a point of only playing the highest ranked teams at trips so unless you consider three colonels to be uncoordinated...maybe you should check my games before making claims that are patently absurd. Finally, my dubs games are almost always 8 man games as well and I would think the teams I play against would be equally surprised to be considered uncoordinated. I am no farmer, far from it, so don't try and pin that one on me. I like to claim that I have NEVER played a game on CC that hasn't been genuinely competitive and no one has yet tried to suggest that I have...until you.

Also, I reject your 1vs1 challenge because I don't consider Risk to be a 1vs1 game. Again my record would bear that out...I simply don't play them. Whether you won more of those games than me wouldn't prove anything anyway. Your beef is with the CC dice, so if I beat you, then you would just blame the dice anyway.

The simple fact is that a 20% win rate for 5 man singles games is exactly average. Not good, not bad just average. Your rank seems to normally be around the private first class to sergeant level which would bear out your average status. Someone simply has to explain to you (as you've been on this thread for seemingly months) that you aren't that good. Sorry, but that's the truth of it. That 22% win rate overall means you will lose lot's of games and sometimes you'll lose them in great strings. But then you'll win a few in a row and it all evens out in the end to that 22% win rate.

The fact that your immediate response to my comment was to fantasise a playing record that I simply don't have, fits in with your fantastical idea that the CC dice are rigged for freemiums. It seems to me you retreat into fantasy when faced by adversity. Assuming you really do care about your game, how about you actually reject these notions for a while and actually take a good hard look at your game. Why do you ONLY have a 22% win rate overall, why do you consider ONLY a 30% win rate to have been you at your best. It isn't really that good you know. If you can put aside the dice as the reason for your lack of success (and just for the sake of argument assume I'm right for a moment), what else could it be?

Don't think me so horrible, I assure you I am not. But you have spent literally months on this thread obsessing about dice and I promise you that it is neither psychologically healthy nor beneficial to your CC success rate.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Mr Changsha
 
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:42 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:18 am

I assumed those things on purpose, so you see how it is good to have someone claiming things about you without even checking.

I have been kicked down to cook for a month, due to lack of any kind of victory. Then, in spite of the medals and the historical wins, a complete moron came and said: "oh, he claims to know how to play risk, but look, he is a cook"

Whatever. I accept your claims. I will try to improve. But just to be noted, I dont think it is common to lost streaks of 3x1 as I have been. Yesterday:

2009-06-29 22:32:14 - Incrementing game to round 17
2009-06-29 22:39:02 - RADAGA deployed 10 troops on Aegyptus
2009-06-29 22:39:11 - RADAGA deployed 10 troops on Moesia Superior
2009-06-29 22:39:17 - RADAGA assaulted Dacia from Moesia Superior and conquered it from Karkhan
2009-06-29 22:39:20 - RADAGA assaulted Moesia Inferior from Dacia and conquered it from Karkhan
2009-06-29 22:39:26 - RADAGA assaulted Classis Moesica from Moesia Inferior and conquered it from Karkhan
2009-06-29 22:39:32 - RADAGA assaulted Taurica from Moesia Inferior and conquered it from Karkhan
2009-06-29 22:39:56 - RADAGA assaulted Arabia Petraea from Aegyptus and conquered it from Karkhan
2009-06-29 22:39:58 - RADAGA assaulted Iudaea from Arabia Petraea and conquered it from Karkhan
2009-06-29 22:40:03 - RADAGA assaulted Syria from Iudaea and conquered it from Karkhan
2009-06-29 22:41:31 - RADAGA reinforced Macedonia with 5 troops from Italia
2009-06-29 22:41:31 - RADAGA ended the turn and got spoils


20 troops, plus the four I had in one of the territories. 24 armies. All of those were defended by one.

Seven territories, 24 armies - minus the 7 to occupy them, 17 armies were lost. Seventeen to seven. And among those, one of those were a 6 loss in a row, another a 7-in-a-row.

I am EXTREMELLY skeptical about the "dice" here when I see such situations on a weekly basis.

For the record: I won that game.
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Wed Jul 01, 2009 10:13 am

10 vs 3 ... end results: 2vs3 .... eight armies burned for nothing.

So much for a meager 30% chance of losing both armies every attack. 1/3 x 1/3 x 1/3 x 1/3 over 1 in 100 chance of happening. But guess what? Just did! Again!

Same game, two rounds later

12x10 ending as 4x9

Another game, today, 10x1, five losses in a row before getting the territory.

This is simply silly.

I can get no
Roll perfection
I can get no
Roll perfection

I roll
but they tie
and they tie
and they tie
and they tie!

I can get no!
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Fri Jul 03, 2009 8:54 am

Another 6-in-a-row loss on 3x1. This is getting far too common, daily, I ´d say.

