CC is declining again!

[iAmCaffeine]

When are the streaky dice going to be fixed? We all know they come in streaks because CC just recycles the exact same loop over and over. I played two speed games this morning, which I very rarely do. I was winning a game, lost 10v3, game over. I was winning another game, opponent won 5v9, lost nothing, game over. It's really not fun losing to mediocre players repeatedly (that's the key word) because CC can't be fucked to invest money in a decent random generator.

According to a highly skilled player, me losing a 7v2 to win the game (93.5% of success in winning that roll) wasn't luck and was in fact because of their skill. How are people so delusional?

[iAmCaffeine]

I don't think I'll ever pay for premium again. What kind of service do we receive? The same 20-50k dice processed through the same exact loop over and over and over. That's not random whatsoever, it's a repetitive cycle that never changes. I wonder how many people actually know they're being conned. I wonder if you could actually sue bigWham for false advertising.

[IcePack]

I don't think I'll ever pay for premium again. What kind of service do we receive? The same 20-50k dice processed through the same exact loop over and over and over. That's not random whatsoever, it's a repetitive cycle that never changes. I wonder how many people actually know they're being conned. I wonder if you could actually sue bigWham for false advertising.

Except that's not how the dice work, so there's that...

[iAmCaffeine]

I don't think I'll ever pay for premium again. What kind of service do we receive? The same 20-50k dice processed through the same exact loop over and over and over. That's not random whatsoever, it's a repetitive cycle that never changes. I wonder how many people actually know they're being conned. I wonder if you could actually sue bigWham for false advertising.

Except that's not how the dice work, so there's that...

That's what bigWham just told me as well, but since when? I don't recall there ever being an announcement that they changed, and the dice were previously used this way.

[BoganGod]

Interesting to note is that while CC is declining, number of users who play 20 or more game per month is in 4 month in a row incline.

They have to walk up-hill?

Mispelling of the german kline. Polygot josko not.

[IcePack]

I don't think I'll ever pay for premium again. What kind of service do we receive? The same 20-50k dice processed through the same exact loop over and over and over. That's not random whatsoever, it's a repetitive cycle that never changes. I wonder how many people actually know they're being conned. I wonder if you could actually sue bigWham for false advertising.

Except that's not how the dice work, so there's that...

That's what bigWham just told me as well, but since when? I don't recall there ever being an announcement that they changed, and the dice were previously used this way.

I've said this exact thing before to multiple people / multiple times. It's a widely held misconception. But people continue to quote it as fact

[iAmCaffeine]

I don't think I'll ever pay for premium again. What kind of service do we receive? The same 20-50k dice processed through the same exact loop over and over and over. That's not random whatsoever, it's a repetitive cycle that never changes. I wonder how many people actually know they're being conned. I wonder if you could actually sue bigWham for false advertising.

Except that's not how the dice work, so there's that...

That's what bigWham just told me as well, but since when? I don't recall there ever being an announcement that they changed, and the dice were previously used this way.

I've said this exact thing before to multiple people / multiple times. It's a widely held misconception. But people continue to quote it as fact

I guarantee you it used to be a fact. If that has since changed why won't bigWham confirm? Just saying "it's not like that anymore" isn't good enough. Who/what are we using for our "totally random" dice?

[IcePack]

Isn't good enough...for you?

[iAmCaffeine]

Not for me, nor likely for the vast majority of paying customers. Certainly not some of the ones I've spoken to. If we pay for this service are we not entitled to know exactly what we're paying for? The last official update was that we're using 20-50k of repetitive looping dice in streaks. You posting a comment as a volunteer is not an official announcement. Since when is paying for something and not even knowing what you're paying for standard practice?

[IcePack]

Not for me, nor likely for the vast majority of paying customers. Certainly not some of the ones I've spoken to. If we pay for this service are we not entitled to know exactly what we're paying for? The last official update was that we're using 20-50k of repetitive looping dice in streaks. You posting a comment as a volunteer is not an official announcement. Since when is paying for something and not even knowing what you're paying for standard practice?

I've done a lot of work with games and apps, and my brother works for a fairly large well known game developer. I don't know of any games or companies that go into detail about how they randomize things.
These games and companies tend to range from small 1-5 people to large 300+ employee operations.

