Sometimes I think the rolls are biased

[Drainbamaged]

I mean, how many armies can you lose when attacking 3 to 1? I think my ratio of defeated / lost armies in such attacks is well below 1.

Grumble.

(For reference:

Attacker wins 855/1296 = 65.97%
Defender wins 441/1296 = 34.03%)

[AndrewB]

If someone would ever to join all threads created about crappy dices it would be the loooooongest thread of CC (at least in the general discussion).

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/search.php?search_keywords=dice%20crappy

[Drainbamaged]

I'm not surprised.

[Anarchist]

I hear you there
ofcourse it works both ways

could always suggest a battle strategy?

[vic]

you problem is lack of training of forces... feed them and make sure they are not around any loose women.

Always keep a few troops away from the action in boot camp.

[Dlakavi]

I mean, how many armies can you lose when attacking 3 to 1? I think my ratio of defeated / lost armies in such attacks is well below 1.

Grumble.

(For reference:

Attacker wins 855/1296 = 65.97%
Defender wins 441/1296 = 34.03%)

Get dice analyzer, and then post your numbers here in a month.
You will be surprised (or to ashamed to post)

[Drainbamaged]

I would like statistics not only on my rolls, but on my rolls in relation to my enemies' rolls; on my successful and unsuccessful attacks.

Where can I find this Dice Analyzer?

[Dlakavi]

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5655

[Lone.prophet]

64.86% (-1.11%) / 35.14% (1.11%)

[gerry22]

I mean, how many armies can you lose when attacking 3 to 1? I think my ratio of defeated / lost armies in such attacks is well below 1.

Grumble.

(For reference:

Attacker wins 855/1296 = 65.97%
Defender wins 441/1296 = 34.03%)

Get dice analyzer, and then post your numbers here in a month.
You will be surprised (or to ashamed to post)

IF for example the dice "could/are" rigged, tell me what good and what point you are trying to make by example of a "Dice Analyzer".

IF the dice can be rigged, Only Some can do it and They "only some" would use it when they really needed it, Right?

Well,

1. How often would you be subject to cheating of this kind?
2. How much "really" would this effect a long term "Analaysis" of your dice rolls?

The answer is it wouldn't show up on a long term analysis of your dice rolls, it would have a subtle effect that would be regarded as just unlucky and which could change if you didn't encounter a cheat for say a month.

What it will do is make you sensitive to honest bad beats. If you lose 21 armies attacking a country of 1, lose 12 attacking a country of one, lose 10 attacking a country of 2(which you don't recieve a card because of), ALL against the same player in the same game, Worse if you encounter him a second time and it happens again. THIS shakes your confidence in the dice. After something like this happening you start feel small beats like losing 5 straight rolls against 2 as though they're massive beats "Cheating".

It doesn't matter what the dice say, because we can't see the dice rolling for real, in front of our eyes, we are always going to suspicous about really bad beats, if we let ourselves.

Frankly if you have to cheat in this way your an awfull Risk Player and just don't get it. The game Risk, just like Chess and any other game of this nature are popular mainly because of one thing. The Victory and the loss is down to one person, You and You alone. There's no other player to give credit to, no other player to thank, no other player to attribute blame. There is a great challenge in this. If you cheat in any way, any way whatsoever, this aspect of the game is lost and therefore in theory you are in fact playing a different game. I happen to like Risk for the game it is and the good games in my experience far out weight the bad.

Every battle is won before it is ever fought. -- Sun-tzu