In the last week, I got 27 losses BEYOND the said average on 3x1 rolls. This already pushed the statistic 0,25% toward the negative side.

The flaw with the "they average out in time" theory here is that they are NEVER, EVER above the expected wins. They are ALWAYS below, and, eventually, "average out" to the medium, just to drift down again.

So I´d risk saying the averages should be a little more biased toward defence, and I risk saying that this happens because of the streaks, thatr make ties happen more often.
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:13 am

2009-07-03 14:07:58 - Craigii deployed 15 troops on ?
2009-07-03 14:08:09 - Craigii assaulted ? from ? and conquered it from RADAGA (had 6 defending)
2009-07-03 14:08:18 - Craigii assaulted ? from ? and conquered it from RADAGA (had 2)
2009-07-03 14:08:20 - Craigii assaulted ? from ? and conquered it from RADAGA (had 1)
2009-07-03 14:08:25 - Craigii assaulted ? from ? and conquered it from RADAGA (had 1)
2009-07-03 14:08:28 - Craigii assaulted ? from ? and conquered it from RADAGA (had 1)
2009-07-03 14:08:39 - Craigii assaulted ? from ? and conquered it from RADAGA (had 7)

NOT STREAKY my ass.
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:34 am

LOOK! ANOTHER 6 IN A ROW LOSS ON A 3X1

TWO IN THE SAME DAY!

I THOUGHT THOSE WERE SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN ONCE EVERY HUNDREDS OF ROLLS!

AND GUESS WHAT? ON THE 3 ROUNDS THAT FOLLOWED, I LOST 4 IN A ROW AND 5 IN A ROW.

NOT STREAKY AND RANDOM, WHATEVER....

it moved another .10 toward the defender, away from the expected. that with 5.000 rolls total.

They should get closer to the average, not away from it.
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby Night Strike on Fri Jul 03, 2009 11:01 am

I still don't understand why you're on the site with how much you complain about it. :roll:

If you feel that freemiums get screwed on dice, buy premium. Since that will solve ALL your problems. :roll:
Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby e_i_pi on Fri Jul 03, 2009 4:32 pm

RADAGA wrote:12x10 ending as 4x9

Not possible dude, you're telling porkies again. How do you lose 8 armies, and your opponent loses 1, when 2 armies are lost per round? Did you roll four and a half times?
User avatar
Captain e_i_pi
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 2:19 pm
Location: Corruption Capital of the world

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby Thezzaruz on Fri Jul 03, 2009 6:48 pm

RADAGA wrote:The flaw with the "they average out in time" theory here is that they are NEVER, EVER above the expected wins. They are ALWAYS below, and, eventually, "average out" to the medium, just to drift down again.


That's not possible though... If your rolls always are worse than average then your total will never "average out" (even for short periods of time.

Both me and e_i_pi have shown some of your statements to be untrue so again I ask, back up your claims with dice analyzer stats or shut up.
User avatar
Lieutenant Thezzaruz
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: OTF most of the time.

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Sat Jul 04, 2009 7:14 am

Fine!

STATS AS TODAY

Battle Outcomes Actual Stats Ideal Stats
3v2 █████████████████████████ 2202 / 1908 / 1709 (37.84% / 32.79% / 29.37%) (37.17% / 33.58% / 29.26%)
3v1 █████████████████████████ 3033 / 1606 (65.38% / 34.62%) (65.97% / 34.03%)


yesterday the 3vs2 were even (0,02 difference) and the 3x1 were 65.62% / 34.38%

In a single day, I lost SO MANY STEAKS of 3x1´s that they moved .25% away of the expected.

Considering I have 4.600 rolls of the 3x1 kind, to slide 0,25% in any direction means to have 11 bad rolls ABOVE the expected. I dont know how many I rolled since yesterday, but they were less than 50.

50 broken into the given standard chance would be 33-17. Since I got 11 bad rolls, and they must come out of those 50, you can see I got 22-28 results. This is over 50% chance for the single defending dice.
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby Mr Changsha on Sat Jul 04, 2009 8:16 am

RADAGA wrote:Fine!

STATS AS TODAY

Battle Outcomes Actual Stats Ideal Stats
3v2 █████████████████████████ 2202 / 1908 / 1709 (37.84% / 32.79% / 29.37%) (37.17% / 33.58% / 29.26%)
3v1 █████████████████████████ 3033 / 1606 (65.38% / 34.62%) (65.97% / 34.03%)


yesterday the 3vs2 were even (0,02 difference) and the 3x1 were 65.62% / 34.38%

In a single day, I lost SO MANY STEAKS of 3x1´s that they moved .25% away of the expected.

