Implemented

Is anyone complaining about dice rolls taking into account that the defender has an advantage by winning dice that are tied?

How are the numbers generated anyway? Can SMG enlighten us? And since this is likely to be put into an update, what type of number generator will be implemented? In the end, no computer algorithm to generate numbers is ever really random. It has to have some sort of basis, such as time. One website, random.org uses slight fluctuations in weather (realtime data) to determine its generated numbers. That's about as random as you can get. Probably more random than rolling dice.

Is the blitz code any different than rolling one at a time? I have noticed the blitz with large armies takes a bit to compute and will lag the game, so this suggests it's more than just selecting a random overall result and I think it's actually rolling all of the dice rolls one by one in the background. So it shouldn't be any different. I get burned sometimes but i am aware of potential bad luck so I know when to use Blitz and when not to. Sometimes time forces me to blitz when I shouldnt though.

It would be nice to reset our dice statistics. Like with a car odometer. Show me the total but allow me to see what they were for a particular game or whenever I last hit the reset button. that'd be cool to see how bad I rolled on one game vs the obvious 16% across the board that everyone sees after a few games. I had one account that was skewed a little bit on the low side for a while.

Is the blitz code any different than rolling one at a time? I have noticed the blitz with large armies takes a bit to compute and will lag the game, so this suggests it's more than just selecting a random overall result and I think it's actually rolling all of the dice rolls one by one in the background. So it shouldn't be any different. I get burned sometimes but i am aware of potential bad luck so I know when to use Blitz and when not to. Sometimes time forces me to blitz when I shouldnt though.

It would be nice to reset our dice statistics. Like with a car odometer. Show me the total but allow me to see what they were for a particular game or whenever I last hit the reset button. that'd be cool to see how bad I rolled on one game vs the obvious 16% across the board that everyone sees after a few games. I had one account that was skewed a little bit on the low side for a while.

The results of my dice rolling is NOT within +-5% like the rules claim they are! I have a 21% chance of rolling 1's and a 15% chance of rolling every other number... This is certainly NOT acceptable! I have lost countless attacks due to this very messed up dice rolling system!

What was changed with the new version? All of a sudden I have a significantly increased chance of rolling a one. Before the update I had a 16% equal chance of all probabilities. What was wrong with the last probability algorithm and what was changed to "improve" it? Seem reasonable to provide us with some info SMG!

Justin,

That's not how physical dice work. They don't guarantee 16% within any limited time period, like a turn, or a game, or ever a dozen games. 16.66667% is what we EXPECT to see over many many roles of the dice, perhaps several thousand. Dice have no memory. There is no way that the dice know that you have been rolling extra 1's during a game, much less any way they can fix that in the rest of the game.

That is correct. Odds/statistics are after many, many, many iterations. And it doesn't change the outcome roll to roll. I have noticed since the new algorithm that I've had a lot more large attacks where I get a really bad outcome. I actually watched it happen to everyone in the same game, constantly losing 11+ men when attacking a 3. I don't blame the algorithm yet, but a few of my games have been beyond normal since the update. I assume coincidence until I see a long term pattern.

Thanks Grampy, I'm well aware of how probability works. I can confirm I have been rolling extra 1's because the game statistics show an 18% roll rate for 1's ever since the upgrade. I have a very large sample size of 179 games, only 14 of which were played since the update. My statistics settled into a 16% spread for all rolls well over a hundred games ago and have remained that way, as would be expected. Now all of a sudden after the update they are skewed towards 1's, as indicated by the stats kept by the game. A 2% change towards a specific number, as weighted over only 14 out of 179 samples is fairly significant. The user above me also noted a high skewing toward 1's, so there may indeed be a pattern.
And yes, representing realistic dice rolls should be very easy via RNG functions. This thread is about a "fix'' that has already applied. I was not necessarily of the opinion it was broken to begin with. So the question is what did they change to "correct'' the previous roll algorithm? It seems odd that it would need fixing in the first place, programming these probabilities should be trivial.

Justin,
I completely agree with you about the dice rolling ones! As you can see in the picture attached to my post right above yours, I have a 21% chance of rolling a one and only 15% chance of rolling every other #! That is no where close to normal or fair. A full 6% difference between the chance of rolling a one compared to rolling any other number is NOT statistically possible if the dice rolls algorithm is truly random. I have played over 120 games so this isn't the result of a small sample size.... I agree this is ridiculously unfair and something they need to figure out a way to fix!

Well, if everyone is rolling extra ones, it's not "unfair." But it is very surprising to see everyone on the map suddenly lose big attacks that you'd think they'd easily win. I had one game where everyone got their big army, started owning the map and would lose out big time on one of the blitz attacks. I'm talking like 40 armies losing against 10 kind of attacks. I've witnessed a major increase in high losses on some attacks and watch others bite the dust in the same game which has been unusual although not always impossible to happen.

Also, in one game I had 2 manual rolls where both me and the defender all rolled 1's. That doesn't happen often, or ever and it was twice in a game. I'm usually using blitz so that's crazy.

Anyway. It's certainly making for a less predictable game. I used to feel confident blowing through people knowing that on average, the attacker does better than 50% of the kills. Now I'm used to needing well above the average to be sure and I'm still getting burned sometimes. Same as the defender of course but I have no choice in that.

Also, in one game I had 2 manual rolls where both me and the defender all rolled 1's. That doesn't happen often, or ever and it was twice in a game. I'm usually using blitz so that's crazy.

Anyway. It's certainly making for a less predictable game. I used to feel confident blowing through people knowing that on average, the attacker does better than 50% of the kills. Now I'm used to needing well above the average to be sure and I'm still getting burned sometimes. Same as the defender of course but I have no choice in that.

Forgot to add, I checked on one of my accounts with 100+ games. All of my accounts in the past have had 16% across the board. This one now has 17% on the 1's after about maybe 10 games. "excited" to see how much this % increases over time :)

I don't like the updated dice algorithm. As a player for quick computer games I've already had 5+ games where I lose 10+ lives before the computer loses one life on a 3 v 2 roll.
What are those odds?
Blitzkrieg is just as bad. 16 lives lost going up against 3? Crazy. It's happened more than once in the last week.

I'm haven't noticed any big change in dice roll results. I also think that the algorithm should ever have been changed. As soon as SMG said they were changing it they took away the credibility of all dice algorithms used from that point on. Now there will always be people saying it's flawed.

should never* have been

I started this request. I haven't actually calculated any stats, but it definitely seems more true to me since the update. I've had very few 10 vs 2, 12 vs 3, etc. losses ( or wins if I'm the 2 or 3). Thanks!

## Steve Clements

HOW TO VOTE FOR THIS FEATURE?Tap the 'Do you like this idea?' below57 people like this idea