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.
@SectaOne - your first sentence is interesting. Based on what? I despise manual rolling as it skews the results in favour of the lesser no. of armies. Fact!!! It is definitely different from blitzing.
It's different in the way that it's true dice rolls. Balanced blitz is designed to avoid surprising results so that people don't whine when they lose a battle that was a little more than slightly in their favor. Balanced Blitz unfairly puts the advantage to the attacker.
@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.
dice is a joke always loosing big battles, 61 v 41 and loose 0 v 14
thats a loss of 61 v 37, i dont know any maths that would give this outcome
Do you think that the dice are skewed specifically against you? Is this an argument that the defender has an unusual advantage (assuming that you are the attacker)? Winning in a 61 v 37 is far from a guarantee. It is "more likely" to be a win and the attacker has slight odds against the defender but the dice can easily go one way or the other. If you play on the actual board rolling dice, write down the stats every time; you may be surprised with how much the dice seem to work against you when you look at the total results of every battle.
Steve Clements
HOW TO VOTE FOR THIS FEATURE? Tap the 'Do you like this idea?' below
91 people like this idea