Considering I have 4.600 rolls of the 3x1 kind, to slide 0,25% in any direction means to have 11 bad rolls ABOVE the expected. I dont know how many I rolled since yesterday, but they were less than 50.

50 broken into the given standard chance would be 33-17. Since I got 11 bad rolls, and they must come out of those 50, you can see I got 22-28 results. This is over 50% chance for the single defending dice.


Where is that emoticon for banging your head against a brick wall?

](*,) Oh, there it is...lovely to see you old chap.

RADAGA some have used logic, others have used reason and some have applied maths, but NOTHING is going to get through to you, so could you stop posting your battle stats please?
Image
User avatar
Colonel Mr Changsha
 
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:42 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby Thezzaruz on Sat Jul 04, 2009 5:27 pm

RADAGA wrote:In a single day, I lost SO MANY STEAKS of 3x1´s that they moved .25% away of the expected.


Lovely .25 percentage unit is nothing, hardly any deviation at all. I'm too tired to do the math right now but I would guess that it would easily be within the 99% confidence interval so all you have proven is that the dice works as intended, well done. =D>
User avatar
Lieutenant Thezzaruz
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: OTF most of the time.

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby e_i_pi on Sat Jul 04, 2009 5:35 pm

RADAGA wrote:Battle Outcomes Actual Stats Ideal Stats
3v1 █████████████████████████ 3033 / 1606 (65.38% / 34.62%) (65.97% / 34.03%)


yesterday the 3vs2 were even (0,02 difference) and the 3x1 were 65.62% / 34.38%

In a single day, I lost SO MANY STEAKS of 3x1´s that they moved .25% away of the expected.

Uh, you're worried about this? Your 3v1 is down by 0.59% on about 4500 rolls. And you believe it is because you are premium? Look, I'm at work so I don't have my dicestats available, but I have waaaay more rolls than you, and my 3v1 is down by about 1.5%, which is massive. Your dice are fine, you should improve your strategyif you want to get better results
User avatar
Captain e_i_pi
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 2:19 pm
Location: Corruption Capital of the world

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Mon Jul 06, 2009 9:53 am

e_i_pi wrote:
RADAGA wrote:Battle Outcomes Actual Stats Ideal Stats
3v1 █████████████████████████ 3033 / 1606 (65.38% / 34.62%) (65.97% / 34.03%)


yesterday the 3vs2 were even (0,02 difference) and the 3x1 were 65.62% / 34.38%

In a single day, I lost SO MANY STEAKS of 3x1´s that they moved .25% away of the expected.

Uh, you're worried about this? Your 3v1 is down by 0.59% on about 4500 rolls. And you believe it is because you are premium? Look, I'm at work so I don't have my dicestats available, but I have waaaay more rolls than you, and my 3v1 is down by about 1.5%, which is massive. Your dice are fine, you should improve your strategyif you want to get better results


So your 3x1 is over by more than the usual error margin tolerance for non-mathemathical events statistics (political, nature, genetic) and still you, being a statistic yourself, is one of the most valliant defenders of the perfection of this dice?

Weird.
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby Thezzaruz on Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:19 pm

RADAGA wrote:(political, nature, genetic)


None of those are meant to have such a big random element though...
User avatar
Lieutenant Thezzaruz
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: OTF most of the time.

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby trinicardinal on Mon Jul 06, 2009 2:20 pm

RADAGA wrote:
Mr Changsha wrote:
RADAGA wrote:
I don't have to since it isn't commonplace here on CC either...


then why it happened again, today?

deployed 13 just to lose 8 in a row for a 1.

Not common, happens once every 5 rounds or so, given I am a freemium.


I'm sure your used to being insulted RADAGA (judging by your posts) and I really don't want to insult you now, but consider two propositions.

1. Your poor rank is based on a conspiracy to punish freemiums by giving them poor roles.

Or

2. You just aren't that good at the game.


I would accept it, if I have not observed the following: I have never changed the kind of games I play:

Freestyle, 3-6 players, flat rate and no spoils

For several MONTHS I usually win 30% of the games I play

then out of the blue I start to lose them ALL. there were a time where I got NOT A SINGLE VICTORY in 3 months in a row. That, just before winning 12 games on the previous month.

Considering the opponents are pretty much the same, that I dont change game type, and that whose win/losses are cyclical, so there is not "getting better" or "getting worse" at the game, I must assume there is something else affecting the overall win/loss ratio.

If I were not that good, how can you explain the medals and the 22% win rate, overall?

Yours are better because of the doubles and triples you play, rigged games with the same buddies, on the same maps, to trap newbies and uncoordinated opponents.

I challenge you for 20 1x1, random map, standard turns, no spoil games. Lets see how well you perform.



