Conquer Club

Great job mods im one of the users who didnt wanna download an addon and yall put it on the side wear it is super accessible. Im finding that they console the shit out of me after a string of shit games. My boner is excite.

yeah, thanks to mods for adding this feature! now the truth is unvealed! finally!

L M S 4.7_________________________________all opponents
Luck Avg Roll 1's 2's 3's 4's 5's 6's Luck Avg Roll 1's 2's 3's 4's 5's 6's
Assault -32% 2.70 3 4 0 0 2 1 +44% 4.60 0 0 0 3 1 1
Defend -16% 3.11 2 2 2 1 0 2 -7% 3.33 2 2 5 2 3 1
Total -24% 2.89 5 6 2 1 2 3 +6% 3.65 2 2 5 5 4 2

yeah, there great!

L M S wrote:L M S 4.7_________________________________all opponents
Luck Avg Roll 1's 2's 3's 4's 5's 6's Luck Avg Roll 1's 2's 3's 4's 5's 6's
Assault -32% 2.70 3 4 0 0 2 1 +44% 4.60 0 0 0 3 1 1
Defend -16% 3.11 2 2 2 1 0 2 -7% 3.33 2 2 5 2 3 1
Total -24% 2.89 5 6 2 1 2 3 +6% 3.65 2 2 5 5 4 2

yeah, there great!

Your overall stats are all +0.

natty_dread wrote:

L M S wrote:L M S 4.7_________________________________all opponents
Luck Avg Roll 1's 2's 3's 4's 5's 6's Luck Avg Roll 1's 2's 3's 4's 5's 6's
Assault -32% 2.70 3 4 0 0 2 1 +44% 4.60 0 0 0 3 1 1
Defend -16% 3.11 2 2 2 1 0 2 -7% 3.33 2 2 5 2 3 1
Total -24% 2.89 5 6 2 1 2 3 +6% 3.65 2 2 5 5 4 2

yeah, there great!

Your overall stats are all +0.

which may be fine overall for you Mr., HOWEVER, that does nothing for me when every time I roll the invisible dice against the invisible people it matters. Maybe you are content with it....and thats fine, but when I make a move it counts every time. To hell with probability, odds, and randomness; each time I attack I do it for a purpose. Just because you don't care about every turn you take and just because you expect to lose doesn't mean I am and I do too. I am not ok with losing a 9v2 or a 6v1 or yesterday when I lost 31 troops while taking 13 in a singe battle....and never will submit to your expectation that shit happens sometimes. You can vehemently defend the system until your a blue in the face (and I know you will) but that doesn't change the rest of our minds. Every attack is made for a reason and used as an overall means to an end, mine are to win the game. Your continual ardent defense denotes an apathy on your part. Your general lack of enthusiasm toward actually winning every game you play because you don't seem to care about every individual e-roll of the dice you make is sad.
Why do you even have a monitor? Seems to me you should just log in, randomly click your mouse a few times and call it good. It seems that's all you care about anyway, that and explaining, ad nauseam, to all the rest of us how we should roll over and play dead like you do.

LMS, the overall luck should theoretically be +0... that means the dice ARE random. You are expecting them to be more than that, meaning they aren't random in YOUR favor. Thats what everything wants, meaning that's their idea (and your's) of random. WHen the overall luck is +0, that means everything is the way it should be.

QoH wrote:LMS, the overall luck should theoretically be +0... that means the dice ARE random. You are expecting them to be more than that, meaning they aren't random in YOUR favor. Thats what everything wants, meaning that's their idea (and your's) of random. WHen the overall luck is +0, that means everything is the way it should be.

not at all.
I am not talking about probability, odds or randomness here.


You are confusing expectation with hope.

I EXPECT to win 9v2....which is why I regularly attack with these numbers.
I only HOPE to win 9v8....which is why I rarely attack with these numbers.

But the point is that everything evens out in the end.

QoH wrote:But the point is that everything evens out in the end.

and thats fine, in the end.
I WANT the dice to be random and I am happy they are....but losing 9v2 is bullshit no matter how it gets justified, in the end.

Let me put it to you guys like this:

If you and your buddy are standing there, me and 8 of my buddies are standing there facing right at you, and you two and we all have the same guns, you and your buddy are going to die.

What if they got Clint?

I posted in another thread, but I like repeating myself - I got to -60, -40 in recent (important / tight) battles than darn, I screwed it back to evens, by autoing 1,100 with my 1,200 stack in a bore draw game.

I repeat, I think we should have a "streakiness" dice option, with comparisons to a bell curve (or whatever streaky normality gets measured by)

xeno wrote:My boner is excite.

Uuhh yeah, that's not peculiar at all.