So while I agree, I'm not an official announcement. But at the same time, i think perhaps the expectation that they detail all the inner workings of the site is a bit misguided. Previous owners have, but imo that was a mistake. People will bitch and moan about the dice / random regardless of what's implemented, as we've seen over 3-4 iterations of the dice on this site alone.

You're paying for the game, not for the luxury of knowing every way the site ticks and randomizes and calculates every last detail. Again, that's just my opinion. Idk the official site position, but if the owner doesn't provide that info all I can say is I'm not surprised and it's definitely not "standard" to get into that level of detail w customers on how the backend of games work.

[iAmCaffeine]

Not for me, nor likely for the vast majority of paying customers. Certainly not some of the ones I've spoken to. If we pay for this service are we not entitled to know exactly what we're paying for? The last official update was that we're using 20-50k of repetitive looping dice in streaks. You posting a comment as a volunteer is not an official announcement. Since when is paying for something and not even knowing what you're paying for standard practice?

I've done a lot of work with games and apps, and my brother works for a fairly large well known game developer. I don't know of any games or companies that go into detail about how they randomize things.
These games and companies tend to range from small 1-5 people to large 300+ employee operations.

So while I agree, I'm not an official announcement. But at the same time, i think perhaps the expectation that they detail all the inner workings of the site is a bit misguided. Previous owners have, but imo that was a mistake. People will bitch and moan about the dice / random regardless of what's implemented, as we've seen over 3-4 iterations of the dice on this site alone.

You're paying for the game, not for the luxury of knowing every way the site ticks and randomizes and calculates every last detail. Again, that's just my opinion. Idk the official site position, but if the owner doesn't provide that info all I can say is I'm not surprised and it's definitely not "standard" to get into that level of detail w customers on how the backend of games work.

I appreciate your knowledge and honesty. My tone probably came off badly but it wasn't my intention to undermine you. However, this game is a representation of risk and dice are a key element. It's not really asking for the mechanics of the game, but more asking that we have reassurance the "random dice generator" is reputable and worth our investment. I don't think that's a lot to ask.

[ooge]

I never used to complain about dice but whatever or whenever this last change with dice was has caused me to want to leave the site and I complain about dice now.

[IcePack]

I never used to complain about dice but whatever or whenever this last change with dice was has caused me to want to leave the site and I complain about dice now.

How do you know it was this last change? How long has it bothered you? You don't know whether the last change was a week, a month, a year, two years. I'm interested how you can attribute it to a change that you don't know the timeline on?

[iAmCaffeine]

I never used to complain about dice but whatever or whenever this last change with dice was has caused me to want to leave the site and I complain about dice now.

How do you know it was this last change? How long has it bothered you? You don't know whether the last change was a week, a month, a year, two years. I'm interested how you can attribute it to a change that you don't know the timeline on?

Let's assume our dice have been terrible for six months. There was a change / update to them three months ago. However, the dice are still terrible. Therefore the change has done nothing to improve the situation and is therefore irrelevant. If the dice are still clearly not as they should be, does it matter when the last update was?

[mookiemcgee]

Icepack, even if you don't want to give out specifics of how you achieve random.... Can't you guys make some sort of announcement that you've moved away from the model repeatedly talked about in the forum as the way its been for several years.

I personally believe in big swings in dice, and that 5% has to happen sometimes, and that it is a fault of human memory that we seem to think it happens too often, or at the wrong time. But it would still be nice to have some kind of counter narrative from management against what you readily admit is the commonly known way the dice randomness is achieved (the idea that it's the same 50,000 rolls repeated).

Outside of this thread, I haven't read anything from any Mod accounts citing any change in the dice. I don't see everything posted, but I have read quite a bit on here... If it exists, maybe you could provide caff and now myself a link?

You almost seem to be baiting Caff here... saying he's wrong, but offering him no alternative explanation and saying that game makers shouldn't be expected to do so? That seems a little ridiculous. Many Poker sites have revealed elements of how they randomize cards, not enough to be used against them but enough to try and ensure they customer base is satisfied the game isn't fixed. ( I.e we use a variation of such and such a system would be enough) Saying the site has no responsibility to explain it may be true, but it's incredibly short sited. Are you required to tell us everything, no. Should you tell us enough so we as customers don't lose faith.... in my opinion it is important to keeping the customers you do have. ( IMO telling us "the dice are random, and not the way we previously said they were" = not enough)

You are commenting as a volunteer, and I don't mean to throw you under the bus with this post. But you did engage the question and since there is basically radio silence from anywhere higher up the food-chain on this subject (for years)...

