Conquer Club

How about an option with no dice?

10 troops beats 9 troops.
Straight up numerical superiority wins.
Take the luck right out of the game.

I believe CC would see that become the most popular option on the site.

Could even put in an option where you don't have to leave any troops behind.
Move out the entire army and leave an empty (0) territory behind that anyone could move into without cost.

I think you've misunderstood the game entirely.

Swifte wrote:I think you've misunderstood the game entirely.

lol yea he defiantly did misunderstand the game

Swifte wrote:I think you've misunderstood the game entirely.

Please do enlighten me....

Possibly you enjoy losing 20-1 on a critical attack?
Or losing games that you should have won as a result of superior tactics and strategy due to bizarre 'dice' ?

Really would like to hear a cognizant argument for the element of luck which plays such a strong role on this site.

If it's some patent 'that's how the board game does it' type of thing, then answer me why we should limit ourselves to that form of technology in this digital age.
And anecdotally... I played a lot of dice games in my life and I never saw the kind of runs that occur with regularity on this site.
If CC dice went to Vegas they would be banned in a couple hours...

DBandit70 wrote:

Swifte wrote:I think you've misunderstood the game entirely.

lol yea he defiantly did misunderstand the game

Wow.... what a remarkably witty, insightful and pithy response!!!!

Did you come up with that all by yourself????

Do feel free to take a crack at the aforementioned questions though....

So, aside from the idea that 'dice' have to be part of the game, does anyone care to remark on the concept of removing the 'dice'?

Doesn't have to be the ONLY style of play on the site, but just another of many game variables.

Zombie spoils is proof enough that the site is willing to stray from the classic interpretation of the game.


There has been a ton of excellent work put into building this site and all the superb maps.....
BUT....
Also seems like the number 1 complaint is the 'dice'.

This type of option may well help to keep many of the players who moved on after a particularly egregious 'dice' encounter.

This was discussed extensively in the past.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=130272

Removing dices is removing the concept of this game IMO, however it has been years dices odd are ridiculous, mainly in those exemple where:

Can’t pass 18v1
When you lose all the sudden 3v2 passes way more often

the logic behind the dices are not meeting the gaming itself, if you manage to build a strategic stack where almost no defensive resistance then there is no way crappy dices should remove the work you’ve have made.

I’m more than positive if dices were more “logic” than more people would stay, one of the reason I joined the SoC guide game is to somehow “wash my dices” when I feel I’m running through a one of those often stupid scenario. It kind of work, at least since I’m rolling into those games I have very few less instance of ridiculous dices outcome.

I want to believe if we made a poll and massively gather active members than webmaster may see a “urgent” way to review it.

cmbdiesel wrote:

Swifte wrote:I think you've misunderstood the game entirely.

Please do enlighten me....

Possibly you enjoy losing 20-1 on a critical attack?
Or losing games that you should have won as a result of superior tactics and strategy due to bizarre 'dice' ?

Really would like to hear a cognizant argument for the element of luck which plays such a strong role on this site.

It's quite simply this: Risk is a dice game. The unpredictability of the dice is what keeps people interested. The game doesn't have the strategic depth to make it interesting on any other level. Without the unpredictability of the dice, it's a super-simple numbers game, and the result of a game could be easily calculated on turn 1, making there be no point in playing it out.

Just to give you a simple example. If we're playing on the Classic map, and I drop 3 of the 4 terts on Australia, while your terts are evenly distributed, I will win. I have 9 troops there, you have 3. There is nothing you can do to change the outcome. Yes, you can work towards a bonus somewhere else, but I will have Australia on turn one, and the extra troops will allow me to frustrate your plans anywhere else. The game has been decided on turn one, and there's really no reason to play it out.

Okay, so you say, let's go to the next level, and equalize the drops. We start with the same number of terts on every continent. In that case, whoever goes first will win. The first person to go will start eliminating the terts of the other (starting with those in the easiest bonus regions) and sooner or later will end up with enough of an advantage so start dropping more troops and magnifying his lead. The other may start doing the same, but will never catch up. Again, the game has been decided on turn one, and there's really no reason to play it out.

Okay, so you say, the Classic map is for babies. Let's use more complex maps. So the calculations get more complex, but the end result is the same. If you have unequal drops, the person who is closer to an easy bonus will win. If you have equalized drops, the person who goes first will win.

No matter how you dress it up, without dice the game is decided on turn one. It simply lacks the strategic depth for anything else. You don't have terrain bonuses or different kinds of troops with unique advantages. One troop is one troop and that's all there is to it.

Even with fair dice, the game is decided on turn one. The inherent unpredictability of the dice is the only thing that allows you to hope for a positive outcome when you have an obviously inferior drop. As much as we hate the dice, they are the only thing in the game that makes it more than tic-tac-toe.

Dukasaur wrote:

cmbdiesel wrote:

Swifte wrote:I think you've misunderstood the game entirely.

Please do enlighten me....

Possibly you enjoy losing 20-1 on a critical attack?
Or losing games that you should have won as a result of superior tactics and strategy due to bizarre 'dice' ?

Really would like to hear a cognizant argument for the element of luck which plays such a strong role on this site.

It's quite simply this: Risk is a dice game. The unpredictability of the dice is what keeps people interested. The game doesn't have the strategic depth to make it interesting on any other level. Without the unpredictability of the dice, it's a super-simple numbers game, and the result of a game could be easily calculated on turn 1, making there be no point in playing it out.

