The Improbable Always Wins....WTF?

[natty dread]

So then why find the need to interject in the "dice bitch" threads?

The forums are a public place where anyone is entitled to state their opinion on any topic. If you post on a public forum, you should expect that people are not going to just shut up if they disagree with you.

If you were really so content with the dice, wouldn't you just let people have a discussion about why they don't like the dice and what they think is wrong with them?

See above.

Why the need to antagonize and snub?

I don't have any need to antagonize. I state how I feel about the dice, I also state how I feel about excessive dice complaints. No matter how cordial I try to keep my tone, most of the time it's the dice-bitchers who start throwing insults at the first sign of someone not agreeing with their view.

Why try and force people to believe the same as you? Can't you just let the threads exist and ignore them, much the same way you probably would deal with a discussion about religions you don't agree with or people who believe in the supernatural. If you didn't believe in God would you feel the need to try and convince anyone who does that God doesn't exist?

Since you brought the god analogy into this, I'm going to use the same metaphorical tools here.

I have no problem if you believe in god. I have no problem with other people believing in different stuff than what I believe. However, when I walk downtown at the railway station and I see some fundamentalist whackjobs who push their jesus-flyers in my face, and let's say if I had children... if I had children, and some crazy fundie preacher started ranting at them, accusing them of being sinners, and scaring them with stories of eternal damnation, I would damn well take offense. Because at that point those people are not respecting my beliefs, and are trying to push their own beliefs into my face.

And let's say, that there's a forum, where I might run into people who believe differently than I do. That's ok, they can believe what they wish. But when the crazy fundies start publicly posting stuff that is blatant misinformation, like earth being 6000 years old and all that crap - whether they do it on purpose or are just misguided - I feel obligated to refute those claims.

Similarly, if you wish to claim that the dice are not random, or flawed in some way, I want to see some objective evidence. If you just wanted to "vent" about it, you could do it on private forums. Or in the offtopic forum I guess. Or just write about it in your blog.

But when you post in GD, and you demand the dice system to be changed because you think it's flawed, it's not just venting, and it's not just a matter of your personal opinion or belief, since it can potentially also affect my gaming experience - if you happen to get your way with the admin. So you can see I again feel obligated to refute any misinformation, and present my own view of things.

That's how civilized society works, you know: you present your point of view, and I either agree and support it, or disagree and try to refute/counter it with my own point of view.

[SuicidalSnowman]

So then why find the need to interject in the "dice bitch" threads? If you were really so content with the dice, wouldn't you just let people have a discussion about why they don't like the dice and what they think is wrong with them? Why the need to antagonize and snub? Why try and force people to believe the same as you? Can't you just let the threads exist and ignore them, much the same way you probably would deal with a discussion about religions you don't agree with or people who believe in the supernatural. If you didn't believe in God would you feel the need to try and convince anyone who does that God doesn't exist?

Hello MNDuke,

If this post was directed at my previous post, I will certainly answer, but let me start by saying that I find this highly offensive.

I have posted in a few "dice bitch" threads, but when I mentioned how many posts I have "read," that is what I meant: I have read 220 and some odd posts. I frequently don't post in these threads, or others. I only post unless I have something that I personally deem worthwhile to say (aside from clan or user group forums, where I do goof off with friends).

Generally, my posts in such threads are either constructive help or genuine questions. For example, I discussed, at length, with user Radaga sometime ago statistics and probability. At one point, I used heavy sarcasm, and a fellow poster commented, "Wow, that was really rude to Radaga." I immediately responded that it was not a personal attack on anyone, I was merely trying to convey feelings about a broad general topic. After all, I felt Radaga was misguided on his views of dice, but otherwise I thought he was a cool guy (or possibly gal) and we even played a game or two together.

In this particular topic, I posted first that I enjoyed Andy's responses. He can be a funny monkey at times, and I think it is great that the Community Manager (or whatever his title is these days) can interact with the community in a positive way. I stand by those statements and posts not to "antagonize and snub" but instead to "enjoy and interact."

My second post was a genuine question: How can the dice be improved? This is something that, as I originally posted, I mean with genuine concern. I frequently hear complaints about the dice, but I am always wondering how one could improve them. There is a suggestions forum where, when users have ideas for ways to improve the site, they can post and the community can comment, and hopefully bring it to the administration's attention. If there is 1) a better option than random dice or 2) a better way to randomize the current dice I would be very interested in hearing about it, and helping it through the suggestions forum. I don't think this is in any way antagonistic to your purpose, in fact, it seems to be directly aligned with your purpose.

