Conquer Club

Hi all, still relatively new to all this, played a good few games now and I think I know what I`m doing but I have to admit I can`t work out the maths for attacking and defending dice, case in point the other day I was attacking with a stack of 10 on a stack of 3, I hit auto and lost 7 for 1, no complaints there just bad luck. So in my wisdom I thought my luck had to change and I attacked again, rolled a 1 and a 4, against a 1 and a 5, I lost both my armies, Can some one please, please tell me why that defensive roll of 1 killed my army. (although if I`m just being thick and missing something everyone else knows about please be gentle )

Duff

(ps. I hope this is in the right place, my first ever post)

cause the dice dont like u

I was starting to think the same thing

they dont like me either but my pure skill and talent brings my score up

Hmmmmmmmmmm, Just noticed the Q&A forum, should a put this thread there, Sorry

Grendelgod wrote:Can some one please, please tell me why that defensive roll of 1 killed my army.

The defensive dice win ties. Defenders 5 beat your 4, and his 1 beat your 1.

Thank you, maybe now the night terrors might stop

you have to give offerings to the dice gods and say that you worship them daily. putting them in your signature helps as well.

Remember that there is something like 6,000 active users of this site, with that many rolls going on all the time the random number generator will do all kinds of odd, streaky things. That means that you are likely to get things like rolling 3 ones and the defender beating you with 2 ones, or rolling 3 sixes and the defender beating you with 2 sixes (happens to me all the time) or just plain lose 10 rolls in a row, regardless of the number of attackers/defenders.

If you always assume you'll have bad dice, plan accordingly and play just a bit conservatively, your win percentage will begin to increase.

Sacrificing a virgin every new moon and praying to the dice gods every time you click one of the attack buttons is also said to help improve your rolls.

I don't know if anyone has tried it with a real virgin yet, but virtual ones don't work.

Not to many virgins around these parts, I`ll ask around

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_averages
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_large_numbers

Try these for a start. The underlying message is that

while a LARGE sample (say for example all of the output of random.org for one day) will always tend to provide accurately distributed "rolls", SMALL samples (say for example the dice rolls that you remember from a few games, may show all kinds of "weird streaks".

I put that in quotes because I want to emphasize that the weirdness of any streak is largely a function of our expectations, that is to say our state of mind. Any order we perceive in a random sequence is something we create by defining what "order" looks like, then hunting for a string that matches the definition.

Think of it this way: If you had a string of a million random letters, and you read them all through, you probably wouldnt be surprised to find a few words scattered here and there.

But then say a thousand people walked by, and each one chose a a string of a few hundred letters and read only those; imagine how hard it would be to convince the ones who found three or four words on their page that it was completely random! They'd say something like, "Yeah buddy, your random letter generator needs some work. Look here, I got five 'and's, a 'cloud', I gotta 'badger' here fa Chrissakes."

Same for the dice.

Random.com wrote the code that covers the behavior of the dice. Everybody appears equally treated by the dice; however, the bias is built into the defenders dice. On ties the defender wins --- simply as that. I believe I've got the record on attack attempts and losses. I've lost 18 armies to 1 defender before. I've lost probably 100's of 5 and 6 to 1 attacks. Apparently this is the norm for most of us so. As long as everybody else gets equally screwed I don't object much. I believe there's a better dice program created by some Russians that is more equal in it's distribution over the long run. Many players have fooled themselves into believing their skill plays a major part in their games; however, skill is mostly an illusion and the dice remain dominant over all wins and losses. Simply read the logs of the games in question and you will easily see an increase in wins by one player or another that gains board domination quickly by favorable throws of their dice. Enough said. Good luck with the dice must be your goal.
larry

random DOES even out in the long run. And the defender gets only 2 dice as opposed to the attackers 3. Nothing is biased, if anything you have slightly better chances while attacking.

MeDeFe wrote:random DOES even out in the long run. And the defender gets only 2 dice as opposed to the attackers 3. Nothing is biased, if anything you have slightly better chances while attacking.

If you appreciate facts you'll learn that bias IS programmed into the defender's dice should you write to Moz in support.
The defender must have 2 or more armies to have the total of two dice thrown. 2 dice are the maximum a defender can throw; however, if you have only 1 army left you only get 1 dice in the throw. If a defender dice ties with the attacker's dice the defender wins the throw. That is the bias in the written code. If the defender keeps rolling 6's he'll/she'll continue to win the tosses until the cows come home. That's the reason I lost 18 armies attacking 1 defender. It seems impossible for a defender to roll 6's 7 or 8 times, but, it's been done to me too often.
I've recorded stats on many, many games. I even have records you can check with game number, number of throws, outcomes, wins and losses.
Lately, i've kept track of 9 games. Average armies used is based upon 108 attacks. I took 108 countries in those attacks. I used 201 total armies. 108 for the countries and 93 extra armies as my costs. It took me 1.64574 armies to take each of the 108 countries which proves its better to be a defender than an attacker when you count the cost(s).
Have you got any facts to base your argument on?

ilarry wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:random DOES even out in the long run. And the defender gets only 2 dice as opposed to the attackers 3. Nothing is biased, if anything you have slightly better chances while attacking.

If you appreciate facts you'll learn that bias IS programmed into the defender's dice should you write to Moz in support.
The defender must have 2 or more armies to have the total of two dice thrown. 2 dice are the maximum a defender can throw; however, if you have only 1 army left you only get 1 dice in the throw. If a defender dice ties with the attacker's dice the defender wins the throw. That is the bias in the written code. If the defender keeps rolling 6's he'll/she'll continue to win the tosses until the cows come home. That's the reason I lost 18 armies attacking 1 defender. It seems impossible for a defender to roll 6's 7 or 8 times, but, it's been done to me too often.
I've recorded stats on many, many games. I even have records you can check with game number, number of throws, outcomes, wins and losses.
Lately, i've kept track of 9 games. Average armies used is based upon 108 attacks. I took 108 countries in those attacks. I used 201 total armies. 108 for the countries and 93 extra armies as my costs. It took me 1.64574 armies to take each of the 108 countries which proves its better to be a defender than an attacker when you count the cost(s).
Have you got any facts to base your argument on?