Just to give you a simple example. If we're playing on the Classic map, and I drop 3 of the 4 terts on Australia, while your terts are evenly distributed, I will win. I have 9 troops there, you have 3. There is nothing you can do to change the outcome. Yes, you can work towards a bonus somewhere else, but I will have Australia on turn one, and the extra troops will allow me to frustrate your plans anywhere else. The game has been decided on turn one, and there's really no reason to play it out.

Okay, so you say, let's go to the next level, and equalize the drops. We start with the same number of terts on every continent. In that case, whoever goes first will win. The first person to go will start eliminating the terts of the other (starting with those in the easiest bonus regions) and sooner or later will end up with enough of an advantage so start dropping more troops and magnifying his lead. The other may start doing the same, but will never catch up. Again, the game has been decided on turn one, and there's really no reason to play it out.

Okay, so you say, the Classic map is for babies. Let's use more complex maps. So the calculations get more complex, but the end result is the same. If you have unequal drops, the person who is closer to an easy bonus will win. If you have equalized drops, the person who goes first will win.

No matter how you dress it up, without dice the game is decided on turn one. It simply lacks the strategic depth for anything else. You don't have terrain bonuses or different kinds of troops with unique advantages. One troop is one troop and that's all there is to it.

Even with fair dice, the game is decided on turn one. The inherent unpredictability of the dice is the only thing that allows you to hope for a positive outcome when you have an obviously inferior drop. As much as we hate the dice, they are the only thing in the game that makes it more than tic-tac-toe.

Regarding outcome on turn 1 - certainly your point is true on some maps with some settings, but definitely not in all situations.
The different types of spoils can counter that argument as can manual deployment, team games and much larger maps.

I get that Risk originated as a 'dice' game, but this site is way more than that original game. The adjunct options currently available are proof enough of that.
Undoubtedly there are some who would not prefer a 'dice' free option, and I would not suggest taking that option away from them. But I do see a 'dice' free option as being really great option for people who delve in deeper and prefer the strategic and tactical aspects of this game far more than the luck of the roll part.
I believe you would see a 'dice' free option utilized mainly by the clans and other team players. Also the no spoils and manual deployment crowd would seem to be a natural fit for this option, as they are already trying to reduce the luck factor in the game.

In short, my belief is that a no 'dice' option would help preserve a segment of players who end up getting sick of losing a hard fought battle because some 'random dice generator' decided to spit out numbers that defy standard deviation.
Personally I've seen well over a dozen people, with whom I played many games, decide after an egregious loss to just leave the site, never to return. These were quality players with real strategic skill sets and the games were always interesting and involved.

Clearly a no 'dice' option is not for everybody, but couldn't we try it for some of us?

Mad777 wrote:Removing dices is removing the concept of this game IMO, however it has been years dices odd are ridiculous, mainly in those exemple where:

Can’t pass 18v1
When you lose all the sudden 3v2 passes way more often

the logic behind the dices are not meeting the gaming itself, if you manage to build a strategic stack where almost no defensive resistance then there is no way crappy dices should remove the work you’ve have made.

I’m more than positive if dices were more “logic” than more people would stay, one of the reason I joined the SoC guide game is to somehow “wash my dices” when I feel I’m running through a one of those often stupid scenario. It kind of work, at least since I’m rolling into those games I have very few less instance of ridiculous dices outcome.

I want to believe if we made a poll and massively gather active members than webmaster may see a “urgent” way to review it.

Mad, I agree wholeheartedly, and am amused by your retelling of 'washing the dices'..... Not the first time I've heard of such a ploy, although I try to use bot games for the same purpose....

The larger point is that we both feel frustrated at the wildly unpredictable outcome and seek relief in any manner possible...
and.... we are not alone....
That says there is a problem.

SOLUTION - Offer a no 'dice' option in the Start Games menus.

TheForgivenOne wrote:This was discussed extensively in the past.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=130272

Thanks for the link Forgiven, had no idea that virtually the same idea had been discussed over a decade ago....
Kinda highlights the colossal inertia on this site....

The idea was rejected by the mods because they claimed there would be unbreakable stalemates.
The sheer idiocy of that position is mind numbing....
Coming up with some extraordinarily unusual instance which would seem to point at an unbreakable stalemate as a reason for not implementing this option is a cop-out all the way.
Using 20+ what-if steps that result in a stalemate as a reason for anything is neurotic, and the person who sat there and dreamt up those scenarios should probably have stepped away from the computer and gone for some fresh air... apparently it was getting stale in mom's basement....
By that reasoning and with the current game options one could end up in an unbreakable stalemate, so hence we must close the entire site....

-OR-

Put in a accept draw option if that's what it comes down to.

That would be another great option btw....
If you create an alliance with another player and the two of you crush all opponents, it would be nice to call a draw and not have to fight it out.
In those scenarios the player who did the most work killing opposition forces will typically lose the final conflict.

-------You might want to play a game called Stratego!!!!...It is a Kool game....With ,The card came War,Chess,and Capture the Flag ...all rolled into one... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

ConfederateSS wrote:-------You might want to play a game called Stratego!!!!...It is a Kool game....With ,The card came War,Chess,and Capture the Flag ...all rolled into one... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

So glad you were able to contribute such a well thought out response.

Stratego, although a fine game, in the context of this discussion it can get rammed up the old south....