Dice are actually biased for the attacker when attacking with three dice, and Pilate, no there is a 36% chance, not a 3.6% chance of losing when attacking 3 on 1.
Red Army wrote:http://www.hostingphpbb.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15&mforum=scionofglory
Dice are actually biased for the attacker when attacking with three dice, and Pilate, no there is a 36% chance, not a 3.6% chance of losing when attacking 3 on 1.
That's from Wikipedia.
There is a 3.6 % chance (36 in 1000) of losing 3 "3 vs 1" rolls in a row.
Frigidus wrote:but now that it's become relatively popular it's suffered the usual downturn in coolness.
Mrs. Mad, what would be really cool is if you could publish you Luck analyser and maybe have a eset button and stuff, then if you have bad dice, you can back it up on your own.
I don't know anything about programming, but it seems like if the numbers for the defending and attacking dice are deteremined using the same method, the outcome, even if not the same as real dice, wouldn't favor the defender or attacker. Can someone explain why this isn't true?
Red Army wrote:http://www.hostingphpbb.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15&mforum=scionofglory
Dice are actually biased for the attacker when attacking with three dice, and Pilate, no there is a 36% chance, not a 3.6% chance of losing when attacking 3 on 1.
That's from Wikipedia.
wtf is that your own site of risk like cc and waw?
How do you read/write in a file with javascript? I've searched the web and there isn't a standard. Something that might work on Firefox might not work on IE or another version of Firefox.
"Every battle has been won before it's been fought." Sun Tzu