I like conquer club, but im not a flipping geek

why
why
why

get a life!!!!

ooo 9 games and 108 attacks! There are people around here who have logged several ten thousand dice throws, THAT's what I call "long run".

They do it with this little tool, the official CC dice analyzer!
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5655

It shows the values that one should expect to get statistically and compares them to what one is actually getting. Very handy for people who think the dice hate them.



And I still don't see why you think the dice are biased towards the defender, your calculation is inherently flawed, for one you counted 108 armies too many as "lost". I know you have to leave one army on every territory you own, but those armies are not lost in the attack, they remain on the board.
Also according to the way you calculated it you lost 1.86111 armies/territory taken, not 1.64574, get your own math right first, ok?


As for arguments, do the math yourself, how are the odds for 3 dice winning against 2? There are only 6^3 possibilities for the attacker and 6^2 possibilities for the defender. Makes a total of 7776 combinations. Happy counting, unless you're in tenth grade or so and are doing statistics, then you'll probably be able to think of an easier way to that calculation.
However, I will pick you up on your own numbers, and remember, you counted 108 armies too many as lost, your real losses are only 93 armies.




I assume that you've been counting attacks against countries with 1 army on them and that you attacked with 3 armies every time. If you have also counted attacks against 2 or more armies or attacks with only 1 or 2 you should be happy with the number's you've got.

So let's see. The chances for winning a 3 vs 1 throw are 95/144 or 65.97222%.
Then we have your 108 attacks, 93 lost. The expected amount of armies lost in 108 attacks with 3 against single defenders is 71.25, your value deviates by almost 31% from the "ideal" value. Initially this seems like much BUT 108 dice throws is almost nothing considering that there are 6^3 * 6 possible outcomes. 216 combinations for the attacker and 6 for the defender, in all 1296 possible combinations for the dice to fall. Say that number out loud: onethousandtwohundredninetysix. You've evaluated 108 throws. Not even 10% of the amount of possible combinations. Do you really suppose you can build a case on that? I think not.

Get the dice analyzer and play anoth 10 games where you log ALL your throws, then we can talk again.

I like conquer club, but im not a flipping geek

why
why
why

get a life!!!!

In education we often learn a concept quickly, apply it for a short period of time, then rarely use that knowledge again. We fail to apply what we spent hours to learn in ones daily life. The pathways in our brain to this information collect cobwebs so to speak. When we need that information again we fail to find the way quickly, like forgetting the appropriate word at the appropriate time.

Applying concepts to something enjoyed as entertainment reinforces those pathways. The gap is bridged between concepts learned and recognition of where they might be applied. More can be accomplished in a shorter period of time when what has been learned is as innate as breathing. The minutes saved become hours spent living.

The percentage was "logged" for you to find. At least you check the stats coming your way; however, I have recorded many more games --- the last is only 1 of many. I've logged 16 games back 04/25/07. The logs, regardless of the probabilities you quote, are the facts and not your idealogical numbers. Anyone can look up probabilities on a search engine to get the tables ... I'm talking about what I actually got. Have you bothered to check your own? The utility to look at your possible outcomes has no relevance to the facts. The utility just looks, again, at a comparison with what you got and what would be the normal distribution. It's not relevant to the facts I gave.
I think it's gonna be difficult for us to communicate if you don't use the actual figures instead of telling us what they "SHOULD" be.
Why, before we go any further, don't you ask Moz in support if the defender's dice are biased? He'll tell you that any "ties" go to the defender and we can get over your bullshit claims that there is no bias.

I don't understand what you want to say, do you even understand what I said?

108 throws is nothing. Absolutely nothing. You somehow seem to say that the dice are biased towards the defender when the defender has one dice. The chance of winning against one defender is almost two thirds. How's that biased towards the defender?

And again, you can't say that an army is lost if it's still on the board.

You weren't even able to calculate your own numbers correctly, there's no way for you to arrive at 1.64574 armies lost per territory taken.

I did use the numbers you provided us with and showed that your sample is too small to be seen as statistically relevant.

ilarry wrote:...Why, before we go any further, don't you ask Moz in support if the defender's dice are biased? He'll tell you that any "ties" go to the defender and we can get over your bullshit claims that there is no bias.

I think you guys are talking about two different things. (And that makes each of you worse than Hitler, just to get the Nazi reference out of the way early).

MeDeFe says the dice give an even number of ones, twos, threes, etc to both the attacker and defender, therefore they are not biased.

ilarry says that defenders six beats attackers six, therefore they are biased towards the defender.

Now, ilarry, I think you are talking about a bias in the RULES, not the dice. No one who plays this game, or has played the RW equivalent that has been around for 50 years this year, (Happy 50th birthday, unnamed-yet-obviously-well-known-game!), is unaware of this bias. It's a key part of the mechanics of this game.

And MeDeFe, quit poking him, he's noisy.

eyeofdeath wrote:

Grendelgod wrote:Can some one please, please tell me why that defensive roll of 1 killed my army.

The defensive dice win ties. Defenders 5 beat your 4, and his 1 beat your 1.

For all you posters complaining/defending the randomness of the dice, the question was not about randomness, and it has been answered.

only way to beat the dice is to refuse blankly to roll them. ill play you 1 on 1 and you can try that strategy

Ok, shall I set up a game?

sure set up a game. pass me the codes.