Hi SectaOne,
pelase understand that some of the questions, properly and detailed answered, would help potential cheaters and hackers and therefore are under wraps.
"First does SMG use the algorithm Ryan described on reddit to generate the battle outcomes?"
This is one of them, but Ryan is not entirely wrong. No detawils here, however, we are glad that FINALLY someone confirmed we don't favor anyone and that the rules are the same for all, AI and Human, Novice and Expert, Freebie and Premium user.
"Third what specifically are you referring to when you say you are within 0.X percent?"
When we tested our algo against
http://riskodds.com/index.php
and a test system written here,
our outcomes in 10.000, 100.000 and more battles were always less then 1% off the value there (fluctuating in both directions), referring to WHO WINS.
Troop losses were within 5% +/- of those there.
One problem we found with using ANY RNG system, no matter which (tried several industry standard ones) is that users experience unlikely cases more often than they would expect in real life. It's partially Voodoo.
Best,
Ivan
Eh... If your rank actually falls back down to novice you should be playing novices and beginners. The point of ranks is to find others of similar skill. Otherwise, it's a huge waste of time and no fun. And why would a grandmaster want to play games where coming in 2nd place will knock away a lot of points and winning give next to nothing?
Untrue probabilities really piss off in this game.
You have true probabilities or your are tinkering probabilities.
So how you decide whom to favor? Game looks very biased.
Did the recent soft-update change the dice back to its old method? I noticed some lag on big blitz battles. It used to do that years ago.
I completely agree, the rng in this game is really bad. They need to make it less rng, and more about the number of troops you have. I've had a situation where I 15 and my opponent had 16 and He took my territory without taking a single hitpoint! This game having rankings is just kind of a joke at this point, there is way to much rng.
I find balanced blitz more like true random anyway. It definitely glitches unless I'm missing something. I'm happy to be called stupid but how can the attached happen in balanced blitz?
Because I seem to remember on the computer version of one of those two versions of games I had like hundred to several hundred troop units on a single territory and with in a single throw of the die it went from that amount to anywhere between 1 to a 2 dozen Risk Troop Units. Now that is true flawed probabilities due to the point of computer cheating.
I'm here to finish this discussion once and for all. A random number generator being used is as good as actual dice fucking morons. If you both have lots of supplementary troops, then the casualty odds for an individual skirmish between armies is favorable to the attacker by a specific margin. The specific margin, idiots that never went to anything better than a community college, is a "profit" of 2 armies for the attacker every 13 3 vs 2 rolls. So shut up idiots, because a RNG is as good as actual die.
Yes, balanced blitz solved all of the complaining about "unfair" roles by making the dice less realistic. There really shouldn't be complaining about dice because of this, even though the game is now less interesting if it's used. I always use true random. Skilled players understand that the dice don't always fall exactly on the odds.
The game cheats. Example…opponent (their bot) has 10 in west Africa. Attacking my Brazil with 9. Wipes me out then take over the entire continent of South America. Plus has 6 left over after occupying all country’s. Developers do not care if you’re upset. They’ve known this for a long time. Stubborn crooked people.
Steve Clements
HOW TO VOTE FOR THIS FEATURE? Tap the 'Do you like this idea?' below
91 people like this idea