your opponent has ridiculously good dice against you consistently?
I played a low ranked player recently who destroyed me in our first game. The dice were something like (3v2) 31 wins 5 losses and (3v1) 13 wins 0 losses. My dice were negative against him but can't recall the details of that. So I played a second game to try my chances again. He went (3v2) 34 wins 4 losses and (3v1) 15 wins 1 loss. To open the game he went 6v3v3v3 perfect. After he won 7v8, 5v6, 6v10, and a couple other odds you wouldn't expect to win. I got destroyed and had negative dice again (as if it mattered anyway).
So I foed him based on the luck dice alone ... his strategy was horrible, and had our dice been close I would have easily won. You can tell by the battles he won that he never should have even been attacking ... there was no reason for him to, as I had no bonus and it was trench, where he obtained a bonus and a buffer within the first round (second game) and second round (first game).
So it is kind of a cowardly move to foe him based on dice but he is (3v2) 55 and 9, and (3v1) 18 and 1 against me as a low rank (compared to me anyway). I feel I had no choice. I've never seen such a discrepancy in the dice.
donkeymile wrote:your opponent has ridiculously good dice against you consistently?
Fair? I dunno...but it seems like a dumb reason, to be honest. Over time, the dice will likely (though not necessarily, according to statistics, each roll is it's own entity, blah blah blah) revert back toward you so you are essentially VOLUNTARILY GIVING UP FUTURE GOOD DICE.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
donkeymile wrote:your opponent has ridiculously good dice against you consistently?
Fair? I dunno...but it seems like a dumb reason, to be honest. Over time, the dice will likely (though not necessarily, according to statistics, each roll is it's own entity, blah blah blah) revert back toward you so you are essentially VOLUNTARILY GIVING UP FUTURE GOOD DICE.
I think what woodruff is trying to say is that it's an irrational reason to foe someone. The dice are random but you know that the player has inferior skills to yours. The odds of ultimately winning more games become better the more times you play this person, granted their skill level doesn't improve dramatically.
donkeymile wrote:your opponent has ridiculously good dice against you consistently?
Fair? I dunno...but it seems like a dumb reason, to be honest. Over time, the dice will likely (though not necessarily, according to statistics, each roll is it's own entity, blah blah blah) revert back toward you so you are essentially VOLUNTARILY GIVING UP FUTURE GOOD DICE.
I think what woodruff is trying to say is that it's an irrational reason to foe someone. The dice are random but you know that the player has inferior skills to yours. The odds of ultimately winning more games become better the more times you play this person, granted their skill level doesn't improve dramatically.
what both of them said... more or less
John Adams wrote:I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a Congress! And by God I have had this Congress!
donkeymile wrote:your opponent has ridiculously good dice against you consistently?
I played a low ranked player recently who destroyed me in our first game. The dice were something like (3v2) 31 wins 5 losses and (3v1) 13 wins 0 losses. My dice were negative against him but can't recall the details of that. So I played a second game to try my chances again. He went (3v2) 34 wins 4 losses and (3v1) 15 wins 1 loss. To open the game he went 6v3v3v3 perfect. After he won 7v8, 5v6, 6v10, and a couple other odds you wouldn't expect to win. I got destroyed and had negative dice again (as if it mattered anyway).
So I foed him based on the luck dice alone ... his strategy was horrible, and had our dice been close I would have easily won. You can tell by the battles he won that he never should have even been attacking ... there was no reason for him to, as I had no bonus and it was trench, where he obtained a bonus and a buffer within the first round (second game) and second round (first game).
So it is kind of a cowardly move to foe him based on dice but he is (3v2) 55 and 9, and (3v1) 18 and 1 against me as a low rank (compared to me anyway). I feel I had no choice. I've never seen such a discrepancy in the dice.
donkeymile wrote:your opponent has ridiculously good dice against you consistently?
I played a low ranked player recently who destroyed me in our first game. The dice were something like (3v2) 31 wins 5 losses and (3v1) 13 wins 0 losses. My dice were negative against him but can't recall the details of that. So I played a second game to try my chances again. He went (3v2) 34 wins 4 losses and (3v1) 15 wins 1 loss. To open the game he went 6v3v3v3 perfect. After he won 7v8, 5v6, 6v10, and a couple other odds you wouldn't expect to win. I got destroyed and had negative dice again (as if it mattered anyway).
So I foed him based on the luck dice alone ... his strategy was horrible, and had our dice been close I would have easily won. You can tell by the battles he won that he never should have even been attacking ... there was no reason for him to, as I had no be bonus and it was trench, where he obtained a bonus and a buffer within the first round (second game) and second round (first game).
So it is kind of a cowardly move to foe him based on dice but he is (3v2) 55 and 9, and (3v1) 18 and 1 against me as a low rank (compared to me anyway). I feel I had no choice. I've never seen such a discrepancy in the dice.
Thoughts?
It's amazing how defensive people can be. The only rule anyone should go by is foe anybody you don't wish to play. There are thousands of players on this site and if it hurts someone's feelings because an individual doesn't wish to play against them, they need to put their big boy pants on and grow up. I have hundreds on my foe list and I'm sure I'm on a few also. It's that simple. Really.
I don't have any problem with anyone choosing to foe someone for any reason. Is it fair? Sure, it doesn't go against the rules. I think your question should be:
Would you foe someone when....
You will probably get 50/50, but with your dice luck everyone will be against you.
Bruceswar » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:59 pm wrote:
We all had tons of men..
As I tend to do from time to time, I unfoed the entire list (probably only about 10 people in all). I don't foe very often - and usually only against suiciders.