[Symmetry]

That's kind of an interesting point from Mook, Duk.

[IcePack]

I never used to complain about dice but whatever or whenever this last change with dice was has caused me to want to leave the site and I complain about dice now.

How do you know it was this last change? How long has it bothered you? You don't know whether the last change was a week, a month, a year, two years. I'm interested how you can attribute it to a change that you don't know the timeline on?

Let's assume our dice have been terrible for six months. There was a change / update to them three months ago. However, the dice are still terrible. Therefore the change has done nothing to improve the situation and is therefore irrelevant. If the dice are still clearly not as they should be, does it matter when the last update was?

My point was, it doesn't matter what the dice are. People will still think they are terrible, regardless of what system it is. People will still exaggerate and only point to the bad times they get. So you could update it to literally be monkeys rolling actual dice, and the computer picking up the rolls that the monkey does and implimenting it and you will still get people bitching about the dice they get. Even tho they are real dice.

Icepack, even if you don't want to give out specifics of how you achieve random.... Can't you guys make some sort of announcement that you've moved away from the model repeatedly talked about in the forum as the way its been for several years.

I personally believe in big swings in dice, and that 5% has to happen sometimes, and that it is a fault of human memory that we seem to think it happens too often, or at the wrong time. But it would still be nice to have some kind of counter narrative from management against what you readily admit is the commonly known way the dice randomness is achieved (the idea that it's the same 50,000 rolls repeated).

Outside of this thread, I haven't read anything from any Mod accounts citing any change in the dice. I don't see everything posted, but I have read quite a bit on here... If it exists, maybe you could provide caff and now myself a link?

You almost seem to be baiting Caff here... saying he's wrong, but offering him no alternative explanation and saying that game makers shouldn't be expected to do so? That seems a little ridiculous. Many Poker sites have revealed elements of how they randomize cards, not enough to be used against them but enough to try and ensure they customer base is satisfied the game isn't fixed. ( I.e we use a variation of such and such a system would be enough) Saying the site has no responsibility to explain it may be true, but it's incredibly short sited. Are you required to tell us everything, no. Should you tell us enough so we as customers don't lose faith.... in my opinion it is important to keeping the customers you do have. ( IMO telling us "the dice are random, and not the way we previously said they were" = not enough)

You are commenting as a volunteer, and I don't mean to throw you under the bus with this post. But you did engage the question and since there is basically radio silence from anywhere higher up the food-chain on this subject (for years)...

I dont do the updates, so it makes it hard to do any sort of official announcement as I don't have all the details in order to actually make sense other then "hey guys, theres been a change" which really isn't an announcement at all. If I did that as an official announcement, then we'd get all the questions and have none of the answers, so whats the point in me doing that? I have said multiple times in response to people claiming "this is how the dice work" that in fact, that isn't how the dice work, which is just as useful as an announcement would have been because people still would say it / ignore the announcement or again, want specifics that we dont have.

Other than myself posting about it, i dont know if anyone else has mentioned it. But I also dont know who / how many know so I dont even know where to begin looking to see if others have posted about it. So really, your search would be about as good as mine but I dont really have time to go looking through threads for that type of thing.

I'm not baiting him, I'm responding to his comment about the dice saying its not how it works. I have no specific other information to provide regarding it, so I can't really provide alternative explanations, and I stand by my statement that the game maker shouldn't be expected to do so. Again, I'm talking from a personal viewpoint / perspective. I can't provide you the "sites perspective" because I dont know it. But from my personal experience and working within game industry / direct knowledge of it, I would say it isn't "standard practise" to go into detail about it. Thats what I was getting at. So I can't tell you enough nor do I pretend to be in a position to do so. But I will speak up and counter info that I know to be wrong, so that others also know it and can be informed.

But that also allows you (and caff) to know that it isn't how it works. What you do with that info is up to you. I didn't engage in a question, I corrected someone elses statement. Anyway, as I said. Thats just my view in general, but I know you (and others) will form your own opinion about what you should or shouldn't know and thats fair. As I said, I just think its probably an unreasonable expectation imo.

