Dice misconceptions.
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 4:57 amI used to think the dice were jinxed too. I learned. I'm not the happy fluffy type quoting probabilities and how the dice even out etc. Instead I looked at the odds and how to use the probabilities to my advantage. My game has stepped up a whole lot since then, here is some of the reasons how:
1. Attack over Defence: You have 20 defending, against 20 attacking. A misconception in this scenario is your safe, you couldn't possibly lose, afterall defence is better than attack right? WRONG. Whilst the attack versus defence dice rolling the same values will favour the defender, the attack dice have three and not two. Soon as I realised that I dont need 40 to conquer 20 armies my game raised a level. So if you can attack without compromising your game, do so. Suck it pacifist hippies!
2. First round attacks (6v3) are doomed: It sucks, 6v3, and you lose 2 armies straight off. The misconception here is that 6v3 is doomed and you should never do it, but the fact is you still have as good a chance as point number one. The difference is that you have only 1 and a half chances (ish) to win that battle. The dice in point one get a chance to even out more. Of course there is every chance that they wont; Take this example, 60v30 armies, and you lose 2 straight of the bat. Now I think you can figure out why 6v3 are less advisable, but not dictated by some mythical dice god.
3. The dice are jinxed, I never rolled such odds with dice, you asshole!: I agree, the dice ARE jinxed, just not jinxed any more or less than manually thrown dice. The reason you never thrown such dice manually is because you've never thrown so many 1000's of dice before, as you have done on CC.
4. But I lost a 12v2!!!!!: Haven't we all? One solution is to pray to the almighty dice god and hit auto-attack. The other solution is to figure out how many armies are you willing to lose and hit attack until you either win or lose that amount of armies. I prefer the second option, though since i'm not Spock I have the human tendancy to go for the first one now and again.
MG, prays to the dice lord, despite all his anti-dice lord rhetoric.
1. Attack over Defence: You have 20 defending, against 20 attacking. A misconception in this scenario is your safe, you couldn't possibly lose, afterall defence is better than attack right? WRONG. Whilst the attack versus defence dice rolling the same values will favour the defender, the attack dice have three and not two. Soon as I realised that I dont need 40 to conquer 20 armies my game raised a level. So if you can attack without compromising your game, do so. Suck it pacifist hippies!
2. First round attacks (6v3) are doomed: It sucks, 6v3, and you lose 2 armies straight off. The misconception here is that 6v3 is doomed and you should never do it, but the fact is you still have as good a chance as point number one. The difference is that you have only 1 and a half chances (ish) to win that battle. The dice in point one get a chance to even out more. Of course there is every chance that they wont; Take this example, 60v30 armies, and you lose 2 straight of the bat. Now I think you can figure out why 6v3 are less advisable, but not dictated by some mythical dice god.
3. The dice are jinxed, I never rolled such odds with dice, you asshole!: I agree, the dice ARE jinxed, just not jinxed any more or less than manually thrown dice. The reason you never thrown such dice manually is because you've never thrown so many 1000's of dice before, as you have done on CC.
4. But I lost a 12v2!!!!!: Haven't we all? One solution is to pray to the almighty dice god and hit auto-attack. The other solution is to figure out how many armies are you willing to lose and hit attack until you either win or lose that amount of armies. I prefer the second option, though since i'm not Spock I have the human tendancy to go for the first one now and again.
MG, prays to the dice lord, despite all his anti-dice lord rhetoric.
