What does your dice analyzer tell you?

[RobinJ]

Well, I was just wondering if I'm the only one whose dice are a tad unproportional. Dice analyzer tells me that 3 things are wrong with my dice:
1) I roll too many 5s when attacking
2) The defender rolls too many sixes
3) I lose way more 3v1s than I should (down 10% on what it should be)

Anyone else got anything like this?

Btw, this is not a thread wining about the dice - just one that is purely out of interest.

[Aegnor]

1)I roll more 6's than anything else
2)My opponents throw more 2's than anything else
3)I win 3v2 2% more than I should
4)I threw 18406 dice.

[Stopper]

Is it true, that the more times you do a joke, the funnier it gets? Especially if it wasn't that funny in the first place?

Anyway, here are my results so far:

[Aries]

How do you show a picture of your dice analyzer?

(It's a pity that that's what mine actually looks like stopper )

[alex_white101]

Is it true, that the more times you do a joke, the funnier it gets? Especially if it wasn't that funny in the first place?

Anyway, here are my results so far:

nope im afriad its false. especially when it was just a tiny bit funny the first time

[Stopper]

How do you show a picture of your dice analyzer?

PRTSCNis your friend.

(It's a pity that that's what mine actually looks like stopper )

What, it looks like it's been hacked by an amateur...?

[jaybebo]

Mine tells me nothing due to the fact that I do not use Firefox...which may need to be changed to be able to utilize all these cool add-ons.

[Aries]

Thanks stopper This is mine

As you can see, my opponent throws alot of 6s compared to other throws

[tahitiwahini]

How do you show a picture of your dice analyzer?

(It's a pity that that's what mine actually looks like stopper )

Click in the Dice Analyzer window to give it focus and press ALT + PRTSCN, which copies the contents of the window into your clipboard.

Start MS Paint (usually in Start --> All Programs --> Accessories). Press CTRL + V, to copy the contents of your clipboard into the Paint application. Click on File --> Save As... , name the file and save as type JPEG. Go to http://imajr.com/ (or http://www.imageshack.com if that doesn't work), and upload the JPEG file you saved with your screen capture to the site. When it's finished uploading it will give you a URL link to your picture. Copy and paste that link into a message using {img}your link goes here{/img}, where the curly braces { and } are replaced with square brackets [ and ].

That's all there is to it. Good luck.

[Nephilim]

i've a question about the dice analyzer that i'm sure has been answered elsewhere, but i'm posting here rather than looking:

how exactly do you read that thing? i wonder b/c under "battle outcomes" we have 1v1, which actually means 1 die vs 1 die, so in the game it's actually a 2v1.

so all the rest of the battle outcomes would go:

3v2=really 4v2 in game
3v1=4v1
2v2=3v2
2v1=3v1
1v2=2v2
1v1=2v1

is that rite? so on the very sensitive subject of 3v2 attacks, i should actually be looking at the "2v2" numbers on my analyzer, i think.

maybe i've got this all wrong, but that has always confused me....

[tahitiwahini]

i've a question about the dice analyzer that i'm sure has been answered elsewhere, but i'm posting here rather than looking:

how exactly do you read that thing? i wonder b/c under "battle outcomes" we have 1v1, which actually means 1 die vs 1 die, so in the game it's actually a 2v1.

so all the rest of the battle outcomes would go:

3v2=really 4v2 in game
3v1=4v1
2v2=3v2
2v1=3v1
1v2=2v2
1v1=2v1

is that rite? so on the very sensitive subject of 3v2 attacks, i should actually be looking at the "2v2" numbers on my analyzer, i think.

maybe i've got this all wrong, but that has always confused me....

Yes, there's room for some confusion and it's not always clear from the context. A 4v2 army attack, results in a 3v2 dice attack. The Dice Analyzer refers to dice (not armies). The Gambit Battle Odds calculator always has you enter one less than the number of armies in the attacking force. In most cases context will disambiguate a 3v2 attack, but where that's not the case the dice or army modifiers help to eliminate any confusion.