[mookiemcgee]

I never used to complain about dice but whatever or whenever this last change with dice was has caused me to want to leave the site and I complain about dice now.

How do you know it was this last change? How long has it bothered you? You don't know whether the last change was a week, a month, a year, two years. I'm interested how you can attribute it to a change that you don't know the timeline on?

Let's assume our dice have been terrible for six months. There was a change / update to them three months ago. However, the dice are still terrible. Therefore the change has done nothing to improve the situation and is therefore irrelevant. If the dice are still clearly not as they should be, does it matter when the last update was?

My point was, it doesn't matter what the dice are. People will still think they are terrible, regardless of what system it is. People will still exaggerate and only point to the bad times they get. So you could update it to literally be monkeys rolling actual dice, and the computer picking up the rolls that the monkey does and implimenting it and you will still get people bitching about the dice they get. Even tho they are real dice.

Icepack, even if you don't want to give out specifics of how you achieve random.... Can't you guys make some sort of announcement that you've moved away from the model repeatedly talked about in the forum as the way its been for several years.

I personally believe in big swings in dice, and that 5% has to happen sometimes, and that it is a fault of human memory that we seem to think it happens too often, or at the wrong time. But it would still be nice to have some kind of counter narrative from management against what you readily admit is the commonly known way the dice randomness is achieved (the idea that it's the same 50,000 rolls repeated).

Outside of this thread, I haven't read anything from any Mod accounts citing any change in the dice. I don't see everything posted, but I have read quite a bit on here... If it exists, maybe you could provide caff and now myself a link?

You almost seem to be baiting Caff here... saying he's wrong, but offering him no alternative explanation and saying that game makers shouldn't be expected to do so? That seems a little ridiculous. Many Poker sites have revealed elements of how they randomize cards, not enough to be used against them but enough to try and ensure they customer base is satisfied the game isn't fixed. ( I.e we use a variation of such and such a system would be enough) Saying the site has no responsibility to explain it may be true, but it's incredibly short sited. Are you required to tell us everything, no. Should you tell us enough so we as customers don't lose faith.... in my opinion it is important to keeping the customers you do have. ( IMO telling us "the dice are random, and not the way we previously said they were" = not enough)

You are commenting as a volunteer, and I don't mean to throw you under the bus with this post. But you did engage the question and since there is basically radio silence from anywhere higher up the food-chain on this subject (for years)...

I dont do the updates, so it makes it hard to do any sort of official announcement as I don't have all the details in order to actually make sense other then "hey guys, theres been a change" which really isn't an announcement at all. If I did that as an official announcement, then we'd get all the questions and have none of the answers, so whats the point in me doing that? I have said multiple times in response to people claiming "this is how the dice work" that in fact, that isn't how the dice work, which is just as useful as an announcement would have been because people still would say it / ignore the announcement or again, want specifics that we dont have.

Other than myself posting about it, i dont know if anyone else has mentioned it. But I also dont know who / how many know so I dont even know where to begin looking to see if others have posted about it. So really, your search would be about as good as mine but I dont really have time to go looking through threads for that type of thing.

I'm not baiting him, I'm responding to his comment about the dice saying its not how it works. I have no specific other information to provide regarding it, so I can't really provide alternative explanations, and I stand by my statement that the game maker shouldn't be expected to do so. Again, I'm talking from a personal viewpoint / perspective. I can't provide you the "sites perspective" because I dont know it. But from my personal experience and working within game industry / direct knowledge of it, I would say it isn't "standard practise" to go into detail about it. Thats what I was getting at. So I can't tell you enough nor do I pretend to be in a position to do so. But I will speak up and counter info that I know to be wrong, so that others also know it and can be informed.

But that also allows you (and caff) to know that it isn't how it works. What you do with that info is up to you. I didn't engage in a question, I corrected someone elses statement. Anyway, as I said. Thats just my view in general, but I know you (and others) will form your own opinion about what you should or shouldn't know and thats fair. As I said, I just think its probably an unreasonable expectation imo.

OK, well you allude to the fact that you do indeed know how the dice work in the above statement. if you don't know how the dice work, how could you know how they don't work???

