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.
Here's the problem. Odds "slightly in your favor" do not account to you winning every time and the game "being flawed" when you don't win. When one bad outcomes happens, everyone comes here to whine that the game is flawed and in favor of the "other guy." Odds and averages are just that. If you could show that you lost 90 times out of a 100 as the defender with the 10 vs 9, then maybe you can make such an argument. But a single battle will only slightly on average go to the defender but really, any result is fair game. You could have won with no losses. He could have won with no losses. "even" is not "fair" with dice.
Hey Briand, sorry you misinterpreted, I was the defender whose capital was attacked. Thanks for confirming, though, that I shouldn't have lost. Just reinforces my view that the game is flawed.
The odds were against you only having 10 armies against 9. The attacker has a slight advantage but only if there are 3 armies to fight with. Assuming you're going to lose on average as many troops as the defender, there is a high chance that you will be beat down to less than 4 and then suffer the serious consequences of only rolling 2 or 1 die. You can look up the odds online as many write about the exact numbers, but basically you should not expect to win this fight. You CAN win, but I would roll one by one to be safe. My general rule is to assume you're going to lose as many as the defender when using blitz, so you always need at least 3-4 armies more ON AVERAGE. You will find that you lose less ON AVERAGE as you sweep the map. But low army quantities give huge chances of high swings because the dice are only rolled a few times and if you're down to 3, you would be better off quitting unless it's a must win or lose the game type of scenario.
I'm by no means Math literate but would like to understand if I should lose a 10 v 9 battle on my capital? I lost to a competitor who had 3 armies remaining. Game was based on balanced blitz. Was this luck, crap algorithm, sore loser, or something else? Please explain as I don't understand how I lost! I'm one of these players that just quits the game when this happens, spoiling it for the remaining players.
@Julian. Seriously? If you have 4 troops and you want to take a shot at getting a card, it only makes sense to do one roll one at a time. What's the point in using Blitz on situations which can lose you the whole game over saving a few seconds of time? is this why so many people complain about Blitz being "rigged?" Because you expect risky situations to always go your way? I'm not doing Blitz up against a territory with 1 army when I only have 7 or less. I won't even use blitz early in the game in those scenarios because guess what? There ARE times when you're not going to take it! And you want to stop when you're down to 3 troops rather than take those more-than-likely losses over a non-essential take-over.
Don't bother responding, my time with Risk is up. Going to find a 'better' strategy game to occupy my time where skill counts.
@Briand. Aah, so you're one of these people that manually roll which frustrates the hell out of me. You're basically frigging the system. Explains a lot.
Do you have actual data on how many wins and losses an 8 to 1 battle results in? And how many troops are lost when winning? "many times" has no meaning. We need to know that your wins are minimal, also. I personally find an 8 to 1 not a guarantee, so I roll the dice one at a time for those to be safe, unless time is an issue. I only use blitz when I'm running the map. You really don't want to keep fighting when you're down to 3 or 2 troops. My biggest complaint is that blitz doesn't have the option to stop when your army dwindles to 2 or 1 dice.
What are you asking for? The dice to be rigged so that the results are always as you expect when you roll?
Luck is a huge part of the game. That's why you opt to take a "Risk" to win.
HOW TO VOTE FOR THIS FEATURE? Tap the 'Do you like this idea?' below
91 people like this idea