

Lindax wrote:Random or not, I don't give a f*ck, they suck. The amount of games I lost on this site because of bullshit dice is just ridiculous.
You know the feeling, you play every move perfect, the plan comes together, you're ready to strike and sweep the map.... kaboom!
27 vs 14 ends 3 vs 6, 53 vs 10 leaves you with 11, etc., etc.
And don't give me the bullshit that "you don't remember the good dice, you only remember the bad ones". FFS! If you play a decent game you never get the good ones. If you have 14 to take 20, you simply don't even try, even though that's when you might have gotten the good ones.
Unfucking random the dice and program it so that if you have double the amount of your opponent you win the fucking battle or something like that.
Bastards!
Lx
Actually the bigger the stack, the better are the assault odds. But also the more dice battles..Funkyterrance wrote:Lolz.
I always figure that the bigger the stack, the more that can go wrong. Another reason why not to play escalating I guess. Do you auto-assault by any chance?


Yeah, I have benefited from somebody else's dice fucking up.betiko wrote:Now Lindax, you are focusing on your dice, but don t tell me you ve never benefited from someone screwing his sweep move, you play next and game is yours...
Right, but it makes me way less comfortable when myself and my opponent have equally big stacks as opposed to a nice spread across the board. I hate games that rely on one battle, probably why I don't like escalating. Bad dice hurt less when spread out over an entire game.betiko wrote: Actually the bigger the stack, the better are the assault odds. But also the more dice battles..

Of course you try. Particularly if the alternative is him having 23 to take your 14. Offensive dice is king.Lindax wrote:If you have 14 to take 20, you simply don't even try, even though that's when you might have gotten the good ones.

niMic wrote:Of course you try. Particularly if the alternative is him having 23 to take your 14. Offensive dice is king.Lindax wrote:If you have 14 to take 20, you simply don't even try, even though that's when you might have gotten the good ones.

drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
Yep, something sure did happen about that time. Don't know what they did but it definitely changed things (for the worse). Nowadays...get an early bonus, proceed to get shafted and lose more than your bonus is earning you. Get to the end of a game that is irrevocably lost and start to roll nothing but 5s & 6s (makes the dice stats look better you see). And don't get me started on 1s. When once upon a time a 4 would usually do the comfortably, now I find myself making sure I've a 6v1 to guarantee a card.HighlanderAttack wrote:AMEN brother--Things changed about two years ago in my opinion. After countless heart breakers the love of this game was lost. Even after two months of no games my attempt to come back and play has been met with more heartbreakers and insane dice,Lindax wrote:Random or not, I don't give a f*ck, they suck. The amount of games I lost on this site because of bullshit dice is just ridiculous.
You know the feeling, you play every move perfect, the plan comes together, you're ready to strike and sweep the map.... kaboom!
27 vs 14 ends 3 vs 6, 53 vs 10 leaves you with 11, etc., etc.
And don't give me the bullshit that "you don't remember the good dice, you only remember the bad ones". FFS! If you play a decent game you never get the good ones. If you have 14 to take 20, you simply don't even try, even though that's when you might have gotten the good ones.
Unfucking random the dice and program it so that if you have double the amount of your opponent you win the fucking battle or something like that.
Bastards!
Lx

Your 3v2 battle outcomes seem to indicate that you definitely kill more troops on offense than defense. Seems like an advantage to me!Chariot of Fire wrote: I guess it's the same for everyone of course, so in that respect it's equitable, but the notion of 'attacker's advantage' is a complete fallacy.


Ah, sorry. My comments were only directed toward your "'attacker's advantage' is a fallacy" comment. I didn't realize that you believe it did in fact exist from 2007-2011, and has ceased to exist since some time in 2011.Chariot of Fire wrote:Oh, manage to isolate up my 2007-2011 stats did you?

And yet there's no support for a "no dice" function. With so many dice haters on this site they should be flocking to a pure strategy, no luck function. Yet most seems to want the dice, they just don't want it to roll bad. Sorry but you can't have that, if you have a dice, you're going to draw the short straw sometimes.Lindax wrote:Random or not, I don't give a f*ck, they suck. The amount of games I lost on this site because of bullshit dice is just ridiculous.
You know the feeling, you play every move perfect, the plan comes together, you're ready to strike and sweep the map.... kaboom!
27 vs 14 ends 3 vs 6, 53 vs 10 leaves you with 11, etc., etc.
And don't give me the bullshit that "you don't remember the good dice, you only remember the bad ones". FFS! If you play a decent game you never get the good ones. If you have 14 to take 20, you simply don't even try, even though that's when you might have gotten the good ones.
Unfucking random the dice and program it so that if you have double the amount of your opponent you win the fucking battle or something like that.
Bastards!
Lx

Chariot of Fire wrote:No worries. And yes, I do believe that the advantage once held by the attacker is not as pronounced as it once had been. The old rule of thumb (add up all the armies of the terrs you plan to hit and add the number of terrs divided by 3) to calculate what size stack is required no longer seems to work very often. I see and experience far more failures than ever I used to.
iAmCaffeine wrote:I honestly think it's a case of remembering the good and bad rolls. Of course everyone has genuinely lost a game because of the dice, but that works both ways. I remember losing 18v2 once, horrific. I've ranted about the dice many times, but I remember a couple of outstanding rolls as well. I have won 5v12, although granted it was too late, and just now won 15v15 with 13/14 left.