Start a new topic
Discussions RISK Global Domination Feature Requests
Implemented

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
292 CommentsSorted by Popular

Aitch, I personally think SMG are doing a great job, over all the app is great (better than many out there) it just needs a little refinement but that's the way it goes in development, debugging takes most of the time, and everything can be improved. Furthermore, many "feature" requests are subjective at best and not every idea should be listened to, because it can break other things, etc. And in my experience they respond in a timely manner.

 

Wow, man you have no business on this forum being so negative. If you don't like the game, don't play it. Simple. I've seen nothing but positive comments here in the forums (until yours) and people usually make good points.

 

Why should they be responding to the forums anyways? If you have a bug or feature request, put in a ticket. The forums are for discussions and has little to do with reporting to SMG, getting feedback, or etc. I'm just going to chalk your comment up to to you not knowing how the website works. For future reference, again if you have a gripe, issue or bug to report, submit a ticket. Don't be a dick.

@Briand - agree but balanced blitz doesn't deliver what it's designed to do. It's rubbish! If my software company's developers coded like this, they'd be out of a job.

Dudes, the most important question is this... 


Does anybody think SMG (Shockingly Mediocre Games!) gives a damn, and will try to fix the problems?


SMG can't even be bothered to reply to posters here ffs!


(Yet they have plenty of time to post nonsense on their facebook/twitter feed lol!)


All we can do is hope Hasbro dumps these losers, and gives the game to a professional company who know what they are doing... Amen!

I noticed the same thing back in the day. With my simulations I could see that true dice are slower when doing one million large battles. But in game you do one battle at a time so it should be ok. Of course seeing it tested on the actual app would be better.

Would love to see if you can. Back 2 years ago, if you did blitz with a large army against a somewhat large army, my device would freeze for about a second before the result came in. I ended up getting a more powerful tablet and it was better for still noticeable. My phone was the only device where it would not really do that. And then they changed the code to where it's not noticeable at all.

I'm willing to bet that doing a million dice rolls didn't take long.  There's no reason that true dice rolls should impact performance on any mobile device built in the last 20 years.  I don't have the old code to look at, but I'm guessing their implementation was broken.  Moving away from "true dice rolls" for performance reasons doesn't make sense.


I don't have time to mess around with the code right now but I'm 99% sure that I could modify the code to use true rolls for both normal and blitz attacks and the performance delta would be undetectable to a human.



So I have now written a true dice roll simulator and did a few basic comparisons to the algorithm Ryan described. From a relatively small dataset it looks like SMG’s way of doing things favors the smaller army and or the defender more than a true dice approach does. As examples I have examined 20v30 30v30 40v30 battles with both algorithms with a million simulations each. For 20 v 30 with true dice: attacker won 12.2% defender 87.8%. With game dice attacker won 15.2% defender 84.7%. For 30 v 30 with true dice attacker won 71.3% defender 28.7% with game dice attacker won 58% defender 42%. For 40v30 with true dice the attacker won 97.8% and lost 2.2%. With game dice the attacker won 89.1% and the defender won 10.9%
The outliers are interesting though. In one million 40 v 25 there is at least one scenario where where the attacker losses none and at least one where the defender losses only five. In one million 60 v 30 I came across at least one scenario where the attacker lost only one and at least one where the defender lost only 15. Those kind of these do happen apperantly.
Attacking a one or two you will lose twice as much as the defender has on average. That ratio gets better as the defending army gets bigger as long as your army is large enough to be reasonably assured of capturing the territory. Eventually the attacker can expect to lose less 1 than troop for every defending troop defeated. At first look the situations where a guaranteed victory army losses and so it just losses a random number of troops appear to happen very rarely mostly with lower numbers.

Briand, I agree and it shouldn't be too hard to run the raw numbers and then compare that to a simple simulator ran over a few million outcomes. Not sure if I'll get to it right away but it's something I'd also be curious about.. to even see if our complaining is even valid LOL. But I suspect it is.

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.

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.

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.
Login or Signup to post a comment
Topics merged into this topic:
More topics in Feature Requests
See all 1515 topics