The third post was an answer to your question. While I do agree with Natty Dread's response, that the burden should be on you to demonstrate (factually) the ineffectiveness of the current dice, I also thought perhaps a response was in order. I gave a list of genuine reasons why I think the current dice system works. These are all true reasons. If any of them are antagonistic, I apologize. Next time, I encourage you to phrase your question differently, so I can know that you don't want an honest answer, but rather an agreeable one, and I can refrain from posting.

I am wondering if perhaps you did not want an answer at all, such that your initial question was in fact rhetorical. If this is the case, please accept my apologies. When things are typed, it can often be difficult to understand the underlying meaning unless it is clearly conveyed with the correct words and grammar.

Hopefully this next paragraph will be the most helpful. As a few other posters have pointed out, the General Discussion forum is open to all (well, I suppose those with forum or site bans are not allowed). If you are looking for a place to complain about the dice without hearing someone who disagrees with you, perhaps you would consider starting a social usergroup. If you have ten members who feel likewise (and I am sure they are out there, even if you are the most vocal, I am confident others exist) you can apply for a special usergroup and be given your own forum. There, you and people who feel the same way could get together and talk about this or anything else without interruption.

Now, I finally must say that if your post was directed at me, I find it offensive. I come here to have a discussion, not have my religious beliefs assumed or vilified. But then again, a few other users have already responded, perhaps you meant it to them. In any case, I hope my explanation will at least give you (and of course, anyone else reading this) the understanding that I do not intend to antagonize or snub, and that I will keep my religious or evangelical leanings as personal information at this time.

I do hope you find this post agreeable and informative. Perhaps we can discuss it further over a few games? I think I would enjoy it, and if you want we can agree to either frequently discuss the dice, or not mention them at all. Please let me know.

Happy Gaming,
-Suicidal Snowman

[rdsrds2120]

When I looked at the title of this thread again, a new thought occurred to me. If the improbable is always winning, doesn't that nullify the idea that it's improbable and in fact make it the probable? Just saying.

-rd

[JelleR]

You guys need to get one thing straight.

Lots of complaints about the dice doesnt mean something is actually wrong with them.

Its just human thinking at its finest (or not so finest actually ). I actually suggest that all of you dice haters pick up the book "Predictably Irrational". Gives great insight on how your mind can play tricks on you.

For example:

The root of all superstition is thatman observes when it hits but not when it misses.
90% of the people think that they are in the group above average drivers. This equates very well to dice bitching: everybody is unlucky, because they are obviously superawesome at the game.

Fallacies like this get discussed at length.

[MNDuke]

Yawn.

[maasman]

If you don't think anything is wrong with the dice, why post at all? Why try to stir up trouble unless that is what you are looking to do?

If you think there is something wrong with the dice, why post at all? Why try to stir up trouble unless that is what you are looking to do?

[JelleR]

I'm not yawning. I find your stubborness fascinating.

[Evil Semp]

Just answer this question:

If you don't think anything is wrong with the dice, why post at all? Why try to stir up trouble unless that is what you are looking to do?

I think I can answer this question. Because it will be like so many other threads on different topics. The posters will say something to the extent that everybody is complaining about it.

[MNDuke]

Not looking to stir up trouble. Mainly just trying to find reason and resolution. Wanting to have a rational meaningful discussion because I do feel that there is something inherently wrong with the dice. I do believe that the streakiness has increased significantly and reduced the game play, strategy and overall enjoyment. Before my membership expires, I would like to see something done or I will not be renewing like so many others. Yes, just because a lot of people perceive something doesn't make it absolute. But the actions of many of the older, more respected members of the cc community, and not just them, would have me to believe something differently. Now, unless they are just focusing on the bad as well, something is wrong. People who have been here for years and years have given up because they don't like the behavior of the new dice. I would think their experience would account for something. That they have something to draw from. So based on my experiences and the experience of others, I would say new dice bad. Random yes. Streaky yes. If the streaks were fixed, I would be satisfied with the new dice. I'm just tired of the unbalanced game play resulting from the streakiness of the dice. Tired of the same old retorts, that they even out over time, too bad that's after they already cost me a game and someone else theirs. After its taken away from my enjoyment and stolen someone else's as well. Now everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Let those who feel the dice are broke have theirs and an open discussion about it without sabotaging it and the dice supporters, go ahead and create your own thread praising the dice and how great of a system it is.

[Woodruff]

Not looking to stir up trouble. Mainly just trying to find reason and resolution. Wanting to have a rational meaningful discussion because I do feel that there is something inherently wrong with the dice. I do believe that the streakiness has increased significantly and reduced the game play, strategy and overall enjoyment. Before my membership expires, I would like to see something done or I will not be renewing like so many others. Yes, just because a lot of people perceive something doesn't make it absolute. But the actions of many of the older, more respected members of the cc community, and not just them, would have me to believe something differently. Now, unless they are just focusing on the bad as well, something is wrong. People who have been here for years and years have given up because they don't like the behavior of the new dice. I would think their experience would account for something. That they have something to draw from. So based on my experiences and the experience of others, I would say new dice bad.

