dice thread about 1s

[betiko]

Have you guys ever wondered why people generally have 3.51 average instead of 3.50?
It looks like we all have slightly less odds of rolling 1s in attack or in defense than we should. Just have a look around at dice pages. These supposedly random dice generators are actually configured to make people roll less 1s that they should.

[BENCLUB]

BENCLUB 4.8 all opponents
Luck Avg Roll
Assault 0% 3.51
Defend 0% 3.50


I guess some players have 3.49 no ?

[loutil]

This has been discussed before at length. There is clearly a bias against rolling 1's that seems to impact almost every player. There is also a corresponding increase in the number 2...
I do not feel like going back through old threads but one player actually graphed the issue using a large and random sample of players.

[Gilligan]

I have rolled 2028245 dice

16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s

In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%

While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.

My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s

shockingly close.

[Agent 86]

I tell ya the 2's are still winning. So which number do you roll the most revisited

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=194323&hilit=Agent+86

[betiko]

I have rolled 2028245 dice

16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s

In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%

While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.

My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s

shockingly close.

Yes and we all have something similar. Loutil seems to say the same thing, and the very common 3.51 average proves there is a problem and those dice are biaised (although i personally roll 3.50 average and my opponents 3.51 lol).
I am pretty sure that it s the way the program works and that they tried to roll slightly less 1s as it s supposed to annoy the most. As a result, not having fair dice annoys people even more. And each time we calculate odds, they are wrong as they are based on fair dice, but the dice we play with are biaised.

Oh, and totally missed the thread you are talking about.

[ManBungalow]

I think the Agent 86 thread linked above was fairly definitive on this subject - we can say that the probability that the bias in the dice is due to chance is very low.

There's some good data in that thread. See this post in particular for a nice graph:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=194323&start=30#p4254756

[betiko]

Interesting. Well sorry guys, missed that conversation as I thought it was dice ranting thread.. And it was actually an interesting one!

[loutil]

I have rolled 2028245 dice

16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s

In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%

While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.

My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s

shockingly close.

.41 may not seem like a lot but it is statistically significant as the pattern holds true across the CC landscape.
My numbers:
16.37% 1s
16.81% 2s
16.70% 3s
16.81% 4s
16.71% 5s
16.60% 6s

[BigBallinStalin]

15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s

[Gilligan]

15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s

according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)

[BigBallinStalin]

15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s

according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)

That's one possibility!

[loutil]

15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s

according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)

That's one possibility!

The other is that you are a lying communist bastard

[BigBallinStalin]

15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s

according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)

That's one possibility!

The other is that you are a lying communist bastard

In school, I learned Soviet Economics. It is superior to Western Economics!

[loutil]

15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s

according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)

That's one possibility!

The other is that you are a lying communist bastard

In school, I learned Soviet Economics. It is superior to Western Economics!

Most people would not consider a Gulag to be school...

[BigBallinStalin]

15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s

according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)

That's one possibility!

The other is that you are a lying communist bastard

In school, I learned Soviet Economics. It is superior to Western Economics!

Most people would not consider a Gulag to be school...

Yeah, but I'm really good at estimating the present discounted value of a rock pile.

[Kaskavel]

I have rolled 2028245 dice

16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s

In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%

While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.

My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s

shockingly close.

Yes and we all have something similar. Loutil seems to say the same thing, and the very common 3.51 average proves there is a problem and those dice are biaised (although i personally roll 3.50 average and my opponents 3.51 lol).
I am pretty sure that it s the way the program works and that they tried to roll slightly less 1s as it s supposed to annoy the most. As a result, not having fair dice annoys people even more. And each time we calculate odds, they are wrong as they are based on fair dice, but the dice we play with are biaised.

Oh, and totally missed the thread you are talking about.

The assumption that deliberately reducing 1s by that percentage hoping players will notice less 1s and thus get less frustrated, as well as the assumption that players do notice such a disturbance and complain because of it are similar to the probability of spreading pure materials in a field, hoping a strong wind will blow, twisting them around and making them form a fully operational, fully fueled and ready for take-off airplane full of living passengers.

[clowncar]

cnn will spend months trying to find it ...

[betiko]

I have rolled 2028245 dice

16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s

In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%

While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.

My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s

shockingly close.

Yes and we all have something similar. Loutil seems to say the same thing, and the very common 3.51 average proves there is a problem and those dice are biaised (although i personally roll 3.50 average and my opponents 3.51 lol).
I am pretty sure that it s the way the program works and that they tried to roll slightly less 1s as it s supposed to annoy the most. As a result, not having fair dice annoys people even more. And each time we calculate odds, they are wrong as they are based on fair dice, but the dice we play with are biaised.

Oh, and totally missed the thread you are talking about.

The assumption that deliberately reducing 1s by that percentage hoping players will notice less 1s and thus get less frustrated, as well as the assumption that players do notice such a disturbance and complain because of it are similar to the probability of spreading pure materials in a field, hoping a strong wind will blow, twisting them around and making them form a fully operational, fully fueled and ready for take-off airplane full of living passengers.

So where exactly do you stand here? Do the stats, or read the stats. It s a fact. 1s are not represented as they should. The general dice average on the site is 3.51 and it proves there is a bias.

[Agent 86]

This site has the most fucked dice any atmospheric noise could produce..the end. Get a new dice program CC..decline will keep happening unless you do so.

There, the end to stupid dice threads..not even close to random

[Kaskavel]

I have rolled 2028245 dice

16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s

In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%

While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.

My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s

shockingly close.

Yes and we all have something similar. Loutil seems to say the same thing, and the very common 3.51 average proves there is a problem and those dice are biaised (although i personally roll 3.50 average and my opponents 3.51 lol).
I am pretty sure that it s the way the program works and that they tried to roll slightly less 1s as it s supposed to annoy the most. As a result, not having fair dice annoys people even more. And each time we calculate odds, they are wrong as they are based on fair dice, but the dice we play with are biaised.

Oh, and totally missed the thread you are talking about.

The assumption that deliberately reducing 1s by that percentage hoping players will notice less 1s and thus get less frustrated, as well as the assumption that players do notice such a disturbance and complain because of it are similar to the probability of spreading pure materials in a field, hoping a strong wind will blow, twisting them around and making them form a fully operational, fully fueled and ready for take-off airplane full of living passengers.

So where exactly do you stand here? Do the stats, or read the stats. It s a fact. 1s are not represented as they should. The general dice average on the site is 3.51 and it proves there is a bias.

Yes, it may be a fact, an irrelevant fact. Each time we calculate the odds, they are not wrong because "they are based on fair dice, but the dice we play with are biased". They are correct. If you calculate 42.5% chance to win the battle, then it is 42.5%. Maybe it is not 42.546% the calc says, but 42.545% because of "reduced odds of 1s" that should offer some tiny edge to the defender, but that's all. We are not playing a game with biased unfair dice. This conversation about unfair dice has become ridiculus over the years.