Dice Complaints and Various Suggestions to Fix Them

by **Dibbun** on Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:41 pm

Holy shit, do you ever stop to think that when you have good dice, your opponent is having bad dice? Cry more for fucks sake, I have the same dice odds as anyone else and I hold a decent rank because part of strategy is accounting for the possibility that you will have bad dice.

by **SuperGoogleman** on Thu Sep 15, 2011 5:46 pm

Dibbun wrote:Holy shit, do you ever stop to think that when you have good dice, your opponent is having bad dice? Cry more for fucks sake, I have the same dice odds as anyone else and I hold a decent rank because part of strategy is accounting for the possibility that you will have bad dice.

yes i do stop and think during good times, often i wish my opponents would have better luck so we could have more enjoyable tightly fought tactical games. I wasnt personally moaning, most the time i just laugh at bad dice or have a quick vent in chat and get back to having fun, but i love this place and want it to be successful for us all, so had, what seemed like, an interesting thought and felt like posting it to see how other people thought about it.

And i get your points that most think real dice are best but if it ment having more closely fought games i think i would be ok knowing the dice werent always fully random

by **zimmah** on Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:35 pm

i'd support the 'no dice option' over this one.

i believe the no dice option has been suggested before, it's basicly like this:

you have the option while creating the game to choose for this option, and in a game with no dice when 6 armies face 4 armies they will always take the country and have 2 armies left (1 on each country). the outcomes of battle will allways be predictable like this. it will be impossable to attack from a country with 2 armies to avoid any balance issues.

by **xenowolff** on Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:56 pm

zimmah wrote:i'd support the 'no dice option' over this one.

i believe the no dice option has been suggested before, it's basicly like this:

you have the option while creating the game to choose for this option, and in a game with no dice when 6 armies face 4 armies they will always take the country and have 2 armies left (1 on each country). the outcomes of battle will allways be predictable like this. it will be impossable to attack from a country with 2 armies to avoid any balance issues.

Bad idea, -1.

I like the dice just how they are. leave them be.

by **Criticalwinner** on Mon Sep 19, 2011 8:57 am

If you rely on not getting horrible streaks to win, then you're not a good enough player to begin with. Streaks are a part of the game, just like the board game version. Many people just get greedy or stupid with their rolling procedures. The dice are fine just the way they should be.
*Hint: Don't Auto-Assualt when you care enough that you can't lose over half your armies.... 'Cause it will (very rarely) happen.

by **tarcellius** on Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:16 pm

If some kind of "make the dice more fair" algorithm were added to reduce good/bad streaks, can you imagine how loud the complaints will be when people feel screwed by bad dice? Because now there will be an actual human-created algorithm to blame!

Leave the random dice alone, that's my vote.

by **rhp 1** on Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:23 pm

stop crying about the damn dice. just become a better player through strat, and the streaks of winning will be longer than the losing regardless of the dice.

by **rhp 1** on Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:26 pm

Dibbun wrote:Holy shit, do you ever stop to think that when you have good dice, your opponent is having bad dice? Cry more for fucks sake, I have the same dice odds as anyone else and I hold a decent rank because part of strategy is accounting for the possibility that you will have bad dice.

you have a decent rank?

by **chapcrap** on Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:27 pm

rhp 1 wrote:stop crying about the damn dice. just become a better player through strat, and the streaks of winning will be longer than the losing regardless of the dice.

Stop bringing up dead threads with nothing to add.

by **Edshuster** on Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:46 am

Agree'd - let the dice be. Random is a good thing. Afterall, that is how we live our lives

by **rokus35** on Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:06 pm

[url]MajorCommand.com[/url] has an option for fixed force which lets you have set battle outcomes.
I think its sounds cool but its only for premiums. I think that's weird because fixed force would be cheaper.
They would know we copied them though. You know MajorCommand has a lot of cool options but not very many maps and it is very very slow. Conquerclub is probably at least 10x faster.

by **grifftron** on Tue Dec 06, 2011 11:32 pm

Welcome to "CC Dice Teller 3.0"

Concise description:
After its predecessors CC Dice Teller 1.0 & CC Dice Teller 2.0, Dice Teller 3.0 will be able to tell you what you are gonna roll 5 rolls ahead unlike DT 1.0 which could only tell you 1 roll ahead and DT 2.0 which could only tell you 3 rolls ahead.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
This would be great for when you are attacking huge stacks, you can just click on DT 3.0 see what you will roll in the next 5 rolls and decide if it will be worth it or not.

by **TheForgivenOne** on Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:44 am

I don't know if this is possible :s From what I know (which isn't a lot), the "dice" are picked from the string of 50 000 numbers. And since people are constantly taking turns, your "next 3/5" numbers are always going to be changing based on who else is rolling the dice.