I offered a reasonable explanation for this. Previous strategy used by some old-timers that worked very well with the dice that were previously used "hasn't changed with the times enough" for it to be successful with the way the new dice behave. That doesn't make the new dice bad, and it doesn't make the old strategy bad necessarily, but it does make the combination of the two...bad. What I'm saying is that the change in dice SHOULD have engendered a change in strategy, but too many folks who have had great success here for years want "their strategy" to work, regardless of the change in dice. They're unwilling (or possibly unable in some cases) to move with the change.

[MNDuke]

We've been down this road before. There is no strategy that is going to work when your opponent drops 3 guys and take 3 of your regions and 9 troops down without losing a roll in the first round, and then you go 0-4 in an esc game. Sure there are some maps you can come back from, but in a 1v1 match in this instance you would be screwed. What strategy would you advise using here?

To continue, we shouldn't have to adjust to an inferior dice system. There is no reason anyone should have to "play" around it. I understand what you are saying, but complacency is not a friend of mine. Just you mentioning that a person should have to change their strategy to adjust to the new dice says a lot. It implies that the dice don't behave in a manner that you would expect. It's like ignoring that your car has a problem. For instance if the tire was punctured and going flat, you wouldn't keeping stopping for air and filling it,so you could get from place to place as a long term solution. You would fix the problem. Maybe not the best example, but it works.

[Evil Semp]

I agree that the improbable always wins, after all I won the prom king vote.

[MNDuke]

Lol. Always = Semantics.

[Evil Semp]

Lol. Always = Semantics.

At least it got a laugh out of you.

[Victor Sullivan]

I agree that the improbable always wins, after all I won the prom king vote.

Haha YES! But remember, Andy always gets what he wants... What I mean to say is, watch out for monkeys...

[natty dread]

Now everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Let those who feel the dice are broke have theirs and an open discussion about it without sabotaging it and the dice supporters, go ahead and create your own thread praising the dice and how great of a system it is.

So in other words: you want to campaign for the dice to be changed, but you don't want anyone to post any opinions contrary to yours in your threads?

Sorry, won't happen.

I offered a reasonable explanation for this. Previous strategy used by some old-timers that worked very well with the dice that were previously used "hasn't changed with the times enough" for it to be successful with the way the new dice behave. That doesn't make the new dice bad, and it doesn't make the old strategy bad necessarily, but it does make the combination of the two...bad. What I'm saying is that the change in dice SHOULD have engendered a change in strategy, but too many folks who have had great success here for years want "their strategy" to work, regardless of the change in dice. They're unwilling (or possibly unable in some cases) to move with the change.

This is probably pretty accurate.

We've been down this road before. There is no strategy that is going to work when your opponent drops 3 guys and take 3 of your regions and 9 troops down without losing a roll in the first round, and then you go 0-4 in an esc game. Sure there are some maps you can come back from, but in a 1v1 match in this instance you would be screwed. What strategy would you advise using here?

1v1 has always been a crap shoot, with old dice as well as the new. Everyone knows that. Nothing can be done with the dice to fix this, apart from making them totally non-random.

To continue, we shouldn't have to adjust to an inferior dice system. There is no reason anyone should have to "play" around it.

So in other words... you want the dice to behave the way you want. You want them to be a predictable asset, not an unpredictable liability.

Just you mentioning that a person should have to change their strategy to adjust to the new dice says a lot. It implies that the dice don't behave in a manner that you would expect.

Of course they don't. They are random. Random is inherently unpredictable.

t's like ignoring that your car has a problem. For instance if the tire was punctured and going flat, you wouldn't keeping stopping for air and filling it,so you could get from place to place as a long term solution. You would fix the problem. Maybe not the best example, but it works.

This assumes that we agree that there is a problem with the car. It's kinda like, you buy a car, drive it for thousands of miles, then take it back to the dealer and say "this car has a manufacturing error, I want a replacement. " "what's the error" asks the dealer, and you say "it's the wrong colour. "

[MNDuke]

You're funny.

The dice are streaky. Far streakier under this system than before. It's obvious. Many see it. Some ignore. While I'm not one, there's Natty Dreads, who cares so much, he trolls these threads

[natty dread]

Problem: cannot come up with coherent counter-arguments.

Solution: accuse the other side of trolling. That always works.

[MNDuke]

That would be downright hilarious if you weren't proving me wrong. I mean like, take that to the laugh factory hilarious. You got any other non constructive thoughts you'd like to throw my way?