Why would the silent game management tell you how the dice work, but instruct you not to share any information about that with the rest of the playing community? From that perspective I'm even more upset because you've all but indicated that the volunteers have an advantage over the average playing player (in that they are aware of 'how the dice work") when paying players are being told by you that they have no right to know anything on the subject. If it is a closely guarded secret for the company, why are they sharing this information with volunteers who a) are actively playing in games/clan competition/tournaments with prizes and b) may not be volunteers tomorrow but could perpetuate their advantage.

if your position is that knowing how the dice work present no advantage then what possible downside could there be to allowing CC's customers some degree of comfort that the game isn't fixed with a simple basic answer in regards to how the dice work. Or at the very least you could ask someone who does have the authority to do so to respond with some sort of official statement... but I guess it's your position that only volunteers should know? Do you not see the inherent contradiction here?

Please know I am not asserting the game is fixed, or that mods necessarily have a clear advantage. It would be reckless for me to do so when absolutely no information is ever presented by CC other than the above 'trump like' denials of what were at least at one time facts. I am simply asking for facts, from the business I patronize. I'm trying my best here not to just assume the business doesn't care about its customers, or the integrity of the game it hosts.

[IcePack]

OK, well you allude to the fact that you do indeed know how the dice work in the above statement. if you don't know how the dice work, how could you know how they don't work???

Why would the silent game management tell you how the dice work, but instruct you not to share any information about that with the rest of the playing community? From that perspective I'm even more upset because you've all but indicated that the volunteers have an advantage over the average playing player (in that they are aware of 'how the dice work") when paying players are being told by you that they have no right to know anything on the subject. If it is a closely guarded secret for the company, why are they sharing this information with volunteers who a) are actively playing in games/clan competition/tournaments with prizes and b) may not be volunteers tomorrow but could perpetuate their advantage.

if your position is that knowing how the dice work present no advantage then what possible downside could there be to allowing CC's customers some degree of comfort that the game isn't fixed with a simple basic answer in regards to how the dice work. Or at the very least you could ask someone who does have the authority to do so to respond with some sort of official statement... but I guess it's your position that only volunteers should know? Do you not see the inherent contradiction here?

Please know I am not asserting the game is fixed, or that mods necessarily have a clear advantage. It would be reckless for me to do so when absolutely no information is ever presented by CC other than the above 'trump like' denials of what were at least at one time facts. I am simply asking for facts, from the business I patronize. I'm trying my best here not to just assume the business doesn't care about its customers, or the integrity of the game it hosts.

Where do I allude to how I know it? In fact, I said the exact opposite by saying I don't know the specifics. I don't know the specifics, but I do know how they don't becasue I've had a few conversations with those who do know about various things related.

They might be silent in the forums, but mods are in regular contact with various other mods / admins. They didn't instruct me not to say anything, hence why I said something... As a volunteer, we are privvy to some info that isn't available to the public (in general, not specifically on this topic) because we sometimes need to know information to do our volunteer work. (For example, I was a Beta Team Lead for a long time, so in order to test different functions I had to know a lot more about some things then the avg paying member would know) but thats because it was relevant to my work.

And again, in specific reference to this subject the only info that was shared was that it wasn't how the dice worked. They shared it w/ me, I shared w/ you. There is no additional information shared with me that could perpetuate anything to my advantage on the subject, as I've cleared detailed above.

You are misrepresnted what my position is. Also, that I have some dice info that you dont. I also am not in a position to share info with "customers", even if I wanted to. Thats not my decision to make. But as I've said before, its not standard practice to share that sort of info with other companies so I dont see why its relevant here. I never said only volunteers should know. Again, misrepresenting information.

If you want facts from the business you are patronizing, you are discussing this with the wrong person. I merely posted in order to inform caff that it wasn't how things worked. Anything beyond that, is above my pay grade. It isn't some volunteer secret, as clearly shown by me sharing what information I had.

[Dukasaur]

OK, well you allude to the fact that you do indeed know how the dice work in the above statement. if you don't know how the dice work, how could you know how they don't work???

Why would the silent game management tell you how the dice work, but instruct you not to share any information about that with the rest of the playing community? From that perspective I'm even more upset because you've all but indicated that the volunteers have an advantage over the average playing player (in that they are aware of 'how the dice work") when paying players are being told by you that they have no right to know anything on the subject. If it is a closely guarded secret for the company, why are they sharing this information with volunteers who a) are actively playing in games/clan competition/tournaments with prizes and b) may not be volunteers tomorrow but could perpetuate their advantage.

