New dice/game option

[seekmeup41]

Not sure I follow you TheForgivenOne. My point was that everyone who trashes my suggestion raves about how important it is not to be able to predict the dice and all the steps lack and others have taken to make it random. I don't consider scripts cheating. In fact, it has been the use of the dice counter plugin that brought forth this suggestion when I had over a 40 dice advantage on a particular roll and the dice counter told me I had a 96% chance of winning and I lost. That type of "Risk" should be reserved for games that have no inherent strategy, like playing the lottery. These type of situations are what I was trying to avoid with this suggestion.

[TheForgivenOne]

Even in real "Risk", there is still a chance of that happening. You signed up to play a variant of that board game we are in no way associated with. Taking out the luck takes out a part of the game. A while back i saw a sugg asking for dice to be removed, and if you went at, say a 10v2, you would end up advancing 8 everytime. Lose 1 for 1.

[seekmeup41]

Look, I don't want to lose the element of risk or luck associated with an 8vs2 roll. I don't want a game where the bigger stack always wins. I just want a game where over the course of the whole game, each player is guaranteed the same dice.

How about a variant of my idea. Use my dice pool suggestion but remove the visibility of the dice altogether. Then you don't know why you won/lost and could never predict what dice would be rolled. I suspect that everyone finds watching the dice an essential feature of the game. I on the other hand don't. I play only fog games meaning I can't predict how many armies my opponent has. If I save up a stack of 80 on Feudal and then lose 40 of them taking 20 neutrals well that was a "risk" that I took. I don't care if the dice odds say losing 40 to take 20 is rare, as long as I know everyone (including the computer) draws from an equal pool of dice. Drawing from a pool of 50K dice might suggest everyone should have the same "luck" of the dice draw but I doubt many games ever reach 50k dice, and I think it is random with replacement anyway so the probability of rolling an X number is always the same.

[jammyjames]

how about one of you mods merge this thread with the other one, back from years ago!

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... =4&t=43095

[Darwins_Bane]

how about one of you mods merge this thread with the other one, back from years ago!

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... =4&t=43095

because it isnt the same? hes not asking for no dice...just dice done a diff way lol

[JoshyBoy]

how about one of you mods merge this thread with the other one, back from years ago!

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... =4&t=43095

because it isnt the same? hes not asking for no dice...just dice done a diff way lol

Bang on Darwins_Bane.

[seekmeup41]

yep, although I like the option of no dice games suggested by Fruitcake. Rather than no dice, I am asking for equal dice, although randomly distributed among 30-600 rolls. I think my additional "invisible dice" option is kinda interesting, which is virtually like autoattack without seeing the final roll. I am sure there is a way to guarantee everyone gets virtually (virtually because you rarely throw exactly the same number of dice as your opponent within an entire game) the same number of each dice whilst still having the randomness in which these dice are distributed throughout the game, and without being able to fully predict what dice will be available.

Essentially, if we can use the analogy of a shoe of 7 decks of cards in blackjack, I am proposing that the cards be dealt up on your turn (seeing your opponents or computers dice) but dealt down on any other players turn, and have the 7 decks of cards replaced by a different number of decks but without knowing when the decks of cards are changed. Even if the casino lets you bring in a computer to work out the odds of hitting a 10, it would be very hard to work out such odds since so much information is unknown. The more I think about, the more I like this game option, although I admit it may be hard to code.
Seek

[jammyjames]

But if you and your opponent both throw the exact same dice when for instance defending against an attack it would be exactly the same as if you were to have 'no' dice. Correct me if im worng but the only time it would ever differ from fruitcake's suggested idea would be when you are attacking neutrals.

[Darwins_Bane]

But if you and your opponent both throw the exact same dice when for instance defending against an attack it would be exactly the same as if you were to have 'no' dice. Correct me if im worng but the only time it would ever differ from fruitcake's suggested idea would be when you are attacking neutrals.