Nope. Everything looks normal here to me. A guy who struggles daily to comprehend the complexities of the english language, is genuinely pleased with the new dice stat addon thus pops a shwance. Sounds about right.

Move along people.

Just to play devils advocate....

I fully expect that every now and then you will lose a roll in a 10v2 or similar situation, it`s just that they seem to happen far more regularly than you would expect. Losing a 10v2 roll should be rare, but it happens a LOT......

Oh, and I`d just like to add that I don`t get sexually excited in any way shape or form when I`m on CC. Ever.

L M S wrote:

QoH wrote:LMS, the overall luck should theoretically be +0... that means the dice ARE random. You are expecting them to be more than that, meaning they aren't random in YOUR favor. Thats what everything wants, meaning that's their idea (and your's) of random. WHen the overall luck is +0, that means everything is the way it should be.

not at all.
I am not talking about probability, odds or randomness here.


You are confusing expectation with hope.

I EXPECT to win 9v2....which is why I regularly attack with these numbers.
I only HOPE to win 9v8....which is why I rarely attack with these numbers.

I understand your feelings totally....
"Shit happens" is unfortunately the only reply you can get though
If it makes you feel any better, I have ever gone 20+ v 3 and lost, and the 3 defenders were still there - one of very many similar situations in fact.
Or in another case, I ever lost in 3 consecutive rounds, every single attacking army I had with 0 losses by the defender...
What you are in fact suggesting is for the dice to be loaded in favour of the force with superior numbers
unfortunately this is a radical change in the nature of the game
and frankly whatever new formula you apply to this "redesigned game", there will still be detractors

L M S wrote:which may be fine overall for you Mr., HOWEVER, that does nothing for me when every time I roll the invisible dice against the invisible people it matters. Maybe you are content with it....and thats fine, but when I make a move it counts every time. To hell with probability, odds, and randomness; each time I attack I do it for a purpose. Just because you don't care about every turn you take and just because you expect to lose doesn't mean I am and I do too. I am not ok with losing a 9v2 or a 6v1 or yesterday when I lost 31 troops while taking 13 in a singe battle....and never will submit to your expectation that shit happens sometimes. You can vehemently defend the system until your a blue in the face (and I know you will) but that doesn't change the rest of our minds. Every attack is made for a reason and used as an overall means to an end, mine are to win the game. Your continual ardent defense denotes an apathy on your part. Your general lack of enthusiasm toward actually winning every game you play because you don't seem to care about every individual e-roll of the dice you make is sad.
Why do you even have a monitor? Seems to me you should just log in, randomly click your mouse a few times and call it good. It seems that's all you care about anyway, that and explaining, ad nauseam, to all the rest of us how we should roll over and play dead like you do.

Funny how the forums sometimes twist people's perceptions.

You're speaking as if I, saying that the dice work as they should, am in the minority against the lots and lots of people who think, like you, that the dice are flawed in some way, and need to be fixed. You think that the majority of CC players feels the dice are not as they should be.

It's kind of telling, really. Confirmation bias is what happens when you pick out the instances that fit your preconceived view of the situation, and use those instances to back up your view - which forms a sort of feedback loop in your head. It is my opinion, that the dice complainers are those who are particularly suspectible to confirmation bias, and this seems to confirm it (no pun intended) - here, due to confirmation bias, you seem to feel that dice complainers are the majority of CC players, and the same confirmation bias leads you to believe that there is something wrong with the dice.

Now, before you get a hissy fit and attack me with rants and ad-hominems like dice complainers usually do when someone dares to challenge their views about the dice, please take a deep breath and remember that I'm just some invisible guy on the internet and my opinion doesn't mean shit to you in the long run. Yeah, I don't buy your view that the dice are flawed. So what?

Also: You say that I should want to win every roll, that every dice roll should be important to me. I should be craving to win every game I play. Or at least you say, that's how you feel about playing, and don't understand why I don't feel the same. To this I can only say that you are making some pretty broad assumptions based on limited evidence.

Yes, I do want to win the game I play. I do however also accept that I cannot always win, and I don't get all upset and blame external factors when I lose. Yes, one must strive towards victory, but one must also be able to accept and deal with defeat. It's like, you're playing a game of tennis, and the sun shines in your eye and the opponent scores the winning point. Will you go bad-mouting the judge, saying that the round should be played again because the conditions were not "fair" to you, or will you graciously accept that this time you lost, go shake the hand of the winner and move on...?

Buff McKagan wrote:Just to play devils advocate....

I fully expect that every now and then you will lose a roll in a 10v2 or similar situation, it`s just that they seem to happen far more regularly than you would expect. Losing a 10v2 roll should be rare, but it happens a LOT......

