[Poll] Increase attackers odds at winning a roll?

[Dako]

How would you feel if CC were to increase % of the winning outcome for the attacker by ... 5% or 10%? For both you and your opponents?

Just thinking out loud. I, myself, would prefer to win more rolls when I see them rather than rely on my opponents rolls.

[SirSebstar]

no, just no

[Dako]

Just want to know why people whine so much about the odds. Maybe they wanted to increased them in the end. Who knows.

[SirSebstar]

It is why we have GD. knock yourself out. I think no matter what happens, as long as not everybody wins, someone will always whine, and when everybody wins too by the way. Its human nature.

[rdsrds2120]

Changing the odds at all would be bad because of how accustomed we are to them. Setting up a good defense would be harder, and if people have even more attacker's advantage, just imagine what the lucky dice outcomes would be like.

-rd

[shieldgenerator7]

NO! don't steel my ability to control the dice with my mind. Well, actually never mind, it wouldn't actually affect it anyways. But no, I'd say don't change it

[rabbiton]

Just want to know why people whine so much about the odds. Maybe they wanted to increased them in the end. Who knows.

your options to reduce dice complaints are to change the chance of winning an attack to:

A) 100%
B) 0%

personally i prefer option B.

under this option we can change the website name to "Click-Click Club" with the tagline "A Great Place to Come and Click".

however we will probably start getting a lot of "Click Quality" complaints.

[Army of GOD]

Agree with rds. I have a lot of defensive strategies pretty much memorized, and with new odds this would suck. Dice complainers can suck it the f*ck up because even if the dice are shit, THEYRE SHIT FOR EVERYONE SO GET OVER IT.

[gStrong]

Isn't the odds determined by the odds of the dice. How would one be able to ajdust the odds by a specific percentage?

[rabbiton]

Isn't the odds determined by the odds of the dice. How would one be able to ajdust the odds by a specific percentage?

through the magic of...

DICE MANIPULATION

sure, it's way harder than just going with simple random, and sure it runs counter to any plausible business rationale, but the payoff is UNMITIGATED GLEE.

it's true that the odds of the dice are determined by the dice, just like years of intense study have concluded that the odds of the weather are determined by the weather, and the odds the stupid are determined by the stupid, but with

DICE MANIPULATION

we can control the very dice themselves, and hence their odds.

another name for it is "computer programming".

[nikola_milicki]

w/e as long as I dont lose every goddamn extra important 5vs1 or 4,3,3 vs 1

[Timminz]

no, just no

Agreed.

Just want to know why people whine so much about the odds.

They complain because of their poor understanding of random numbers, and the ways the can manifest.

[owenshooter]

this is just stupid. i have a better suggestion. how about, if when you attack, as long as your number is greater, you always win... just a stupid suggestion... sorry, no offense, i just don't think it is all that wise...-the black nostrodamus

[gStrong]

Isn't the odds determined by the odds of the dice. How would one be able to ajdust the odds by a specific percentage?

through the magic of...

DICE MANIPULATION

sure, it's way harder than just going with simple random, and sure it runs counter to any plausible business rationale, but the payoff is UNMITIGATED GLEE.

it's true that the odds of the dice are determined by the dice, just like years of intense study have concluded that the odds of the weather are determined by the weather, and the odds the stupid are determined by the stupid, but with

DICE MANIPULATION

we can control the very dice themselves, and hence their odds.

another name for it is "computer programming".

So are you saying that the odds of the dice here have been programmed and are not random?

Where can I see the program?

[rabbiton]

Isn't the odds determined by the odds of the dice. How would one be able to ajdust the odds by a specific percentage?

through the magic of...

DICE MANIPULATION

sure, it's way harder than just going with simple random, and sure it runs counter to any plausible business rationale, but the payoff is UNMITIGATED GLEE.

it's true that the odds of the dice are determined by the dice, just like years of intense study have concluded that the odds of the weather are determined by the weather, and the odds the stupid are determined by the stupid, but with

DICE MANIPULATION

we can control the very dice themselves, and hence their odds.

another name for it is "computer programming".

So are you saying that the odds of the dice here have been programmed and are not random?

Where can I see the program?

hello gStrong.

tell me, gStrong, would you like to be a happy fellow? would you enjoy to be laughing 23 hours a day, and smirking for the other hour? would you like to be that chap/wench of whom everyone is always saying "why are they so goshdarned happy?"

well you can do so, with the magic of

DICE MANIPULATION

first you need to go to programming school. or attend a web page on the matter. become a master of the coding arts. then you can develop a website based on a game of chance. that's when the fun begins.

instead of going the simple route and just using plain vanilla flavored randomness for your chance (this is known as "uniform" in the statistical parlance gStrong), you spend the extra time and effort to introduce

DICE MANIPULATION

why? cause it makes you smile, gStrong! it makes you so happy to mess with people that are giving you money. even though their money does make you happy too, the upset caused by the

DICE MANIPULATION

makes you way happier, gStrong, let me tell you it is intensely pleasurable.

you will probably need to wear a condom on your mind so as to not transmit the intense pleasure to others. it will just come spurting out of you all day and night. seriously, you will not need to go out or experience the company of others due to the amazing unmitigated glee caused by the

DICE

MANIPULATION

[Dako]

Isn't the odds determined by the odds of the dice. How would one be able to ajdust the odds by a specific percentage?

7-sided dice for example.

this is just stupid. i have a better suggestion. how about, if when you attack, as long as your number is greater, you always win... just a stupid suggestion... sorry, no offense, i just don't think it is all that wise...-the black nostrodamus

This thread is not a suggestion, do not take me wrong. I just want to hear some opinions on the subject.

[Master Fenrir]

I would like the odds of me to win a roll to increase by 5-10%. However, I would like the odds of my opponents to win a roll to either stay the same or (preferably) decrease.

[Rodion]

How would you feel if CC were to increase % of the winning outcome for the attacker by ... 5% or 10%? For both you and your opponents?

Just thinking out loud. I, myself, would prefer to win more rolls when I see them rather than rely on my opponents rolls.

I think people would complain even more when they don't start the game, as the odds of the game being "over" before they get to play round 1 would increase (especially on 1v1s).

[Army of GOD]

I would like the odds of me to win a roll to increase by 5-10%. However, I would like the odds of my opponents to win a roll to either stay the same or (preferably) decrease.

Welcome to the forums Master Fenrir!!

[rabbiton]

How would you feel if CC were to increase % of the winning outcome for the attacker by ... 5% or 10%? For both you and your opponents?

Just thinking out loud. I, myself, would prefer to win more rolls when I see them rather than rely on my opponents rolls.

I think people would complain even more when they don't start the game, as the odds of the game being "over" before they get to play round 1 would increase (especially on 1v1s).

the very concept shows a failed understanding of the psychology of the dice complainer. the dice complainer usually doesn't have a proper knowledge of the statistical expectations involved, or if they do, their evaluations of events are considerably biased towards what they would like to happen and, perhaps, honestly believe 'should' be happening based on the fact that they know themselves to be a superior player.

hence raising the odds of winning will merely raise their expectation of winning, which in turn will raise their exasperation with losing.

the net result is a conservation of stupidity.

whether or not changing the odds might make a better game is another question.

[Joodoo]

Recently in my Doodle Earth build game, I found out that by assaulting a defending stack that had more troops then my attacking stack, the defending stack could still be decimated.
In other words, no.