Start a new topic

New Dice Algorithm / True dice rolls

Game does not use true dice roll probabilities. Many, many times I've had 97-99% chance to win and dont.

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

91 people like this idea

The dice is a primary issue - to the extent that it could make or break SMG... 

As this is officially sponsored by Hasbro - they must have a substantial financial stake in the game

Either SMG paid Hasbro a lot of money for the franchise - or Hasbro didn't take any money up-front, opting instead to take a big slice of the ongoing revenue it generates...

This means that the game has to be successful and bring in the money!

The flawed Dice will significantly hamper the profitability of the game - which may force SMG and Hasbro to give up on it entirely...which would be bad news for everybody!

 I am pretty sure SMG bought this from Hasbro. I got on board when it was only Hasbro. Or maybe they merged. I didn't really look into it; I just know the name changed at one point.

If it helps, I had a game where I had about 35 troops or so going up against 60. I rolled one by one, since the goal was to just beat him down as much as I could without going below 3 troops on my territory. He lost 3 and I lost about 27 to 30 or whatever it was before the timer ran out. I think you guys need to stop blaming Blitz so much. There's a case where it was ridiculous for me as the attacker to lose so much. And I did it roll by roll. So it can happen and it did to me.

FYI, the new algorithm has been programmed to explicitly give Novice users an unfair advantage by heavily biasing their rolls away from 1’s. I’ve investigated this thoroughly and it’s undeniable—create a new account, play a game, then check your stats, you can easily observe this yourself. It’s obviously a highly unethical attempt at keeping new players happy and encouraging them to buy the full game. I suggest you ban all Novice users from any games you create if you want a fair playing field. Please open a new ticket and complain to game creators. We need to hammer them until they decide to be truthful with their paying customers and undo this cheap marketing trick that ruins the game for everyone else!
Have you been able to advance a player to beginner rank without the novice making all but one roll so that you can test dice rolls at the beginner level with a clean slate?

What happens when a novice rolls again a novice? The attacker wins most of the time? So it's all about offense for novices?

I boot novices anyway. And usually beginners. and if SMG would take a moment to program filtering I'd only host games for masters and grandmasters. But you know, your mom.


Briand, That level of complexity is not needed to test what I’m talking about. It’s a simple biasing away from rolling 1’s for any user with a Novice rank, doesn’t matter who they are rolling against or in what scenario. Create a new account, play one game as a Novice, check stats — You will find roughly a 12% rolling of 1’s and roughly 17% rolls for every other number. Create any number of new accounts to test this and you will find that distribution bias every time (keep in mind probability still applies so you may not end up with those exact numbers but something close).
All accounts roll fewer ones than they should. I've created a few new accounts and after a game or two they are beginner and before long master. Even after reaching grandmaster the skewed dice remain. Since most of those accounts games are not played at novice level it demonstrates that everyone has skewed rolls and while not accurate the game is balanced.
Nah, that’s nonsense. Any account with a sufficiently large enough sample size comes out with roughly 15-17% statistic for any given roll probability. If everyone is biased away from rolling 1’s then everybody here above Novice should see a below 14% chance of rolling 1. Everybody reading can check and see that’s not the case. I have several friends that play, everyone has 16% even stats after a few dozen games including myself.
Hmmm, that’s messed up. Thanks for posting. Are all these accounts created recently? I wonder if it has something to do with newer accounts. Anybody else reading should post their stats just like SectaOne so we can see how pervasive this is.
The Wilburn Howitzer account is fairly new. I made it immediately after the update that added spectator mode. The other two are a bit older but stll newer than the last dice algorithm change I know of. But I think all accounts roll with the same algorithm as that makes sense to me as a programmer and SMG says it is the case. the reason old accounts stats are not as skewed is because they have a large sample from before the change to the matrix dice.
My stats as a Novice. Note that I mostly play offline games with the AI, as I have basically given up on online games due to the fact of not being credited for wins which would have increased my rank.
I made a new account to enjoy destroying newbies.2 games into it and my dice rolls are 13% for the 1's. If it's true that 1's are rolled less often, then the defender is getting some advantage here (assuming it's the same for the defender). If the defending dice are not affected by this, then the defender is getting screwed.


I won a 3 vs 10 attack today but I also had some heavy losses so that by itself doesn't prove much. I do think everyone's rolls are skewed not just the attacker or low ranks or high ranks or new accounts or old accounts but everyone's. Having all accounts use the same dice algorithm is the most logical and best approach to take when writing the game. I can't imagine SMG would change rolls from one account to another. I think the stats we are posting are both defensive and offensive rolls together. I'm not happy about the rolls being different from equal odds, but I doubt I would change much about my decision making based on just a slight adjustment.
The question is. How are these stats composed?
Is it from normal rolls only or from Blitz rolls as well, I suspect it is not from all rools as Blitz is probably using some shortened algorithm.

And what Briand is saying is, that if you 1s are rolled less frequently than the defender is getting a higher advantage than he is supposed to, compared to true dice rolls.

There is another very disturbing statement in the Faq, I quote: "The results are within +-5% of the control comparison, which is acceptable."

Uhm no, it's not acceptable at all, when I attack with 8 vs 1 and the chance of winning is 99,9% and instead it's 95%, because the difference is like night and day.

5% deviation is absolutely unacceptable for a trivial algorithm like dice throwing ;/

Blitz can't possibly be giving data for each and every roll. The point of their algorithm is to bypass that. I believe it does a couple of rolls to confirm the results after rolling for the results. Doesn't seem like it would use dice for that though. I have no clue as that code is not shared as far as I know.

+/- 5% doesn't mean your chances of a roll change by 5% it means that expected averages can vary by that much. And that makes sense. Until you have millions of rolls, it's not going to be dead on to the odds of getting something, speaking by the average. Would love to see a number of rolls stat in the dice counter. One of my accounts has over 700 games on it and the dice rolls are all even. It wasn't always. I think I started it not long before when everyone started complaining in this very thread.

I have a 6th account now that I play with when I can't find good enough ranked players. It is rolling less 1's but we'll see how it pans out. Will have to make more accounts to test the theory. Or SMG can just answer honestly?


Yes that's what I suspect as well. Blitz probably does not contribute much or anything to the statistics, but only SMG really knows.

The other thing is, I understand that they have some kind of control comparison and that is basically the limit if you did the battles an infinite amount of times. That is to what you refer as expected average.

And now their algorithm gives results, which can differ up to 5% from this control comparison.

That's completely unacceptable in my opinion, it's certainly possible to achieve a difference less than 0.1% to true dice throw outcomes. Devices these days are so powerful that you could even run a MonteCarlo simulation, which would be pure brute force but still fast enough and accurate to these degrees.

I mean I don't want to sound like I'm only here to complain, the app is great and I really enjoy playing the game, but these numbers just seem off and the statement does not really make me more confident in the accuracy of the algorithm -_-

Login or Signup to post a comment