When you think about the 20,000+ active games going on, plus some ~20,000 active users, each often with a chance to roll, that is a heck of a lot of rolls a day.

This is somewhat out-of-date, but from the FAQ:

As of June 2010 we process 1,000,000 assaults per day.

. I can imagine your scenario happening a number of times a day!


--Andy

natty_dread wrote:

L M S wrote:which may be fine overall for you Mr., HOWEVER, that does nothing for me when every time I roll the invisible dice against the invisible people it matters. Maybe you are content with it....and thats fine, but when I make a move it counts every time. To hell with probability, odds, and randomness; each time I attack I do it for a purpose. Just because you don't care about every turn you take and just because you expect to lose doesn't mean I am and I do too. I am not ok with losing a 9v2 or a 6v1 or yesterday when I lost 31 troops while taking 13 in a singe battle....and never will submit to your expectation that shit happens sometimes. You can vehemently defend the system until your a blue in the face (and I know you will) but that doesn't change the rest of our minds. Every attack is made for a reason and used as an overall means to an end, mine are to win the game. Your continual ardent defense denotes an apathy on your part. Your general lack of enthusiasm toward actually winning every game you play because you don't seem to care about every individual e-roll of the dice you make is sad.
Why do you even have a monitor? Seems to me you should just log in, randomly click your mouse a few times and call it good. It seems that's all you care about anyway, that and explaining, ad nauseam, to all the rest of us how we should roll over and play dead like you do.

Funny how the forums sometimes twist people's perceptions.

You're speaking as if I, saying that the dice work as they should, am in the minority against the lots and lots of people who think, like you, that the dice are flawed in some way, and need to be fixed. You think that the majority of CC players feels the dice are not as they should be.

It's kind of telling, really. Confirmation bias is what happens when you pick out the instances that fit your preconceived view of the situation, and use those instances to back up your view - which forms a sort of feedback loop in your head. It is my opinion, that the dice complainers are those who are particularly suspectible to confirmation bias, and this seems to confirm it (no pun intended) - here, due to confirmation bias, you seem to feel that dice complainers are the majority of CC players, and the same confirmation bias leads you to believe that there is something wrong with the dice.

Now, before you get a hissy fit and attack me with rants and ad-hominems like dice complainers usually do when someone dares to challenge their views about the dice, please take a deep breath and remember that I'm just some invisible guy on the internet and my opinion doesn't mean shit to you in the long run. Yeah, I don't buy your view that the dice are flawed. So what?

Also: You say that I should want to win every roll, that every dice roll should be important to me. I should be craving to win every game I play. Or at least you say, that's how you feel about playing, and don't understand why I don't feel the same. To this I can only say that you are making some pretty broad assumptions based on limited evidence.

Yes, I do want to win the game I play. I do however also accept that I cannot always win, and I don't get all upset and blame external factors when I lose. Yes, one must strive towards victory, but one must also be able to accept and deal with defeat. It's like, you're playing a game of tennis, and the sun shines in your eye and the opponent scores the winning point. Will you go bad-mouting the judge, saying that the round should be played again because the conditions were not "fair" to you, or will you graciously accept that this time you lost, go shake the hand of the winner and move on...?

I love how vehemently you defend the dice....do you own random.org or something? Actually I think you just do it to get a rise out of everyone and you will continue until someone tells you your act is tired.
Anyway, my only point is that 9v2 (for example) shouldn't ever fail, if you do THAT math, its is 4 tries to take out that 2 stack unsuccessfully WITH "attackers advantage". That's the only point "dice complainers" are trying to make dude. You always make into this big ass thing that its not meant to be.
Your act is tired.

Obviously you didn't read this part

me wrote:Now, before you get a hissy fit and attack me with rants and ad-hominems like dice complainers usually do when someone dares to challenge their views about the dice, please take a deep breath and remember that I'm just some invisible guy on the internet and my opinion doesn't mean shit to you in the long run. Yeah, I don't buy your view that the dice are flawed. So what?

... and furthermore:

L M S wrote: Actually I think you just do it to get a rise out of everyone and you will continue until someone tells you your act is tired.

I love how you instantly try to dismiss any opposing viewpoints and opinions simply because you don't agree with them. Are you narrow-minded or is this some kind of defense-mechanism? After all, if you're based your whole ego on the premise that you're this misunderstood CC genius that would be on the top of the scoreboard if only the dices worked right, then it must be a pretty threatening idea to even consider that the dices wouldn't be the ones at fault... but, I digress.

L M S wrote:Anyway, my only point is that 9v2 (for example) shouldn't ever fail

Why shouldn't it "ever fail"? That's like saying that you should never throw any sixes because they're the largest number on the dice, or saying that nobody should ever win the lottery...

