Conquer Club

I guess what I'm asking is, do you play more defensive if you are rolling poorly in a game? I'm not talking about when playing defense is the better option. For example, I was recently in a game where I was just getting demolished on the dice, but I managed to rebuild to respectable status and took a pile of guys and tried to break a continent because I believed it to be to my advantage. I of course still rolled horribly and it cost me 8 guys to take out 2 of theirs (and still didn't break said continent). But I still made the play because I refused to let the poor rolls of the past dictate how I would act in the future.

Was going on the offense a bad play because I had rolled poorly in the past in that game? And on the flip side are you more aggressive in games when you are rolling well? I'm kinda curious as to the opinions of others and how they would act in these situations

You should let your rolling affect your strategy only when those rolls have changed the odds for your attack. Attacking 50 vs 10 on the border of your continent may be a good thing to do, But when that has been reduced to 20 vs 2 (no, you shouldn't autoattack), and the opponent has a stack of 20 immediately behind, it's a good time to stop because you can't risk losing the continent in the counterattack.

If the loss of troops due to poor rolling had no effect on the attack you are considering, then the fact that you rolled poorly earlier in the turn shouldn't be a consideration.

I don't think you can roll poorly all game long so no I wouldn't say it affects my strategy in that respect.You need attacking dice against your enermies so its always best to attack.As for opening up armies that lurk behind borders.If you can't break the conti and take out the big army.Do not do it.

I see it a lot of the time in freestyle, if someone has a poor roll or something go against them they decide to just attack out throughout the board in a fit. But not many are convinced freestyle requires much strategy so maybe there's no effect.

trapyoung wrote:I see it a lot of the time in freestyle, if someone has a poor roll or something go against them they decide to just attack out throughout the board in a fit. But not many are convinced freestyle requires much strategy so maybe there's no effect.

Well not everyone has in them to play freestyle.These are the ones convinced freestyle requires no strategy.I am comfortable with all setting so.I don't follow any myths freestyle or otherwise.

I absolutely take the luck of the dice into consideration. No sense in proceeding if I'm leaving myself open to attack.

The first thing that needs to be stated is that, in probability, past results do not affect future ones.

So, let's say you're playing a 1v1 game and you have a 500 stack next to an opposing 500 stack. Everything else is filled with 1s. The fact that you started 2-20 and are down 480v498 doesn't mean your bad streak will continue to make you lose 10 armies for every army you kill. In that scenario, I'd keep attacking. In fact, I'd hit auto-attack without mercy, even though most people find it innapropriate.

Now, let's say you're playing a 3-player game with escalating spoils and you have a good chance of killing one of your enemies, cash and kill the other. If due to bad luck your good chance is not looking so certain anymore (get yourself a calculator), then you might consider stopping.

The best method, in my opinion, is to brainwash yourself after every roll you make. Don't look behind (what you've just rolled), look ahead (what you need to roll next). If you want to get a territory and the battle is 15v8, decide whether you want to roll 15v8 or not. Do not consider whether the battle started 20v18 and you had a little luck or whether it started 100v8 and you lost 85 armies in a row. Simply look at your odds of winning 15v8 (consider, also, the macro-political impact of that battle, such as winning a bonus you can easily hold or drawing a bullseye or your back because you've just conquered Asia). 15v8 is 15v8, regardless of the previous rolls you had in that particular assault/round/game/tournament/life.

freestyle just requires a different kind of strategy. Its more about taking your turns at the most strategic time. And I can definitely see where that makes it easier to get caught up in the moment. At least in standard you know you have 1 hour to take your turn and nothing is going to change in that time. If you need to walk away for a minute and regroup, you have that option. Freestyle you may theoretically come back to find yourself in a whole different position.

And Rodion, I agree entirely. But I was curious as to how others react in that situation. I've always thought that If a play is good in one situation, it is good in every situation regardless if you are running hot or cold in the luck department.

M8...i/m addicted to gambling...with the dice, if they are playing bad. pull back...if they're on a roll go9 for it but (as others have said) have a fall back position for if they change....simple maths really...but unfort most mug punters take that to mean that bad rolls will end so keep hitting harder...the "random" only works if you have unlimited resources i.e. money in a casino or points here in CC...

KoE_Sirius wrote:

trapyoung wrote:I see it a lot of the time in freestyle, if someone has a poor roll or something go against them they decide to just attack out throughout the board in a fit. But not many are convinced freestyle requires much strategy so maybe there's no effect.

Well not everyone has in them to play freestyle.These are the ones convinced freestyle requires no strategy.I am comfortable with all setting so.I don't follow any myths freestyle or otherwise.

I meant "not much" strategy, but I agree with your point, there's a strategy, it's just different. But doesn't change the point that when you're clicking quickly and see you've lost a 16v3 1-15 using auto-attack I see a bunch of people just suicide out afterwards

I go games without winning a single roll. So whether I want it to or not, it affects my strategy. I have to play this game "handicapped", because CC apparently hates the Buckeyes.

Answers to both original questions are "Yes," and "Yes."

Of course someone whose dice are great is more aggressive; he or she may originally be after 1 region, but if the dice are good the player is likely to target a 2nd, even a 3rd region. "Go for it," mode.

