One more thing about the dice.

[steelplayin]

MAN RULE"everyone say aye?...AYE" good post AAFITZ

[Major Henderson]

I know the dice are random, its just think that there unfair.

New site for DICE!

[b.k. barunt]

Again, Iceman, why can't we use the Risk II feature you spoke of?

[Xayath]

i would wonder if there was a way to modify to favor obvious differences in armies. i should not lose more than three armies in a 10vs. 1 contention.

say maby this

Troop/Unit difference Modifier

(-x) though 9 0

10-19 1

20-25 2

26-30 3

31-35 4

36-40 5

40+ 6


Now the modifier would be randomly (or not) distributed between the three dice you have. This would help eliminate ending up with only five men after a battle that was 30 to 5. I mean The Spartan Stand was historic but so were the Spartans. 300 against Millions is almost improbable to being impossible. even now i wonder if it was really the way it happened.

There should be something to favor excessive differences in armies...

[The Fall Guy]

THE DICE ARE RIGGED I TELL YOU!!! RIGGED!!!! I've lost 16-1 and then 9 more men when it was 10-6. I can't get a break. My opponents can wipe me out and not lose a guy, but me? Nope. (SIGH) I feel a little better, but there has to be another way rather than these dice!

[gimil]

you just need to learn when to stop attacking. its your own fault youve no men not the dice

[The Fall Guy]

Thanks. What a relief. Makes me feel so much better.

[The1exile]

Your armies: french

Their armies: spartan.

Result? Rubbishy rolls.

[SouthParker]

This site sucks man. I just lost every armie possible on the board in a 1 vs 1 trying to get my opening card. That's not unlucky, that's rigged.

[cena-rules]

then dont let the door hit you on the way out.

[gimil]

mate you've won 9 out of your first 10 games and your complaining?

I dropped to 700 points before i started climbing the ranks.

Suck it up

[misterman10]

This guy is a freaking crybaby whiner. He plays all 1v1 games, which are totally determined by luck (THE DICE) and has won 90% of them. Now he comes in here crying about his dice.

I just lost every armie possible on the board in a 1 vs 1 trying to get my opening card.

LMFAO, I hope you had fun trying to attack 1v1

[ATHFmeatwad]

OK, I didn't see any post for this after a search, I didn't want to go through 68 pages or so looking at all of the threads so I only read the first page. Sorry if this is a repeat.

I read on here that it is human psychology to remember the negative over the positive. I believe this to be somewhat true. Having said that I would like to say that I have 2 parrents who are psychologists. I feel I know quite a bit about the subject. I submit that the following is not an instance of only remembering the negative.

Now... not to deminish this AWSOME FREE WEB SITE... OR its creators... but the DICE SUCK LAMERS. I admit that what ever construction you have for its (R)andom (N)umber (G)enerator is probably STATISTICALLY accurate, but I say... just like in RISK II, that it's RNG is not a NATURAL NG. I don't care what you think, but loosing 2 die on 6-8 consecutive rolls as an attacker in 4 different simultaneous games is not realistic and hardly happens in actual sit down and physically roll the dice on a board risk once! Attacking is suppose to have great advantage because you have 3 dice.

I have a suggestion for this reason, and even if you DON'T agree with the above, you may still like this idea. I suggest that dice ROLLS be RECORDED in the GAME LOG. Even if you don't think that the dice are un-natural as I do, it is still a good idea to implement this. It would help to make the game more interesting in being able to see how badly someone lost... or won! DONE SORRY FOR THE LENGTH.

GREAT SITE!!!

[misterman10]

too many words

aaaah

[pepperonibread]

You can download a program which statistically analyzes your dice here. Maybe not exactly what you were looking for, but something to look at.

[Honibaz]

It would be really complicated, but if you really want those dice rolls recorded then...

[lackattack]

I second pepperonibread's suggestion to use the dice analyzer.

I'm really posting to correct ATHFmeatwad - we don't use a RNG, the numbers from random.org are indeed natural random numbers.

[Rocketry]

shuddup about the dice - there fine.

Rocketry

[yorkiepeter]

shuddup about the dice - there fine.

Rocketry

on a lucky streak are we?

[misterman10]

shuddup about the dice - there fine.