L M S wrote: That's the only point "dice complainers" are trying to make dude.

Is it? I would hope not, seeing how that is a totally illogical and irrational point to make.

I mean, what basis do you have to claim that 9 should never lose to a 2? Because it just "feels like it shouldn't happen"?

natty_dread wrote:... and furthermore:

L M S wrote: Actually I think you just do it to get a rise out of everyone and you will continue until someone tells you your act is tired.

I love how you instantly try to dismiss any opposing viewpoints and opinions simply because you don't agree with them. Are you narrow-minded or is this some kind of defense-mechanism? After all, if you're based your whole ego on the premise that you're this misunderstood CC genius that would be on the top of the scoreboard if only the dices worked right, then it must be a pretty threatening idea to even consider that the dices wouldn't be the ones at fault... but, I digress.

L M S wrote:Anyway, my only point is that 9v2 (for example) shouldn't ever fail

Why shouldn't it "ever fail"? That's like saying that you should never throw any sixes because they're the largest number on the dice, or saying that nobody should ever win the lottery...

L M S wrote: That's the only point "dice complainers" are trying to make dude.

Is it? I would hope not, seeing how that is a totally illogical and irrational point to make.

I mean, what basis do you have to claim that 9 should never lose to a 2? Because it just "feels like it shouldn't happen"?

We all read your (same post over and over again really) posts Natty, and just hear circus music in our heads. Try balancing a chair on your forehead while you post your next pièce de résistance. One, it will be at least mildly entertaining, and two, we would be more inclined to listen since you actually were attempting something new to go along with your tried and true forum regurgitation's.

So Natty, LMS has in his line up:

Dillinger
Ma Baker
John Wayne
Clint Eastwood
Bonnie
+Clyde
Stormin Norman
Bad ass McLinchey
James Cagney

in his line up, you have

Natty
Another Swedish care worker

Team 2 wins???????????????? Like bollocks is that random

L M S, you forget that natty's act won't ever get tired because it's being fueled by a nuclear reactor, not just some AA natty pulled off a shelf. A whole NUCLEAR REACTOR! I've seen it myself, it's huge. If you want natty's act to get tired, you'll have to destroy the nuclear reactor first, or severe the power connections or something. Oh, but that could get messy with all that nuclear waste. Very dangerous mission.

shieldgenerator7 wrote:L M S, you forget that natty's act won't ever get tired because it's being fueled by a nuclear reactor, not just some AA natty pulled off a shelf. A whole NUCLEAR REACTOR! I've seen it myself, it's huge. If you want natty's act to get tired, you'll have to destroy the nuclear reactor first, or severe the power connections or something. Oh, but that could get messy with all that nuclear waste. Very dangerous mission.

Who are you?

L M S wrote:

shieldgenerator7 wrote:L M S, you forget that natty's act won't ever get tired because it's being fueled by a nuclear reactor, not just some AA natty pulled off a shelf. A whole NUCLEAR REACTOR! I've seen it myself, it's huge. If you want natty's act to get tired, you'll have to destroy the nuclear reactor first, or severe the power connections or something. Oh, but that could get messy with all that nuclear waste. Very dangerous mission.

Who are you?

Oh, I guess we've never formally met. I'm shieldgenerator7, shield for short. Nice to meet you L M S.

shieldgenerator7 wrote:

L M S wrote:

shieldgenerator7 wrote:L M S, you forget that natty's act won't ever get tired because it's being fueled by a nuclear reactor, not just some AA natty pulled off a shelf. A whole NUCLEAR REACTOR! I've seen it myself, it's huge. If you want natty's act to get tired, you'll have to destroy the nuclear reactor first, or severe the power connections or something. Oh, but that could get messy with all that nuclear waste. Very dangerous mission.

Who are you?

Oh, I guess we've never formally met. I'm shieldgenerator7, shield for short. Nice to meet you L M S.

Oh joy.
Somebody wanna lend this kid $25?

L M S wrote:

shieldgenerator7 wrote:

L M S wrote:

shieldgenerator7 wrote:L M S, you forget that natty's act won't ever get tired because it's being fueled by a nuclear reactor, not just some AA natty pulled off a shelf. A whole NUCLEAR REACTOR! I've seen it myself, it's huge. If you want natty's act to get tired, you'll have to destroy the nuclear reactor first, or severe the power connections or something. Oh, but that could get messy with all that nuclear waste. Very dangerous mission.

Who are you?

Oh, I guess we've never formally met. I'm shieldgenerator7, shield for short. Nice to meet you L M S.

Oh joy.
Somebody wanna lend this kid $25?

I see you don't take too kindly to my comments. Oh well. See you later.