[silvanthalas]

I've learned from Dice Analyzer that if you have a really shitty period of dice rolling, it'll take you a much longer period of time for the dice stats to balance back out.

[Astran]

I am new here, but it seems to me that, unless the dice are actually "loaded" an analysis of dice rolls has absolutely no predictive power beyond the probabilities that determine the values themselves. All you can really say is "I've been unlucky" or "I've been lucky", but what's the point? We're either naval gazing or getting superstitious.

[musicman_379]

Quick question. Is there a dice analyzer out there for people running on IE, or do I have to be using another browser for the analyzer?

It would be greatly appreciated if I could be pointed in the right direction.

[Captain Crash]

Mine tells me nothing due to the fact that I do not use Firefox...which may need to be changed to be able to utilize all these cool add-ons.

I changed from IE to FF and went from an 800 pt pvt up to Lt in days and am now hovering around capt!
The add-ons are available so you might as well use them...you're kidding yourself if you think you can consistently beat those who use them if you don't use them.

(BTW you can use IE and FF at the same time, it doesn't have to be one or the other. At our place I only use FF for CC and related stuff, everything else in the household is IE7 based)

Oh ... and I just upgraded from Troy's script to stocksr's v0.8 and have to say: It rocks!

[alex_white101]

1)mine tells me i roll more 3's than anything else, as does the defender.
2)i win a hell of a lot more 1 vs 2 than i should yet lose more 1 vs 1 than i should
3) everything else seems relatively normal.

[jaybebo]

Nothing yet...as I have not figured out how it works.

[tahitiwahini]

I am new here, but it seems to me that, unless the dice are actually "loaded" an analysis of dice rolls has absolutely no predictive power beyond the probabilities that determine the values themselves. All you can really say is "I've been unlucky" or "I've been lucky", but what's the point? We're either naval gazing or getting superstitious.

Exactly.

It has no predictive power whatsoever.

It's just a look at a snapshot of dice rolls (for your attacks only) the sole value of which is to let you look at your results and say I've been lucky here, unlucky there.

It is interesting to see how close the expected and actual results become given a sufficient sample size. For the rational it's enough to put their minds at rest that in the long run the good and bad dice balance out. For the superstitious it does absolutely nothing.

[tahitiwahini]

Quick question. Is there a dice analyzer out there for people running on IE, or do I have to be using another browser for the analyzer?

It would be greatly appreciated if I could be pointed in the right direction.

No it's an add-on for Mozilla Firefox only. Of course, there's no technical reason why you couldn't download and install Firefox for the sole purpose of using the Dice Analyzer. You could continue to use IE7 (if that's your wish) for everything else.

[Stopper]

I am new here, but it seems to me that, unless the dice are actually "loaded" an analysis of dice rolls has absolutely no predictive power beyond the probabilities that determine the values themselves. All you can really say is "I've been unlucky" or "I've been lucky", but what's the point? We're either naval gazing or getting superstitious.

Oh, believe you me, once you've got 100 games under your belt, you will become absolutely convinced that the defenders' dice are loaded towards 6. I doubt there's a soul here at CC who hasn't wondered that at some point - at least at the back of their mind.

As TW has said, that's the main reason for the analyzer - just to reassure you of the reliability of the dice.

Well, up to a point. Some people then start complaining that, although the overall results are OK, the dice are too "streaky" - but they only ever complain about their losing streaks, not their winning ones.

[alex_white101]

i roll more 1's than anything else now then 3's from 10,000 dice i roll more 1's than anythin else, unbelievable, and the defender rolls more 3's than anything else.

[RobinJ]

I am new here, but it seems to me that, unless the dice are actually "loaded" an analysis of dice rolls has absolutely no predictive power beyond the probabilities that determine the values themselves. All you can really say is "I've been unlucky" or "I've been lucky", but what's the point? We're either naval gazing or getting superstitious.