[MNDuke]

From now on when the dice are streaky, I'm going to say, now that was random.

[ljex]

Well that's funny. Because In the 20 turns I took today, I managed to roll 111 twice. So what you are saying is that the chance of that happening is 1 in 2,500,000,000 yet it manages to happen all the time....odd. It seems that the title of this thread is strangely appropriate then.

Each set of off/def gets picked from a different location. Not each dice or roll of the dice.

How is the chance of rolling 111 1 in 2,500,000,000 or are you saying the chance of that happening 2 times is 1 in 2,500,000,000 either way that is not even close to the odds that i would think.

you still havent answered this, could you please do so? i really want to know how you think rolling 111 twice should only happen 1 in 2,500,000,000...

[Woodruff]

To continue, we shouldn't have to adjust to an inferior dice system. There is no reason anyone should have to "play" around it. I understand what you are saying, but complacency is not a friend of mine. Just you mentioning that a person should have to change their strategy to adjust to the new dice says a lot. It implies that the dice don't behave in a manner that you would expect.

No, it doesn't. It implies that the dice behave in a manner different that what they used to. For SOME, that may mean they behave in a manner you wouldn't expect (you would be in that category, I would guess). But I maintain that is because you are locked into "how they used to behave".

I understand what you're saying, but at a very basic level, you and I simply have a different perspective on the situation. Whereas you feel that the problem is that the dice don't behave in a way that you feel is reasonable, I feel that the problem is that you expect the dice to behave in a particular way that is not reasonable. I don't think we're going to change each others' minds, to be honest.

You're funny.
The dice are streaky. Far streakier under this system than before. It's obvious. Many see it. Some ignore. While I'm not one, there's Natty Dreads, who cares so much, he trolls these threads

I don't think there are many folks here denying that the dice are streakier now, nor do I see anyone really ignoring it. It's quite simply that some folks understand that is inherent in any "as close to true random as we can get" system and some folks believe that should not be the case.

[Bruceswar]

Well that's funny. Because In the 20 turns I took today, I managed to roll 111 twice. So what you are saying is that the chance of that happening is 1 in 2,500,000,000 yet it manages to happen all the time....odd. It seems that the title of this thread is strangely appropriate then.

Each set of off/def gets picked from a different location. Not each dice or roll of the dice.

How is the chance of rolling 111 1 in 2,500,000,000 or are you saying the chance of that happening 2 times is 1 in 2,500,000,000 either way that is not even close to the odds that i would think.

you still havent answered this, could you please do so? i really want to know how you think rolling 111 twice should only happen 1 in 2,500,000,000...

He cannot answer this... All the people who complain about the dice, never seem to come up with any hard evidence to show they are "broken". They only remember the bad times or times where dice "go nuts" for lack of a better word. They do not remember the many other times where dice stay within what they think is normal. The placebo effect at work here.

[Woodruff]

Well that's funny. Because In the 20 turns I took today, I managed to roll 111 twice. So what you are saying is that the chance of that happening is 1 in 2,500,000,000 yet it manages to happen all the time....odd. It seems that the title of this thread is strangely appropriate then.

Each set of off/def gets picked from a different location. Not each dice or roll of the dice.

How is the chance of rolling 111 1 in 2,500,000,000 or are you saying the chance of that happening 2 times is 1 in 2,500,000,000 either way that is not even close to the odds that i would think.

you still havent answered this, could you please do so? i really want to know how you think rolling 111 twice should only happen 1 in 2,500,000,000...

In fairness to MNDuke, I believe his quote there was in response to one by natty_dread, who initiated the "1 in 2,500,000,000" number. I think MNDuke just went with that assertion, under the assumption natty had actual numbers behind it.

[theBastard]

this is realy frustrate how set up works. in game 8453944 I had 6 in Cairo and 6 in Kerac. I assaulted with 6 from Cairo 3 in Ascalon, result 3:2. I assaulted with 6 from Kerac 3 in Jaffa, result 3:2. then I assaulted with 3 from Cairo 2 in Ascalon, result 2:1. my next attack with 3 from Kerac 1 in Ascalon, result 2:1. then with 2 from Cairo assaulted 1 in Ascalon, result 1:1. my next attack with 2 in Kerac against 1 in Ascalon, result 1:1.

so how stupid is this set up, I ask? in the same round, in the same game 6 units can not beat 3. and then all these attacks against Ascalon and I lost?

btw, I remeber that one time I assaulted 6 agaisnt 6 and I won 4:1. so is this realy all right? I think no.

is any chance that this will be solve in the future? and I´m not alone who is thinking that set up/dice of attacks works so stupid too often.