Question about dice...

[maniacmath17]

What is the most troops you've had attack a country with 3 and lose? I just lost a 22 v 3 a few minutes ago. In case you were wondering, that's 99.99541% to win.

I also lost a 21 v 6 in the same game which is only a 99.8% favorite but combine the two and that should basically never happen in a game. Now I've never had an issue with the dice, but has there been any research gone into possible "streakyness" of the dice?

[sully800]

There was quite thorough research in fact, I guess during your absence. A professional statistician analyzed the dice by many different tests and distributions and concluded that they were random both in the short run and the long run.

[maniacmath17]

Thanks Sully. I'll just go back to assuming I'm just the unluckiest person in the world, lol.

[AndyDufresne]

Thanks Sully. I'll just go back to assuming I'm just the unluckiest person in the world, lol.

Maybe the Dice gods are trying to balance out your skill.


--Andy

[Woodruff]

Thanks Sully. I'll just go back to assuming I'm just the unluckiest person in the world, lol.

Maybe the Dice gods are trying to balance out your skill.
--Andy

Thank you for that most excellent excuse. I shall be availing myself of it frequently!

[tyche73]

i had a 52v12 that ended 3v3

[oVo]

i had a 52v12 that ended 3v3

Was that an auto-attack?

[maniacmath17]

i had a 52v12 that ended 3v3

Wow thanks for making me feel better. That's 99.99998% to win that you just lost, lol.

[LFAW]

I've lost a 35v2 before but have won a 12v83 w/8 left over

so dice are pretty even

[maniacmath17]

Wow 35 v 2? That's definitely the worst one I've ever heard. Gambit doesn't even go to that many decimals, but based on very rough estimates, I'd say the probability of that happening is around one in 500,000,000. The calculation for the other one is a bit more involved but I'm sure the chances of winning that one are just as slim.

What's weird is that even though the odds suggest this only should happen to maybe one or two people in the history of conquer club, I'm sure there's more than that many people who have had this happen. It definitely defies the odds, but I can't think of a reason for it.

[KLOBBER]

What is the most troops you've had attack a country with 3 and lose? I just lost a 22 v 3 a few minutes ago. In case you were wondering, that's 99.99541% to win.

I also lost a 21 v 6 in the same game which is only a 99.8% favorite but combine the two and that should basically never happen in a game. Now I've never had an issue with the dice, but has there been any research gone into possible "streakyness" of the dice?

Actually, your numbers are off.

If those things actually happened (of which there is no proof by the way) then they were 100% likely to happen. 99.99541% is incorrect, and 99.8 is incorrect. The correct number, in each and every case, is that whatever patterns the dice actually manifest are 100% likely to manifest.

100% -- in reality, there is never any exception to this number.

What "should" or "should never" happen in a game is also something about which you are mistaken: In reality, what should happen in every game is that every player should be unable to predict the dice, just as you were unable to do in your two examples above. What should never happen in a game is for any player's predictions of the dice to come true. Your predictions did not come true, and so all is exactly as it should be.

"Man bites dog" would be reportable news. "Dog bites man," however, is not news, as it happens every day, many times, in every city. You have only reported that your own arbitrary and unscientific dice predictions were incorrect, just like everybody else's arbitrary predictions are always incorrect. You have merely reported two boring instances of "dog bites man," and this is not newsworthy, sadly.

I have seen hundreds of dice complaints, and each and every one of them contains attempts at predictions that are arbitrary, unscientific, and incorrect, just like yours, above. What I'm waiting to hear is a player, ANY player, reporting that his dice predictions were correct, just once. Now THAT would be real news, but it has never happened -- never. You were wrong, and the dice were right.

Have you no shame?

This is my challenge to all dice complainers: Predict correctly. Just once. Stop reporting "dog bites man." Report "man bites dog," just once, and then and only then will your text be considered to have some value, some meaning. Then, and only then, will you have some valid basis for a complaint. Don't be wrong -- be correct -- just once. But no, not a single dice complainer has ever reported any correct prediction of the dice, never reported any stats of actual note. Never. Not a single time. It's always dog bites man, dog bites man, dog bites man -- again, and again, and again. Reality check: this is NOT news, guys!

CONCLUSION:

All of the above only means that the dice work properly -- exactly as they were designed to work -- unpredictably.

News story: Man Bites Dog!

[LFAW]

Wow 35 v 2? That's definitely the worst one I've ever heard. Gambit doesn't even go to that many decimals, but based on very rough estimates, I'd say the probability of that happening is around one in 500,000,000. The calculation for the other one is a bit more involved but I'm sure the chances of winning that one are just as slim.

What's weird is that even though the odds suggest this only should happen to maybe one or two people in the history of conquer club, I'm sure there's more than that many people who have had this happen. It definitely defies the odds, but I can't think of a reason for it.