Similarly, if dice are poor, the player is likely to regroup and stack to defend rather than continue assaults.

As to the "suicide" discussion: on some maps, depending on the play, a failed assault means death, with the only question, "How soon?" In such cases, yes, a player might go ahead and assault down to singles to speed up the play, because they realize the situation is unwinnable. It's technically suicide, but it's really just understanding the map and what is an "unwinnable" situation. Not all stack-to-stack assaults result in that unwinnable situation, of course.

stahrgazer wrote:Answers to both original questions are "Yes," and "Yes."

Of course someone whose dice are great is more aggressive; he or she may originally be after 1 region, but if the dice are good the player is likely to target a 2nd, even a 3rd region. "Go for it," mode.

Similarly, if dice are poor, the player is likely to regroup and stack to defend rather than continue assaults.

As to the "suicide" discussion: on some maps, depending on the play, a failed assault means death, with the only question, "How soon?" In such cases, yes, a player might go ahead and assault down to singles to speed up the play, because they realize the situation is unwinnable. It's technically suicide, but it's really just understanding the map and what is an "unwinnable" situation. Not all stack-to-stack assaults result in that unwinnable situation, of course.

Yeah,but the dice are random.This is what LackAttack has said on numberous threads !Isn't that true then ?

KoE_Sirius wrote:

stahrgazer wrote:Answers to both original questions are "Yes," and "Yes."

Of course someone whose dice are great is more aggressive; he or she may originally be after 1 region, but if the dice are good the player is likely to target a 2nd, even a 3rd region. "Go for it," mode.

Similarly, if dice are poor, the player is likely to regroup and stack to defend rather than continue assaults.

As to the "suicide" discussion: on some maps, depending on the play, a failed assault means death, with the only question, "How soon?" In such cases, yes, a player might go ahead and assault down to singles to speed up the play, because they realize the situation is unwinnable. It's technically suicide, but it's really just understanding the map and what is an "unwinnable" situation. Not all stack-to-stack assaults result in that unwinnable situation, of course.

Yeah,but the dice are random.This is what LackAttack has said on numberous threads !Isn't that true then ?

Yes, but the question is "define random." From among the set of 50,000 (or whatever the number is) of possible options, the set does not reset for a player every time that player rolls. Only once that full set was used up does it reset.

Each time you pick up the cubes at home, when you roll, you have that full set of options and only that full set of options. True random would mean that for each roll, you will get every option, and only 1 each of each of those options that the dice could give you; and true random would mean your potential roll would always be from among that full set of random numbers.

But that's not how the CC program works it. Instead, as I said, there's a set of numbers. Which number you get is random within the existing set, but when you roll again it's "that set less 1" and if 3,000 other players have since rolled, your options are that original set of options set less 3,001.

So, if the random dice mix happens to have randomly given out all the "good numbers" from the set, you'll get from among the random "bad numbers" that are left (or vice versa).

At least, thats how I understand it to work based on another thread when they announced (was it last month?) that the set of random numbers was increased.


Again: To be "truly random" each roll would have to be among 1 full set of options available for that roll, just like when you roll your dice at home. So while the dice are random, they're not fully random. Understanding that made me understand why the dice here are streaky in ways that really defy random.

"Well not everyone has in them to play freestyle.These are the ones convinced freestyle requires no strategy."

I think that freestyle just requires a different kind of strategy. Its more about taking your turns at the most strategic time.

--------------
reason beat maker software

KoE_Sirius wrote:I don't think you can roll poorly all game long so no I wouldn't say it affects my strategy in that respect.You need attacking dice against your enermies so its always best to attack.As for opening up armies that lurk behind borders.If you can't break the conti and take out the big army.Do not do it.

And you sir would be mistaken...lol. I generally try to think first: If I were to have bad dice, what would I do? And prepare for the worst.

"Speak softly but carry a big stick"

Rodion wrote:...escalating spoils and you have a good chance of killing one of your enemies, cash and kill the other. If due to bad luck your good chance is not looking so certain anymore (get yourself a calculator), then you might consider stopping.
The best method, in my opinion, is to brainwash yourself...

Linked to the Assault Odds Script, it's really nifty if I do say so myself.

The dice are completely random. So look at each position you have from the present moment and just try and make the right move from where things stand. Forget everything that's happened previously as far as the dice are concerned.

People often think that if they're rolling badly in a game then they're cursed and bound to continue rolling badly.
Alternatively some players think that they've "used up their bad luck" after a few bad rolls so the dice are bound to improve. Both these assumptions are wrong. Everytime you roll the dice they are random and previous rolls have no effect whatsoever.

Only if I lose a really bad roll, like 8-1. Yes, that has happened.

I attack on expected outcome and then internally rage when lady luck screws me...

Pity my selective memory only remembers when Losses(Expected)<<<<<Losses(actual) and not the other way around :S

Yes, in multi-player singles (especially on kill run attempts). No, in 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, or 4v4.

Not really. I make my strategy, and I generally stick with it. If the dice gods curse me and don't give me what I had expected to achieve, then I just try again next turn. The dice are pseudo-random, so what happened last turn has no bearing whatsoever on what could happen this turn.

it depends all on the map. if its doodle earth then yes. if its like classic then no unless i have very bad dice. i think this gos for a lot of people.