The owner shares very little information with the volunteers. Certainly nothing about the internal workings of the game engine.

The knowledge that the notorious 50K file was discarded in January 2014 is based entirely on evidence observable to any member, namely, the fact that the average dice roll changed in January 2014. Prior to January 2014, the average dice roll on the site was 3.51. After January 2014 it is 3.50, which is the statistically expected value. Degaston collected a very large amount of data in 2013 which exposed the flaws in the 50K file (proved that it was too poor in 1s). There was a major site overhaul in January 2014, and although no announcement was made, it was obvious to anyone watching that the dice problem had been fixed. How it was fixed we don't know, but it is obvious that the old 50K file was discarded and that dice rolls moved toward statistically expected values.

Although there was never any announcement, none of this is effectively secret. The members of Conquer Club are very good at sleuthing out how things work. All of these things have been discussed ad nauseum in this very forum.

Subject: What can be done to reverse the decline?

However, I don't believe the site is using the 50K file any more. I believe that's old news.

I have not witnessed, nor been informed of, anything that would lead me to believe they've improved.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=194323&start=25#p4254756

The original data that degaston collected in August of 2013 no longer holds true.

At that time, almost everyone on the site had average dice stats of 3.51 instead of the expected value of 3.50. That was one of the key pieces of evidence that degaston used to establish that there was a shortage of 1s in the 50K file. http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=194323&start=25#p4254756

Later that same month, bigWham bought the site, and in January of 2014 made major structural changes, including new servers, a new method for calculating the scoreboard, etc., etc. Basically a major overhaul of the game engine.

Since then, the number of people with 3.51s has dwindled steadily. Most people who have joined since January of 2014 have 3.50 (if they have a large-enough number of games to be statistically useful).

It's unfortunate that bigWham is so secretive and won't make any announcements, but you can follow the timeline well enough.

• June 2010 lack switches to the 50K file
• August 2013 degaston crunches the numbers and proves the 50K file has a shortage of 1s. Note that it took 3 years of the 50K file to get to this point.
• January 2014 bigWham overhauls the site, and people who join after January of 2014 don't have a shortage of 1s in their dice stats, and even among people who joined before 2014 the sign of the bias starts to dwindle.

It's pretty clear to me that whatever else was done in the Jan. 2014 overhaul, it included an overhaul of the dice. All the data that degaston accumulated was before that date. Since then, there is less and less evidence of bias.

[Donelladan]

There was a major site overhaul in January 2014, and although no announcement was made, it was obvious to anyone watching that the dice problem had been fixed.

You are overestimating the average CC player I think.
There was nothing obvious to me that the dice changed. I barely ever check my dice stats, nor would I have noticed a change from 3.51 to 3.50, nor would I have think it was relevant.
I often read forums and therefore I knew about the "50k dice file" because it was often shared in the dice complaints topic, and therefore I assumed, haven't read otherwise, that it was still used.


But thanks for the information on the change

[mookiemcgee]

Thanks Duku, that type of post is helpful and highly relevant to the crux of my post.

Perhaps this question will go unanswered because you just aren't in a position to confirm or deny... but is it possible we are still using a 50k file, just one that was updated to get to an average dice roll of 3.50? I realize you are acting more as a historian and examining the timeline, rather than disseminating information for BigWham. I'd just be curious to know if that possibility was disproven or looked at by others.

Icepack, I understand now that you simply received this info from other volunteers. If the answer to my question above turns out to be "its certainly possible we are just using a different 50k file", then I would submit that you are incorrect in your initial assertion "Except that's not how the dice work, so there's that..." . You simply don't have enough info to make a claim like that.

If it turns out the answer to my question is "No we are no longer using a 50k dice file, or a file of any kind", then that at the very least is the pertinent information I was trying to get someone at CC to engage in productive conversation about. I will attempt to read through the forums again to try and find whoever proved this (and how) if that is the case.