Oh, believe you me, once you've got 100 games under your belt, you will become absolutely convinced that the defenders' dice are loaded towards 6. I doubt there's a soul here at CC who hasn't wondered that at some point - at least at the back of their mind.

As TW has said, that's the main reason for the analyzer - just to reassure you of the reliability of the dice.

Well, up to a point. Some people then start complaining that, although the overall results are OK, the dice are too "streaky" - but they only ever complain about their losing streaks, not their winning ones.

Yep, that's exactly what I wonder when luck is against me cos the number of sixes rolled against me in 3v1s is shocking. I've had to learn to be more cautious at times and wait until I have surplus armies, just in case something goes wrong.

[IronE.GLE]

Dice Distribution for myself and defender is almost perfectly equal all the way down the board with the exceptions being I roll 3's 17% of the time while my opponent rolls 5's 17% of the time.



3 vs 2 -- 1728/1532/1353 for a 37% win, which I feel it pretty good

Where it goes south for me is:

3 vs 1 -- 2688/2010 for a 57% win.

Basically I'm getting owned and losing 43% of my armies when I attack countries that only have 1 army on them. Looking at other people's charts, I should be closer to 66% - 68% wins when I'm attacking 3 vs 1. I normally don't pay attention to the analyzer until a thread like this comes up, but I can honestly say I'm not surprised by the 3 vs 1 winning percentage because it literally seems like every time I attack a country with 1 army on it, I lose at least one army. When I use Auto-Attack(Suicide) I feel like I lose even more often. I wish the analyzer would show overall stats like it does and also break it down into manual attacks and auto attacks. That would be very interesting to see.

As a result of my piss poor dice in 3 vs 1 situations, I've learned (very quickly I may add) that I need to have serious # advantage before I launch any major attacks on fairly undefended bonus territories. This either results in a dominating win for me or losing without ever launching a major assault on the other players due to waiting too long to act.

On the other hand, I must admit that when I attack very large forces (25+) with a force equal to or slightly greater than the territory I am attacking, I seem to lose very little armies a majority of the time. So breaking through defenses doesn't seem to be a problem for me, it's the cleaning up of the interior countries that kills me.

[tahitiwahini]

As a result of my piss poor dice in 3 vs 1 situations, I've learned (very quickly I may add) that I need to have serious # advantage before I launch any major attacks on fairly undefended bonus territories. This either results in a dominating win for me or losing without ever launching a major assault on the other players due to waiting too long to act.

On the other hand, I must admit that when I attack very large forces (25+) with a force equal to or slightly greater than the territory I am attacking, I seem to lose very little armies a majority of the time. So breaking through defenses doesn't seem to be a problem for me, it's the cleaning up of the interior countries that kills me.

Very interesting comments.

In the second paragraph I think you're just seeing the effect of a larger sample size resulting in your actual results more closely matching your expected results. That is, in the attacks you are making the attacker really does have an advantage over the defender. Therefore, the more attacks made the more likely your actual results will be favorable to you as the attacker.

When you make fewer attacks as you do when you attack with smaller forces against smaller forces you are likely to see more variation due to the smaller sample size and therefore to experience actual outcomes that differ more greatly from the expected ones.

[IronE.GLE]

I see your point, however I'm specifically talking about instances when I have 20 or so armies and try to take over 6 territories with 1 army each. More often than not, when I'm finished taking over those 6 territories I end up with 4 or 5 armies left of the original 20. I realize that I'm leaving 5 behind to occupy conquered territories, but I'm still losing 9 or 10 armies to the 6 defending armies. Now say that I have 20 and am attacking 3 countries, one with 12 armies and the other two with 1 army each. More often than not, I'll lose only 1 or 2 armies to the main force of 12, then lose 4 or 5 straight rolls to the 1 countries with army on them. It's quite frustrating as I'd rather lose a few more to the larger force so that I don't feel like my soldiers got drunk after the first battle.

Not sure if I'm actually making any sense right now as I've had very little sleep in the last 48. Damned work, school, CC and family time make it very difficult to find time for sleep