I hit my pc and turned it off. lol

[maniacmath17]

What is the most troops you've had attack a country with 3 and lose? I just lost a 22 v 3 a few minutes ago. In case you were wondering, that's 99.99541% to win.

I also lost a 21 v 6 in the same game which is only a 99.8% favorite but combine the two and that should basically never happen in a game. Now I've never had an issue with the dice, but has there been any research gone into possible "streakyness" of the dice?

Actually, your numbers are off.

If those things actually happened (of which there is no proof by the way) then they were 100% likely to happen. 99.99541% is incorrect, and 99.8 is incorrect. The correct number, in each and every case, is that whatever patterns the dice actually manifest are 100% likely to manifest.

100% -- in reality, there is never any exception to this number.

What "should" or "should never" happen in a game is also something about which you are mistaken: In reality, what should happen in every game is that every player should be unable to predict the dice, just as you were unable to do in your two examples above. What should never happen in a game is for any player's predictions of the dice to come true. Your predictions did not come true, and so all is exactly as it should be.

"Man bites dog" would be reportable news. "Dog bites man," however, is not news, as it happens every day, many times, in every city. You have only reported that your own arbitrary and unscientific dice predictions were incorrect, just like everybody else's arbitrary predictions are always incorrect. You have merely reported two boring instances of "dog bites man," and this is not newsworthy, sadly.

I have seen hundreds of dice complaints, and each and every one of them contains attempts at predictions that are arbitrary, unscientific, and incorrect, just like yours, above. What I'm waiting to hear is a player, ANY player, reporting that his dice predictions were correct, just once. Now THAT would be real news, but it has never happened -- never. You were wrong, and the dice were right.

Have you no shame?

This is my challenge to all dice complainers: Predict correctly. Just once. Stop reporting "dog bites man." Report "man bites dog," just once, and then and only then will your text be considered to have some value, some meaning. Then, and only then, will you have some valid basis for a complaint. Don't be wrong -- be correct -- just once. But no, not a single dice complainer has ever reported any correct prediction of the dice, never reported any stats of actual note. Never. Not a single time. It's always dog bites man, dog bites man, dog bites man -- again, and again, and again. Reality check: this is NOT news, guys!

CONCLUSION:

All of the above only means that the dice work properly -- exactly as they were designed to work -- unpredictably.

Klobber, while I sort of see what you're saying, that kind of reasoning wouldn't fly in a statistics course. Now I'm not going to spend a whole lot of time explaining things like confidence intervals and stuff but hopefully this example helps.

If someone were to win the lottery 3 weeks in a row, would you strongly suspect that the winner is not being chosen randomly? Surely no one could have predicted ahead of time that this person would win 3 straight lotteries, but is that enough to prove that the lottery was random and this person was innocent of any wrongdoing?

[KLOBBER]

Actually, your numbers are off.

If those things actually happened (of which there is no proof by the way) then they were 100% likely to happen. 99.99541% is incorrect, and 99.8 is incorrect. The correct number, in each and every case, is that whatever patterns the dice actually manifest are 100% likely to manifest.

100% -- in reality, there is never any exception to this number.

What "should" or "should never" happen in a game is also something about which you are mistaken: In reality, what should happen in every game is that every player should be unable to predict the dice, just as you were unable to do in your two examples above. What should never happen in a game is for any player's predictions of the dice to come true. Your predictions did not come true, and so all is exactly as it should be.

"Man bites dog" would be reportable news. "Dog bites man," however, is not news, as it happens every day, many times, in every city. You have only reported that your own arbitrary and unscientific dice predictions were incorrect, just like everybody else's arbitrary predictions are always incorrect. You have merely reported two boring instances of "dog bites man," and this is not newsworthy, sadly.

I have seen hundreds of dice complaints, and each and every one of them contains attempts at predictions that are arbitrary, unscientific, and incorrect, just like yours, above. What I'm waiting to hear is a player, ANY player, reporting that his dice predictions were correct, just once. Now THAT would be real news, but it has never happened -- never. You were wrong, and the dice were right.

Have you no shame?

This is my challenge to all dice complainers: Predict correctly. Just once. Stop reporting "dog bites man." Report "man bites dog," just once, and then and only then will your text be considered to have some value, some meaning. Then, and only then, will you have some valid basis for a complaint. Don't be wrong -- be correct -- just once. But no, not a single dice complainer has ever reported any correct prediction of the dice, never reported any stats of actual note. Never. Not a single time. It's always dog bites man, dog bites man, dog bites man -- again, and again, and again. Reality check: this is NOT news, guys!

CONCLUSION:

All of the above only means that the dice work properly -- exactly as they were designed to work -- unpredictably.