Rocketry

on a lucky streak are we?

no, I've been hacking them for him

[Rocketry]

shuddup about the dice - there fine.

Rocketry

on a lucky streak are we?

nope i just understand probability

no, I've been hacking them for him

dont tell them lol...

[AAFitz]

I second pepperonibread's suggestion to use the dice analyzer.

I'm really posting to correct ATHFmeatwad - we don't use a RNG, the numbers from random.org are indeed natural random numbers.

I thought at first you were flaming the guy, but now I see thats his real name

and in response to the thead... there would indeed be a huge advantage with 3 dice over 2, if the defender did not win with ties. You are throwing attacking dice with 1 through 6, the defender is effectively throwing dice 2 through 7. that negates a large part of the advantage.

There is still an advantage over time in attacking, but not always in the short run. This would cease to be a game, if there were any more of an advantage. Whoever went first would win. Ive almost taken a team out on round 2, and many on round 3. This would happen on every game if the attacker had any more of an advantage.

after 2000 games, the dice act the same for me as they always have... sometimes very good, sometimes very bad, but 80% of the time, they are evenly balanced, and therefore random.

If you play one game at home, you wont see anything strange. If you play one game in here, you probably wont either.

However, if you play 2000 games at home, after playing some games for months at a time with massive armies, and unleashing 100's of dice at a time, you will indeed see some streaks that would seem unbelievable.

But since no one plays more than the occasional game at home, they remember nothing that crazy, but play hundreds or thousands in here, and see a massive win or loss, and deduce that the dice arent random.

You just cant compare the two because you havent played enough of the other. We see a few posts complaining about a few crazy rolls. But if everyone posted the number of times they got normal rolls, you wouldnt even see the other posts. They would be such a small percentage that they wouldnt be worth mentioning.

Your parents can explain that people are 9 times more likely to complain about something than compliment it. That when you win because of luck, you will want to believe it is because of skill, and when you lose believe it is because of bad luck. This game is indeed a game of psychology, and not of luck... an individual game can indeed be influenced by luck, but over time, if you lose you arent playing well, and if you are winning, you are.

The dice have proven themselves to be random, with over millions of dice thown. I myself am way over 200000 of them, and see no reason to suspect they arent random.

They are generated randomly, played randomly at different times, by different players. You just dont get more random than that.

[uzless]

The analyzer says the dice are fine but in reality they are NOT.

What the analyzer doesn't show you is what value of the dice come up for the defender when it rolls 3 v 1 or 3 v 2. etc


I've kept track of over 1000 rolls of 3 v 1 and the defender rolls a 4,5,6 102% more times than it rolls a 1,2,3.

Trust me, this is true and is a fault of the analyzer for not breaking it down this way. The dice on 3 v 1 ARE FAULTY. Data doesn't lie.

[AndyDufresne]

If you think the analyzer is broken, I suggest creating a better enhanced one to prove your point of the dice being 'NOT fine'


--Andy

[Hyronimus]

First off COOL site I love this ....but


I have got to agree with the original poster....

the algorithm for the die sucks. The dies rolls are not truly random. Full stop.

I know its virtually impossible to have a perfect mathematical random algorithm on a computer but there MUST be some kind of glitch.

its possible to predict throws with some degree of certainty the results. If defender throws 2 die and gets 6 + 5 as sure as eggs is eggs if you attack a gain immediately he will roll either 6 + 4 or 6 + 6. if you cease attacking and attack elsewhere the pattern is broken if you go back.

Also with three attack die you seem to roll a silly number of repetitions 4 + 3 + 3 or 2 + 2 + 1 all in a spurt....again breaking off the attack and refreshing 'cures' this.

I have only been playing on here for a few weeks but I have played R**k for years with other games which involve multiple D6 throws. I also design games ...... I have thrown fistfuls of D6 in games for ages and have rarely seen consistently poorly spread results.

It is not just a case of 'remembering the bad times' or 'not remembering when you are throwing all 6's - come on! thats childish !..

Alas there is something genuinely the matter. I don't know what it is. I'm not a programmer or into fractal Calculus etc but I do not unfortunately it diminishes the fun and fairness of an otherwise superb site and great game.