Can I take up that challenge? I'm freemium too and therefore should be subject to the same problems you are having (by your theory) Let's see what you make of me.
10:16:35 ‹Ace Rimmer› haven't looked at work in ages
10:42:43 ‹Sackett58› fine, I'll take my panties elsewhere
User avatar
Captain trinicardinal
 
Posts: 2911
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 7:59 am
Location: On a Tropical Island - Coconut anyone?

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby e_i_pi on Wed Jul 08, 2009 7:22 am

RADAGA wrote:
e_i_pi wrote:
RADAGA wrote:Battle Outcomes Actual Stats Ideal Stats
3v1 █████████████████████████ 3033 / 1606 (65.38% / 34.62%) (65.97% / 34.03%)


yesterday the 3vs2 were even (0,02 difference) and the 3x1 were 65.62% / 34.38%

In a single day, I lost SO MANY STEAKS of 3x1´s that they moved .25% away of the expected.

Uh, you're worried about this? Your 3v1 is down by 0.59% on about 4500 rolls. And you believe it is because you are premium? Look, I'm at work so I don't have my dicestats available, but I have waaaay more rolls than you, and my 3v1 is down by about 1.5%, which is massive. Your dice are fine, you should improve your strategyif you want to get better results


So your 3x1 is over by more than the usual error margin tolerance for non-mathemathical events statistics (political, nature, genetic) and still you, being a statistic yourself, is one of the most valliant defenders of the perfection of this dice?

Weird.

You keep complaining that your dice suck because you are freemium. But I am premium, and I have worse dice than you. So doff your chefs hat, get baking, and buy yourself some straws. It's time to suck it up, cupcake.
User avatar
Captain e_i_pi
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 2:19 pm
Location: Corruption Capital of the world

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:01 pm

You keep complaining that your dice suck because you are freemium. But I am premium, and I have worse dice than you. So doff your chefs hat, get baking, and buy yourself some straws. It's time to suck it up, cupcake.


Actually I complain about the dice showing far too many streaks than it should. I honestly believe that there would be no way to calculate odds individually for every player, and bias it according to rank and paying status.

BUT I do discredit the dice here as well-behaved. One to many 3,3,3 vs 3,3 for me to believe in that.

Of course, 23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23,23 can be part of a truly random sequencee of integers that range from 1 to 1.000.000. At least, there is no way to prove otherwise.

For that matter, one million (or one hundred million, for that matter) of "23´s" are perfectly valid results for such conditions. As valid as the "23" never evfer showing up, no matter how many zillion times you roll your D-1.000.0000 across the ages of earth.
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby #1Buckeye on Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:17 pm

I"m tired of not getting cards on 1/3 or more of my turns...I'm tired of starting a turn losing my first 12 guys and not ever winning that many in a row. I don't know what the problem is...This site is free and I love it...but it's a love/hate relationship and I don't think I want to keep pissing myself off here :evil:

Sorry so angry but it's sooo DAMN FRUSTRATING!!
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class #1Buckeye
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:21 pm

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Thu Jul 16, 2009 10:10 am

Five 3x1 lost in a row. I feel safe when I return to places and they remain the same. Statistics are now .36% away. if I keep the .10% / week and I shall get to the TRUE 3x1 odds here: 50%-50% by xmas
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Tue Jul 21, 2009 11:13 am

I was moving for a kill

there were a mere two territories left. Each guarded by 1 army.

Then I advanced nine.

And I failed to kill the guy. I lost 2 3x1, got one of the lands, advanced 6... lost everything... and he stood proud.

New 3x1 statistics, because of that> 0.41% away from the average!
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby Timminz on Tue Jul 21, 2009 4:21 pm

I agree. Faulty perceptions need to be fixed immediately.
User avatar
Captain Timminz
 
Posts: 5579
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:05 pm
Location: At the store

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby RADAGA on Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:43 pm

+ 0.47% and increasing ;)

by the end of the day>

+ 0.51% weeee!
Private 1st Class RADAGA
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:23 am

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby Timminz on Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:46 am

My coffee this morning was half a degree too hot, and they put in 4 granules more sugar than ideal. I tried demanding that they fix it, but they laughed at me , and said, "Yeah right! Who do you think you are? RADAGA, or something?"
User avatar
Captain Timminz
 
Posts: 5579
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:05 pm
Location: At the store

Re: 'all new' intensity cubes complaints (merged)

Postby e_i_pi on Sat Jul 25, 2009 2:38 am

I think they model your dice on the level of recession across the world RADAGA. Cheer up, your dice should be good again in 4-5 years
User avatar
Captain e_i_pi
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 2:19 pm
Location: Corruption Capital of the world

PreviousNext

Return to Conquer Club Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users