Klobber, while I sort of see what you're saying, that kind of reasoning wouldn't fly in a statistics course....

If someone were to win the lottery 3 weeks in a row...

In that case, either the statistics course is also wrong, or your interpretation of it is wrong, or both. I have cited clear and irrefutable facts about the dice, and any attempted refutation of the unadorned facts must necessarily be incorrect.

By your "reasoning," if I flip a coin and it lands on heads, then, due to so-called "statistics," it must necessarily land on tails the second time, in order to line up with the unscientific and incorrect theory that it must match 50-50. However, real coins and real dice do not work that way, and neither do the dice on this site.

Also, your example of winning the lottery is flawed in that the dice complainers are not winning -- they are losing. If a guy loses the lottery 3 times, 30 times, or 3,000 times in a row, this is not news; it is par for the course.

Similarly, if a dice complainer predicts wrong twice in a row, as you did, it is not news.

In order for your example to hold any water, you would first have to predict RIGHT three times in a row, which you have not done. Your position is obviously more similar to the guy who repeatedly loses the lottery, which is, as I said in my original post, yet another example of "dog bites man," and is boring, quite expected, and by no means newsworthy.

According to your feeble brand of "logic," if I were to roll a die 5 times, yielding 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, then the next number must necessarily be 6. However, your thinking is as illogical as this example, and in reality, the previous rolls DO NOT determine the subsequent rolls. Real dice manifest independent of your unscientific theories, as do the CC dice.

You were wrong both times, and this is because your theory is wrong.

The dice are unpredictable, exactly as they are designed to be. Your errors prove, not that there is a problem with the dice, but that there is NO problem with the dice. Your thinking is diametrically opposed to reality, my friend, and I am beginning to doubt if you are even capable of apprehending the actual facts due to being unnaturally attached to your incorrect and unscientific preconceived notions.

However, the fact that you are consistently and undeniably wrong shows that what I am saying is fact.

By the way, no lottery is ever chosen "randomly." There are always specific parameters within which the numbers manifest, without exception. Specific and predictable parameters of manifestation are characteristics wholly divorced from the theoretical concept of "randomness," and as lotteries always possess such characteristics, they can never be defined as "random" in the least bit.

[ppgangster]

If those things actually happened (of which there is no proof by the way) then they were 100% likely to happen. 99.99541% is incorrect, and 99.8 is incorrect. The correct number, in each and every case, is that whatever patterns the dice actually manifest are 100% likely to manifest.

100% -- in reality, there is never any exception to this number.

Ok, I wasn't about to say anything until I saw the last post.... it is simple, you are both right, but slightly off. The Dice are 100% correct like Klobber mentionned. The Statistics predictions tell us that there is 0.00469% chance for THESE CONDITIONS AND NUMBERS to happen in THIS PARTICULAR SUCCESSION!

According to your feeble brand of "logic," if I were to roll a die 5 times, yielding 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, then the next number must necessarily be 6.

Here for the numbers to happen in this succession, you have to calculate 6 (the number of the faces on a dice) to the power = to the number of time you throw the dice... so here 6^6 (6 power 6) = 46 656. Conclusion, this serie doesn't predict 6, it says that if after 1,2,3,4,5 then there is ( 1/46 656)x100 = 0,00214% chance of having a 6.

Go do some University stats, then come back with your "logic" Klobber...

[KLOBBER]

If those things actually happened (of which there is no proof by the way) then they were 100% likely to happen. 99.99541% is incorrect, and 99.8 is incorrect. The correct number, in each and every case, is that whatever patterns the dice actually manifest are 100% likely to manifest.

100% -- in reality, there is never any exception to this number.

Ok, I wasn't about to say anything until I saw the last post.... it is simple, you are both right, but slightly off. The Dice are 100% correct like Klobber mentionned. The Statistics predictions tell us that there is 0.00469% chance for THESE CONDITIONS AND NUMBERS to happen in THIS PARTICULAR SUCCESSION!

According to your feeble brand of "logic," if I were to roll a die 5 times, yielding 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, then the next number must necessarily be 6.

Here for the numbers to happen in this succession, you have to calculate 6 (the number of the faces on a dice) to the power = to the number of time you throw the dice... so here 6^6 (6 power 6) = 46 656. Conclusion, this serie doesn't predict 6, it says that if after 1,2,3,4,5 then there is ( 1/46 656)x100 = 0,00214% chance of having a 6.

Go do some University stats, then come back with your "logic" Klobber...

You are as incorrect as the other guy who posted "statistics." In reality, previous rolls NEVER affect subsequent rolls, and your numbers are off. Mine are perfectly accurate.

[JoshyBoy]

I once lost a 12 v 1 so annoying

But then one game I had 18 that took out 10 without losses, then an 8 with loss of 1 troop, and then a 7 with 4 troops loss

That's 18 v 25 = 13 leftover.

