Controlled Dice

[john9blue]

Concise description:

I propose that it be made impossible to win or lose four 3v2 battles in a row, and to lose four 3v1 battles in a row. If the attacker loses three 3v2 or 3v1 battles in a row, and random.org returns more losses, they should be thrown out until a different result (tie or win) is given. Similarly, if the attacker wins three 3v2 battles in a row, any subsequent wins should be thrown out until a different result appears.

I have had bad luck for most of my CC career, but recently the dice have been worse than usual for me. I am scared to play 1v1 games because I consistently get screwed over (even on Feudal and Age Of Realms), despite my deliberate efforts to remember the times when my luck is good (which is almost never). Not playing 1v1 games is a huge setback because it's hard to directly challenge people. To those who don't believe in luck, I can only say: be glad you aren't me. Maybe luck doesn't exist, but there are still far too many unfair wins and losses in CC.

I considered reviving the "no dice games" thread, but that would give rise to unbeatable strategies and more farming, so I made a new suggestion.

Specifics:

The odds of winning 3v2 four times in a row: 2.04%
The odds of losing 3v2 four times in a row: .74%
The odds of losing 3v1 four times in a row: 1.41%

As you can see, the change will affect less than 1 out of every 20 three roll streaks (the math for large streaks is complicated and I don't want to get into it). Furthermore, it will change them in a way that just about everyone will agree is for the better.

Even with the change, it is possible for the attacker to win/lose seven times more troops than the opponent. There can still be the occasional lucky streak... but none of this "I LOST 21-3!" crap. I mean really.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• Less cursing the dice and less anger.
• More fairness and more fun.

PLEASE don't just dismiss this, give it serious consideration. It would make the site a lot more fun and we would get less dice ranting threads.

[Night Strike]

Seems to me like this will just increase accusations of rigged dice (and almost lend credibility to that argument).

By the way, they aren't affecting you too much when you have a score that's higher than 90% of the site. I almost have a tiny bit of sympathy on those who are cooks.

[Qwert]

I also recently get realy strange dices-almost lost 600 points and still going down. Dont know what hepening,but these long period of bad dices,give me feel that dices is not random. If i throw real dices,chances to lost 10 throw in a row look realy impossible,but here these is normal.

[john9blue]

Seems to me like this will just increase accusations of rigged dice (and almost lend credibility to that argument).

Strictly speaking, yes, the dice will be "rigged", but in a way that I think everyone will appreciate. They will not be truly random anymore, but they will not favor any one player.

By the way, they aren't affecting you too much when you have a score that's higher than 90% of the site. I almost have a tiny bit of sympathy on those who are cooks.

Well, I want to shoot for the top like everyone else! But I keep getting gipped by the pips.

I also recently get realy strange dices-almost lost 600 points and still going down. Dont know what hepening,but these long period of bad dices,give me feel that dices is not random. If i throw real dices,chances to lost 10 throw in a row look realy impossible,but here these is normal.

Haha, I experienced that firsthand during our epic "battle of bad dice".

I'm not calling the randomness of the current dice into question, I'm suggesting that they not be truly random. Maybe controversial, but definitely beneficial.

[The Neon Peon]

I suggested something similar to this, yet saying that the dice odds should never be allowed to move 5% away from probability in both the positive and negative directions. However, it was shot down by a lot of people that disagreed with having weighted intensity cubes. Although I fail to see how making the dice less random for the purpose of being more fair is a bad thing.

[TheBro]

So far the random dice has given me an advantage. I'd like to see it kept completely random.

[Timminz]

If this were used, I know what I'd do every time I won 2 doubles in a row.

I don't like the idea at all. With semi-scripted dice, it seems to me, the attacking would be more monotonous. Less excitement. I love this game, and a big part of this game is the dice.

The dice giveth, and the dice taketh away. Sometimes a 4 can defeat a 20, and sometimes a 2 can stop a 16, and I, for one, wouldn't have it any other way.

[Night Strike]

They will not be truly random anymore, but they will not favor any one player.

That, my friend, is an oxymoron.

You can't say it's truly random AND favors someone.


By the way, I agree with Tim. Not knowing for sure how your rolls will fall adds to the game. I know I get a rush of adrenaline going for a kill that requires a 1v1 roll to win. Then there's the other cases where I run with so perfect dice that I don't know for sure what to do next since I wasn't expecting it.

[ronsizzle]

Seems to me like this will just increase accusations of rigged dice (and almost lend credibility to that argument).

By the way, they aren't affecting you too much when you have a score that's higher than 90% of the site. I almost have a tiny bit of sympathy on those who are cooks.

90 percent of the site doesnt play.

[john9blue]

I suggested something similar to this, yet saying that the dice odds should never be allowed to move 5% away from probability in both the positive and negative directions. However, it was shot down by a lot of people that disagreed with having weighted intensity cubes. Although I fail to see how making the dice less random for the purpose of being more fair is a bad thing.

That may be a better idea, but it's more complex and the coding would be harder. I was just looking for a solution that was easy to implement.

So far the random dice has given me an advantage. I'd like to see it kept completely random.

Something tells me Night Strike would have even less pity on you.

The idea is to not give any one player an advantage, it's to sort of "spread the luck" among everybody, and ensure that one person doesn't gain/lose too much. This is starting to sound vaguely like economics...

If this were used, I know what I'd do every time I won 2 doubles in a row.