Maybe someone who is a bit more tech savvy can confirm/deny this.

by **blakebowling** on Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:33 pm

TheForgivenOne wrote:I don't know if this is possible :s From what I know (which isn't a lot), the "dice" are picked from the string of 50 000 numbers. And since people are constantly taking turns, your "next 3/5" numbers are always going to be changing based on who else is rolling the dice.

Maybe someone who is a bit more tech savvy can confirm/deny this.

I'm fairly certain this is a joke TFO.

by **TheForgivenOne** on Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:35 pm

blakebowling wrote:
TheForgivenOne wrote:I don't know if this is possible :s From what I know (which isn't a lot), the "dice" are picked from the string of 50 000 numbers. And since people are constantly taking turns, your "next 3/5" numbers are always going to be changing based on who else is rolling the dice.

Maybe someone who is a bit more tech savvy can confirm/deny this.

I'm fairly certain this is a joke TFO.

Probably, can I smack grifftron with my paddle that i wish I had?

by **blakebowling** on Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:38 pm

TheForgivenOne wrote:
blakebowling wrote:
TheForgivenOne wrote:I don't know if this is possible :s From what I know (which isn't a lot), the "dice" are picked from the string of 50 000 numbers. And since people are constantly taking turns, your "next 3/5" numbers are always going to be changing based on who else is rolling the dice.

Maybe someone who is a bit more tech savvy can confirm/deny this.

I'm fairly certain this is a joke TFO.

Probably, can I smack grifftron with my paddle that i wish I had?

Fine by me.

by **battlemania** on Mon Jan 30, 2012 6:03 am

new dice simulator

CCan weplease have better dice...this is crap...im sure many agree...cheers

better dice, fairer with less stress O:)

by **blakebowling** on Mon Jan 30, 2012 10:30 am

The dice are fair (as has been posted many many times). Changing the way a randomization code works won't effect the direct outcomes of the dice.

Rejected -- Please use the search form next time, it's your friend.

by **battlemania** on Wed Feb 01, 2012 3:11 am

dont know about your logic, but there are deffinate patterns in the dice and there is deffinite bs

by **codierose** on Wed Feb 01, 2012 3:19 am

blakebowling wrote:The dice are fair (as has been posted many many times). Changing the way a randomization code works won't effect the direct outcomes of the dice.

Rejected -- Please use the search form next time, it's your friend.

its your friend lol not like the dice

by **TheForgivenOne** on Wed Feb 01, 2012 3:24 am

battlemania wrote:dont know about your logic, but there are deffinate patterns in the dice and there is deffinite bs

And what do you suggest? rolling each dice individually? Is there any actual website that you suggest we use?

by **tkr4lf** on Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:38 pm

Maybe CC could raise the price of premium to $100 a year. With the extra income, you guys could pay an army of homeless people to do nothing but sit around and roll dice all day. They could use IPad 2's to then upload the results to the website.

I think this would stop all dice complaining.

Thanks.

by **Criticalwinner** on Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:35 pm

Good strategy will usually prepare you for the bad dice rolls. I feel your pain, but it's just a part of the game.

by **SiriusCowKing** on Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:20 pm

The problem:
As heard many times before, luck on dice is sometimes impossible. It was proven that luck is just random, but the other day I won a game because the other player couldn't kill my last unit going 10vs1. I am happy that I won, but not this way. At some point you should just be able to roll over the enemy if you have enough units.

The solution:
Put a cap on the maximum and minimum units you should lose when attacking someone. In the help section line 25 there is the chances to win an attack. If you attack with 3 dices vs 2 dices you have 54% chances to win, and 66% chances for a 3 dices vs 1 dice. Based on that you should lose 85% of your enemy's stack when going 3v2 and 50% when going 3v1 (so 1 unit or 0). I suggest that when pressing the auto attack button, you can only lose from half to twice the units based on these statistics. So a 200 vs 100 would result in assured capture, losing from 43 to 170 units. In the case of attacking a 1 unit territory with at least 4 units (3vs1 dices), the outcome would result in assured capture with losses of 1 or 0 units.

How it can be implemented:
When a player press the auto attack button, the 2 stacks are saved as variables. The outcome is calculated as usual, but the maximum and minimum caps on units lost are also calculated, rounded up. If the random result is over the maximum cap, use the maximum instead. If the random result is under the minimum cap, use the minimum instead. If the defender is not eliminated in the fight and the losses were over the maximum units lost cap, use the maximum to calculate how many troops the defender should lose.

by **Swifte** on Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:43 pm

Sorry, but I'll live with the crazy. This is a game of chance after all. If you hard-code guaranteed results, you completely change the nature of the game.