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

Almost all of my accounts have winning records yet I think I’ve lost more troops than I’ve defeated on all of them. I’m not really worried about that though my goal is to win. I have noticed the attacks seems very streaky right now. If I blitz a one and lose 3 I’m likely to lose a lot for a few more attacks. Recently I took and army of about ten and blitzed seven and six back to back losing no troops. So when I see my opponents losing a lot of armies in the opening rounds of tend to attack where I have the largest army facing a one rather than try for the best positional attack.

"streaky" sort of explains what I've been seeing lately. In the last game I played, everyone was getting their ass handed to them as the attacker. Twice they tried to kill this one guy hoarding Australia where at least in the 2nd run should have happened but got blown away, giving me an easy sweep of the board since my turn was next. But even during that sweep, I was losing a lot more than expected on some rolls. Like losing 24 men to kill an 8 spot or something like that.

I also had a game where everyone was just decimated the first couple of rounds. 6 player game and everyone had an average of 15 men left after 2 rounds. This wasn't from attacking like idiots, it was from killing 1 territories. I didn't even get my first card. And I wasn't using blitz either. Mostly others were. Probably coincidence but I have been afraid of going offense especially in Blitz lately.

I've posted several times about the lost troops vs killed troops stats. It is statistically impossible to loose more troops than you have killed when your total win-to-loss ratio is 2:1 (or greater). A buddy of mine who has an EXTREMELY large win-to-loss ratio says the same thing... his lost troops are WAY higher than his killed troops stats.

I have one trash account. 2 wins. 0 losses. 190 defeated, 216 lost lol

I have won 326 and lost 282. I attack more 3 on 1 than am attacked 3 on 1, so that has nothing to do with me having lost 16000 more troops than i have won. They have it set up that the lower rated rolls high numbers. Until they post dice rolled against, i won't believe them.
Here is how out of wack that is. I have played 608 games, for an average of 309 troops won/defeated per game. That would mean i could play 51 games in a row, without losing a single troop, before i got to even. Bwahaha SMG (Suck My Genitals)
Brian. That is my point, when you come in as a new player, magically you win a ton more than you lose. My theory is they want new and or bad players to stick around and play more games, so they give them a little help. WHICH IS BS

That's the opposite of my findings. New player, won both games and still lost more than I won. The ratio is about the same as my other accounts.

More than likely the tracking is bugged. I never believed the dice roll numbers either.

Wow, what a thread. 

Developers - could you please engage a statistician if necessary and post a detailed explanation of the matrix algorithm used, surely you have a data scientist in the team somewhere that skill set. At least that way there is full transparency. Also can you please respond to the allegation that new players are advantaged by design. Neither of these issues will go away unless you address them.

I have a new spin on this...

Not go for pure accuracy, but a dice roll that is SLIGHTLY closer to predictable, but mostly realistic. (In the end it's a game, and supposed to be fun!)

--------------------------- Just in case your dying to dispute this thought ----------------------------------

-First person shooter (CS, COD, Halo, etc.), don't see realistic fatigue added, bone breakage, and more simply because it would suck to break your players leg from jumping off a roof in the game, or can't keep running & jumping constantly for an entire round. Say needs a bench to rest now. Also nice that any ammo clip left on the ground fits you exact gun. Pretty universal clips & bullets. 

-Bowling, ally's typically oil an easier shot during league's to make bowling more fun!

-Poker machines remember # of winners to ensure people win from time to time.


Saying in the end, slightly less real, slightly less disappoint big rolls that nearly end your great game, and slightly more fun for everyone! Don't forget, easy or tough dice, as long as it's the same for everyone... isn't it still fair?

Hey guys, I reverse engineered the Android version, did some experiments on different ways to cheat, and deconstructed the way die rolls work. To encourage open conversation, I posted this offsite on reddit:

Started reading your thread, immediate thing that jumps out to me was that rolls are made on the client and not the server. I've known this for ages because if your device gets disconnected from the net, you could sweep through several territories before the game decides that you're disconnected and then resets you to the point where you were disconnected. Other proof of it is that the device's processing power also affects how quickly results come out. That wouldn't be the case if it was internet dependent on a server. I'm certain SMG did this so they could cheap out their servers.I don't blame them though. It's not an expensive game. But if we ever start some official tournament or something, it needs to be server based.

Also, I got into this game some 3 years ago I think. And before the SMG logo was appearing (It was straight Hasbro?) the blitz rolls with several armies froze the device pretty hard sometimes. I think the blitz rolls used to be rolled out. But SMG changed it to a probability matrix. Blitz is instantaneous these days.

The greatest concern is with the code granting an automatic win to an attacker of x number of troops over the defender. Losing a "random" amount of troops if unlucky on the probability roll. This explains why the losses can be so catastrophic sometimes. Like losing 30 to a defender's 5. That CAN happen but it happens a lot more than I would expect.

Why can't we just have blitz programmed to be true dice rolls? And why can't single rolls be true dice rolls? It can't be THAT taxing on the device to randomly generate some numbers.

It also makes sense that a hacker can make his rolls more likely to win but still appear like it's fair from losing some troops. I have observed this before, where it seems insane that a guy is only losing a few on his run through the map. Not just lucky I guess.

I played the actual board game the other day, and I was pretty sure the dice statistics were skewed also. However, the actual game roles worked out to be just as bad in many cases. Besides, I agree with other comments saying that as long as each player gets the same odds then it works out. The problem I have is more with attacking defending, the calculation for that seems wrong. I've seen one person with 7 armies defeat someone with more than 30. That would never happen in the actual game and it's either a game exploit, glitch/bug, or bad algorithm. That's just my two cents. Thanks!

Login or Signup to post a comment