I don't like the idea at all. With semi-scripted dice, it seems to me, the attacking would be more monotonous. Less excitement. I love this game, and a big part of this game is the dice.

The dice giveth, and the dice taketh away. Sometimes a 4 can defeat a 20, and sometimes a 2 can stop a 16, and I, for one, wouldn't have it any other way.

Actually, you wouldn't know. You could lose one, or come out even and win two more.

True, some people do get excited over miraculous victories. I cannot vouch for that as I am usually on the other end. It's always possible that the generator could throw out every other roll in a streak - like, if random.com returned 6 wins, it would display numbers 1, 2, 4, and 6. Might be hard to implement though. Or you could allow for three in a row and throw out the fourth one. Winning three in a row is pretty darn exciting if you ask me.

I don't think I've ever seen those two scenarios, though. The odds are ridiculously low- on the order of hundredths of a percent.

That, my friend, is an oxymoron.

Nope, it's not an oxymoron. Suppose the attacker and defender always lost the same number of troops (i.e. no dice games). Random? No. Does it favor one player? No.

You can't say it's truly random AND favors someone.

I know. I never said that anything was favoring anyone. What I said was that this system and the current system both favor nobody (although the new system would lessen the attacker's advantage by a very small amount).

Random implying fair does not mean that controlled implies unfair.

By the way, I agree with Tim. Not knowing for sure how your rolls will fall adds to the game. I know I get a rush of adrenaline going for a kill that requires a 1v1 roll to win. Then there's the other cases where I run with so perfect dice that I don't know for sure what to do next since I wasn't expecting it.

More opposition than I was expecting. Maybe because you have a different idea than the one I am trying to get across?

I'm going to change it to "throw out 4 in a row". Hope that's a bit better.

[The Neon Peon]

Actually, both are about as easy to code if you come up with the equation it uses before hand, one just has a longer equation. My old suggestion is below.

Concise description:

• New way of using dice.

Specifics:

• Okay, the last week for me has been complete BS with the dice. Firstly, I am still down 300 points, even though I have managed to gain 100 back yesterday since the bad luck streak started. I have been losing BS rolls like 30 v 15, 19 v 2, and 12 v 1. (these are rolls to break a bonus, in some cases worth a great deal and undefended. I am not an idiot that goes around attacking 3 v 3, or 2 v 1 and thinking I can win).
• So, here is my option to solve this dice crap to 90% of the extent. It is easiest to explain if I use and example.
  
  The dice will still be used, however, they will be forced to stay within 10% (or 15%, or 20%) of the 1 kill per loss mark. So, if in the first turn, I roll a dice an win 1 troop, the second roll will have to lose because then I would be at 100% win. If I have so far won 100 and lost 100, I could lose 10 troops in a row, before these modified dice would come into effect.
  
  Okay, so lets do this one dice at a time. Assume a 15% away from 50% range.
  
  Roll 1: I win 2 (100%) troops, the dice adjust themselves to win 1 troop, lose 1 (50%) troop
  Roll 2: I win 1, lose 1 (50%)
  Roll 3: I lose 2 (33%), dice adjust to win one, lose 1 (50%)
  Roll 4: I lose 2 (38%)
  Roll 5: I win 1, lose 1 (40%)
  Roll 6: I lose 2 (33%), dice adjust so that I win 1, lost 1 (41%)
  Roll 7: I win 2 (50%)
  Roll 8: I win 2 (56%)
  Roll 9: I win 2 (61%)
  Roll 10: I win 2 (65%)
  Roll 11: If I win 2, the dice adjust to win 1, lose 1 because I will have passed the 15% range of dice I can roll. I am able to lose 2 for 7 rolls, but then the dice will adjust themselves so that my win rate goes up.
  
  The more rolls I make, the less the dice adjust, since I have a wider range of possible rolls. Since in most games, hen you are going in for longer, the less you need very fair dice. But on the first round to break a bonus, they can be devastating. This prevents either a person keep on rolling 3 v 3 in the first round and winning because they got good dice, or someone not being able to win a single roll in a game.
• The theory is this: if the dice were completely equal, the games would never end. This type of dice allows the dice to vary from the normal, but not so far as that one person has a distinct advantage over the other. This is why the limit should probably be 10% or 15%

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• No games will be won or lost within the 1st round. We can obviously make this an option for those people who like doodle assassins.
• Although the dice may still be biased toward the favor of someone, the lower the limit for variation is set, the more strategy is involved in the game.

[john9blue]

Wow, that's even more extreme than my first suggestion. I am at least allowing for some lucky streaks (as they are part of what makes CC so exciting). The thing about yours is that you would have to keep track of every dice roll for every person for every game. Also, any rolls less than 10 men would get really predictable (for those of us who don't use auto attack). If that suggestion ever happens, it will almost definitely be as an option and not an overall site change. I'm trying to balance the dice for the entire site here in a subtle way.

[Witt13]

If i throw real dices,chances to lost 10 throw in a row look realy impossible,but here these is normal.

One thing to consider is when your playing here, you throw thousands upon thousands more dice than you do in real life. I've played my fair amount of risk games in real life, but not close to as many as I have during my time here at CC. And with that being said, having rolled so many dice, the nearly impossible rolls, but they are possible, are bound to happen.

So with everyone complaining about how the dice are rigged, those streaks of bad rolls stick in your mind more, because you have a predisposition the dices are rigged.

My 2 cents.

[Timminz]

So with everyone complaining about how the dice are rigged...

And the ones here, who are suggesting we should use rigged dice.