Now let me give you an example of when Blitz WAS flawed. This was probably at least 6 years ago and only lasted for a short period after an update made. Every blitz attack against a territory with 1 army would ALWAYS have a result of attacker losing 1 and the defender losing 1. That's a flawed algorithm. I reported it immediately once I realized the consistency and at first they doubted me but then went into the code and found out I was right. If you can prove real flaws, they'll be fixed. But a single battle outcome, regardless of how unlikely, is zero proof of a flaw. You'd have to record thousands and thousands of blitz outcomes to be able to see any kinds of abnormalities to the statistics of the rolls.
@SectaOne - your first sentence is interesting. Based on what? I despise manual rolling as it skews the results in favour of the lesser no. of armies. Fact!!! It is definitely different from blitzing.
It's different in the way that it's true dice rolls. Balanced blitz is designed to avoid surprising results so that people don't whine when they lose a battle that was a little more than slightly in their favor. Balanced Blitz unfairly puts the advantage to the attacker.
@Briand - agree but balanced blitz doesn't deliver what it's designed to do. It's rubbish! If my software company's developers coded like this, they'd be out of a job.
Steve Clements
HOW TO VOTE FOR THIS FEATURE? Tap the 'Do you like this idea?' below
91 people like this idea