Sort of, but what i think the OP means is that when you get dice each person gets a random pool of dice(divisible by 6 of course) each person gets the same dice. when those dice are used up the next set are gotten. but what i think he means is the pool of dice is still randomized. so instead of fetching random dice from random.org, he wants to get everyone the same dice, then randomize the order, if i understand it correctly.

[seekmeup41]

This is exactly correct Darwin. To be precise:
1) At the start of a game, the CC powers that be randomly select a dice pool size, say between 30 and 600, with a pool size divisible by 6 with each of the 6 dice equally represented. This pool size is always unknown to the player, but the pool size is the same for all players and for computer.
2) As play starts, the dice are randomly selected from this initial pool size (e.g., 120) for each player and computer.
3) The dice are drawn from this example pool of 120 whether you are attacker or defender; thus you can only track the dice when they are visible on your attacking turn.
4) Once these initial 120 dice are used up, a new pool is created (again from say 30 to 600 and unknown to all players) and you begin randomly drawing dice from this pool. Different players/computer will finish their first pool at different times but each pool size is the same for every player.
5) Thus, assuming every person rolled the same number of dice in a game, you can have different outcomes depending on when you roll your best dice, but every player should roll approximately the same number of dice (or exactly the same number of dice up to the point of the most recent dice pool from which each player is currently drawing).

Advantages:
1) Every player will have rolled approximately the same number of 6s RATHER than the current design where everyone has the same ODDS of rolling a 6.
2) Very unlikely that attacks with large disparity between attacker defender armies will result contrary to what might be predicted by dice odds; e.g., you should not lose on 30vs6.

Disadvantages:
1) It is possible to make a slight prediction about what your chance of rolling a 6 will be. Granted, you do not know the dice pool size, nor do you know when you or your opponents pool is refreshed, nor do you know what dice you roll when you are defending. Nonetheless, you can make assumptions about what might happen assuming a small pool size and tracking recent dice history and infer dice likelihoods from that. To be honest though, this is not much different from the current dice odds calculator plugin which gives you information about the likelihood of winning based on number of attacker/defender dice. However, if people were still overly concerned about this issue, you could make the dice invisible so it would it incredibly difficult to make a reliable prediction about what dice you might get on future rolls.
2) However, one might argue that the inclusion of this small amount of certainty might make the game all the more interesting. Plugins could be made tell you the odds of drawing a 6 given your recent history of rolls and might alter when you decide to attack. Perhaps you might choose to waste your upcoming bad rolls on single neutrals to gain territories. Or if you think you have good rolls coming, perhaps you might want to sit and defend knowing your 6s will always win.

There is no defense I can give for people who love the randomness of the dice as they currently are. People like to think they still have a chance at winning when they are vastly outnumbered. That is fine. I am not trying to change that aspect of the game. I am simply proposing another game "option" for those of us that are simply tired of outrageously poor dice or listening to dice whiners. With my option, if you lose, you can hardly blame it on the dice other than the order in which your dice were rolled. Thus, my option places a large emphasis on strategy which is what I want my rank to be based on rather than winning points on lucky dice.

Seek

[sh4dows]

i likeeee the idea of a limitation to the number of 6s someone can roll. half of the time i attack a region 4 or more vs 1that one dice is 6, and i mean really half of the times, maybe im unlucky lol. i can no longer attack, just defend and build up since a while ago. dont get how is that the fun about CC and im starting to hate randomness

[seekmeup41]

Well sh4dows I take that as a vote for consideration as a game option. Not sure how we go about setting up polls and getting some sense of whether this is a good idea but hopefully people will keep contributing their ideas and adding revisions to my suggestion and we might perhaps pick up enough steam to consider this as a new game "option".

[Darwins_Bane]

Well sh4dows I take that as a vote for consideration as a game option. Not sure how we go about setting up polls and getting some sense of whether this is a good idea but hopefully people will keep contributing their ideas and adding revisions to my suggestion and we might perhaps pick up enough steam to consider this as a new game "option".

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/faq.php#f2r3