SMG Studio

Probabilities are just that, probable, not a sure thing.

I understand probability. When you are 98% chance to win you should win about 98 times out of 100, maybe only 94,maybe 99, maybe 97, but statistically it's impossible to win 50-60% time when there's a significant amount of data.

I don't think there is any problem with the current dice roll system. I imagine they are done using a pseudo random number generator which is standard for games and is basically the same as actual dice rolling. I have played a lot and my dice stats show that I roll each number 16% of the time. This is of course just what you would expect with a large sample. Individual battles can appear weighted but keep in mind that they are limited samples.

I have noticed since the last update a week or so ago that the chances of winning 6 vs 3 blitz attacks does not seem to match probabilities any longer. It seems close to 50/50 or worse then it should be.

I see this is now "in progress." May I ask for a general explanation of the algorithm changes being made?

Matt, so if the probability is 92% that 4 armies will beat 1 army, you don't care if it's actually 50-50 for everyone? And how can it be fair if it doesn't match true probabilities? When I evaluate my chances of success on an attack it's based on true dice probability, not some weird programming algorithm that I have no idea how to calculate. I.e if 9 on 3 is 95% true dice, but the algorithm makes it 60-40. Now take 8 on 2 with a 97% but the algorithm makes that one 99%. How can that be fair?

Yes ever since I've been playing this game I've noticed there is something wonky going on with the dice. Honestly I wouldn't mind a random number generator. It really needs to be fixed to keep people's interest in the game. As for the blitz mechanic, it should really just be a sped up version of normal dice rolling. Rolls tend to go strongly in favor of one side and then when people realize the risks they're taking you end up getting people who just rolled out 20 versus 30 situations and it makes the game take longer. It was meant to make things go faster in the first place.

SMG, your loyal playerbase accept luck as a core mechanic of Risk and that streaks are inevitably part of that. Please don't do anything funky with the algorithm to placate those blaming "unfair" rolls...

I would agree with Sam's comments if 'luck' was an occasional influence to the game but there are too many occasions even during a single game that the dice rolls just do not stack up with ridiculous turnovers. If you want to take strategy and skill out of the scenario then please continue, personally I'm finding it hard to even finish a game under these conditions as it's fast becoming a pointless and tiresome effort.

It's not bad now but I think this would be an improvement

I've had a actuary buddy of mine observe a number of games. 100% confirmed Hasbro's "algorithm" is horrifically flawed. My dice rolls were determined statistically impossible. Hasbro needs to get an ACTUAL actuary to design a REAL algorithm for dice rolls that ESPECIALLY takes into account the dynamic nature of 3v2, 3v1, 2v2, 2v1, 1v2 and 1v1. Of course they wouldn't invest that up front. A REAL actuary is not cheap. If they're not making six figures, they're not a REAL actuary that actually know what they're doing. They probably put an undergrad intern on it with the effort to match. Until Hasbro ACTUALLY fixes this, this game cannot be taken seriously, is intended for children, and will continue to be insulting to adults that understand statistics. Going back to to the physical game where reality exists with dice rolls.