The second best 45 seconds of my CC career...

[ppgangster]

[...]The Dice are 100% correct like Klobber mentioned. The Statistics predictions tell us that there is 0.00469% chance for THESE CONDITIONS AND NUMBERS to happen in THIS PARTICULAR SUCCESSION!

You are as incorrect as the other guy who posted "statistics." In reality, previous rolls NEVER affect subsequent rolls, and your numbers are off. Mine are perfectly accurate.

Ok, just for your little mind and LACK of attention, I bolded and color the important part of the message... man, such a little brain in this big head... (if you are like your avy...)

In statistics previous rolls do, because they are talking about a SUCCESSION of numbers... plz stop posting if you can't read and you don't understand!

[KLOBBER]

[...]The Dice are 100% correct like Klobber mentioned. The Statistics predictions tell us that there is 0.00469% chance for THESE CONDITIONS AND NUMBERS to happen in THIS PARTICULAR SUCCESSION!

You are as incorrect as the other guy who posted "statistics." In reality, previous rolls NEVER affect subsequent rolls, and your numbers are off. Mine are perfectly accurate.

Ok, just for your little mind and LACK of attention, I bolded and color the important part of the message... man, such a little brain in this big head... (if you are like your avy...)

In statistics previous rolls do, because they are talking about a SUCCESSION of numbers... plz stop posting if you can't read and you don't understand!

Oh, I understand perfectly. Your theory is incorrect and unscientific.

The fact that everyone who believes (and it is a belief) as you do is ALWAYS proven wrong by the actual dice patterns proves my point.

[ppgangster]

The fact that everyone who believes (and it is a belief) as you do is ALWAYS proven wrong by the actual dice patterns proves my point.

This is not the point of this thread... sorry to disappoint you...

[Thezzaruz]

In statistics previous rolls do, because they are talking about a SUCCESSION of numbers... plz stop posting if you can't read and you don't understand!

But that does not apply here. Every roll is a new individual roll, not a part of a succession of rolls. Whatever the expected value of a dice roll is it will never be a relevant number.

What's weird is that even though the odds suggest this only should happen to maybe one or two people in the history of conquer club, I'm sure there's more than that many people who have had this happen. It definitely defies the odds, but I can't think of a reason for it.

Not it doesn't defy the odds. There are a few hundred thousand rolls made each day IIRC and that means that even a extremely unlikely situation suddenly becomes likely to happen.

[KLOBBER]

In statistics previous rolls do, because they are talking about a SUCCESSION of numbers... plz stop posting if you can't read and you don't understand!

But that does not apply here. Every roll is a new individual roll, not a part of a succession of rolls. Whatever the expected value of a dice roll is it will never be a relevant number.

Exactly.

[ppgangster]

I was trying to explain where he got his statistics from... but I did mention earlier on that Klobber was right, only the SUCCESSION of numbers are odd... but that wasn't part of his argumentation...

Yes, every roll taken by itself is UNIQUE... let's put an end to this...

[maniacmath17]

What's weird is that even though the odds suggest this only should happen to maybe one or two people in the history of conquer club, I'm sure there's more than that many people who have had this happen. It definitely defies the odds, but I can't think of a reason for it.

Not it doesn't defy the odds. There are a few hundred thousand rolls made each day IIRC and that means that even a extremely unlikely situation suddenly becomes likely to happen.

I see this point made a lot, and I've already done the numbers for it, it still doesn't add up. The problem is assuming that these few hundred thousand rolls are done in the situation in question. Of the almost 5 million games, a 32+ attacking a 2 probably only happens maybe 20 times on average for a total sample of 100 million, and so for one person to lose that's perfectly likely, but from what I've seen this isn't a common occurrence and I'm sure others have lost even though statistically anymore than 1 is highly unlikely with random dice.

As for Klobber, I'll do an example with the man bites dog approach. Someone rolls a 6 sided die hoping to roll a 6. He does this 10 times and doesn't roll a 6. No reason to panic right? Rolling a 6 isn't expected, so going a long time without one is fine. Now lets say he rolls one million times and still doesn't roll a 6. Can we at this point assume there's something wrong with the die that he's rolling? According to you there isn't a problem because he shouldn't expect to roll a 6. Hopefully this clears things up.

[JOHNNYROCKET24]

What is the most troops you've had attack a country with 3 and lose? I just lost a 22 v 3 a few minutes ago. In case you were wondering, that's 99.99541% to win.

I also lost a 21 v 6 in the same game which is only a 99.8% favorite but combine the two and that should basically never happen in a game. Now I've never had an issue with the dice, but has there been any research gone into possible "streakyness" of the dice?

Its all lies !!