Lev306 wrote:You guys do have a point that in time, the dice balances out. However, that still doesn't help the effects on gameplay. A bad streak can permanently cripple a game. Although u can argue that the next game you can get incredibly lucky streaks, it doesn't matter in terms of gameplay. Firstly, you will win half and lose half the games which won't help your points all that much. Rather overall consistent dice rolls will allow a player with good strategy to raise their score much more quickly than the streaky dice player whose strategy will ultimately fail due to the dice. Secondly, the players in the game can strongly affect your score too. If you get bad streaks in a game with players ranked much lower than you, you can say bye bye to loads of points, possibly more points than you can recover with good dice in several games afterwards.
While I personally don't mind the dice, it would be nice though if somehow the balancing of streaks were a bit more fair. Its not too annoying or that big a deal if you lose, say 5 ot 6 to 3 odds or something of that nature but it would be annoying if it would be pretty annoying and very destructive to your game if you lost at greater odds.
Streaks are to be expected in truly random dice for two reasons.
1) Streaks, meaning the same number occurring over and over again, will occur in truly random dice. In other words: a truly random number generator can be expected to produce a stream of 6's: 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6, every so often. In fact, it can be statistically determined how often such a sequence is likely to occur. If such a sequence never occurred it would be highly suspicious.
2) When we talk about streaks at CC we usually mean bad attack outcomes. So for instance if we get the following dice rolls:
1 2 3 4 5 2 5 2 5 2 1 4 6 5 6 3 2 4 4 3 2 1 5 6 3 2 1 6 3 6
looks pretty random, yes?
What if we were making a series of 3v2 dice attacks and we received the above dice rolls:
[(1 2 3) (4 5)] = attacker loses two armies
[(2 5 2) (5 2)] = attacker loses two armies
[(1 4 6) (5 6)] = attacker loses two armies
[(3 2 4) (4 3)] = attacker loses two armies
[(2 1 5) (6 3)] = attacker loses two armies
[(2 1 6) (3 6)] = attacker loses two armies
We've just lost 12 attacking armies and the defender has lost none. All this carnage resulted from an innocent (and random) looking string of dice rolls:
1 2 3 4 5 2 5 2 5 2 1 4 6 5 6 3 2 4 4 3 2 1 5 6 3 2 1 6 3 6
I attacked a territory defended by two armies, from an attacking country with 13 armies, and when the dust settled I had one army on my country and the defender still had two on his.
When we talk of streaky dice this is what we're talking about.
From our perspective it is a streak, but it certainly doesn't mean that the dice are not truly random. For example, if before we commenced our 3v2 dice attacks we had made a 1v1 dice attack (and assuming we got the same dice rolls) we would have experienced a much different outcome in the 3v2 attacks that followed:
[(1) (2)] attacker loses 1 army
[(3 4 5) (2 5)] attacker loses 1 army, defender loses 1 army
[(2 5 2) (1 4)] defender loses 2 armies
[(6 5 6) (3 2)] defender loses 2 armies
[(4 4 3) (2 1)] defender loses 2 armies
[(5 6 3) (2 1)] defender loses 2 armies
6 3 6
So, if as an attacker I attacked with 2 armies a country defended by 2 armies and I lost 1 army.
Then if I attacked with 5 armies a country defended by 9 armies, and when the dust cleared, I was able to advance 4 armies into the defeated defender's territory.
Two drastically different battle outcomes but all with the same dice rolls.