To me this question is a very important one, and one that has much more place and value in CC's forum than 99% of the other junk in here (I am admittedly a part of it far to often)

[iAmCaffeine]

So IcePack doesn't actually know they've changed, he was just told they were so believes they were. I'd forgotten about that conversation with Duk, but I'm still unconvinced. I had a PM from bigWham saying they no longer used the 50k file, but he won't disclose anything about what it was replaced with, so how do we know if it's a better system or worse? Given the site has remained in decline, is it unreasonable to assume even cheaper methods are being used? I don't see why it's so hard to just say where the intensity cubes are being sourced from.

[IcePack]

Again, incorrect. I didn't receive it from other volunteers. I received it from the admin. We aren't using a 50k file. I'm not sure you're even reading what I type anymore, so maybe I should just say aliens are doing the dice. Because you'll read what you want anyway?

Icepack, I understand now that you simply received this info from other volunteers. If the answer to my question above turns out to be "its certainly possible we are just using a different 50k file", then I would submit that you are incorrect in your initial assertion "Except that's not how the dice work, so there's that..." . You simply don't have enough info to make a claim like that.

Thanks duka, I knew things had been discussed previously but had no idea where to go find it again. This was part of info I was referring to I believe there was more elsewhere.

OK, well you allude to the fact that you do indeed know how the dice work in the above statement. if you don't know how the dice work, how could you know how they don't work???

Why would the silent game management tell you how the dice work, but instruct you not to share any information about that with the rest of the playing community? From that perspective I'm even more upset because you've all but indicated that the volunteers have an advantage over the average playing player (in that they are aware of 'how the dice work") when paying players are being told by you that they have no right to know anything on the subject. If it is a closely guarded secret for the company, why are they sharing this information with volunteers who a) are actively playing in games/clan competition/tournaments with prizes and b) may not be volunteers tomorrow but could perpetuate their advantage.

The owner shares very little information with the volunteers. Certainly nothing about the internal workings of the game engine.

The knowledge that the notorious 50K file was discarded in January 2014 is based entirely on evidence observable to any member, namely, the fact that the average dice roll changed in January 2014. Prior to January 2014, the average dice roll on the site was 3.51. After January 2014 it is 3.50, which is the statistically expected value. Degaston collected a very large amount of data in 2013 which exposed the flaws in the 50K file (proved that it was too poor in 1s). There was a major site overhaul in January 2014, and although no announcement was made, it was obvious to anyone watching that the dice problem had been fixed. How it was fixed we don't know, but it is obvious that the old 50K file was discarded and that dice rolls moved toward statistically expected values.

Although there was never any announcement, none of this is effectively secret. The members of Conquer Club are very good at sleuthing out how things work. All of these things have been discussed ad nauseum in this very forum.

Subject: What can be done to reverse the decline?

However, I don't believe the site is using the 50K file any more. I believe that's old news.

I have not witnessed, nor been informed of, anything that would lead me to believe they've improved.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=194323&start=25#p4254756

The original data that degaston collected in August of 2013 no longer holds true.

At that time, almost everyone on the site had average dice stats of 3.51 instead of the expected value of 3.50. That was one of the key pieces of evidence that degaston used to establish that there was a shortage of 1s in the 50K file. http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=194323&start=25#p4254756

Later that same month, bigWham bought the site, and in January of 2014 made major structural changes, including new servers, a new method for calculating the scoreboard, etc., etc. Basically a major overhaul of the game engine.

Since then, the number of people with 3.51s has dwindled steadily. Most people who have joined since January of 2014 have 3.50 (if they have a large-enough number of games to be statistically useful).

It's unfortunate that bigWham is so secretive and won't make any announcements, but you can follow the timeline well enough.

• June 2010 lack switches to the 50K file
• August 2013 degaston crunches the numbers and proves the 50K file has a shortage of 1s. Note that it took 3 years of the 50K file to get to this point.
• January 2014 bigWham overhauls the site, and people who join after January of 2014 don't have a shortage of 1s in their dice stats, and even among people who joined before 2014 the sign of the bias starts to dwindle.

It's pretty clear to me that whatever else was done in the Jan. 2014 overhaul, it included an overhaul of the dice. All the data that degaston accumulated was before that date. Since then, there is less and less evidence of bias.

[DirtyDishSoap]

Does CC get promoted at all? I've only heard about this through word of mouth back in the day. I think there is a facebook page as well, but I seldom check.