dice thread about 1s
Moderator: Community Team
Forum rules
Please read the community guidelines before posting.
Please read the community guidelines before posting.
dice thread about 1s
Have you guys ever wondered why people generally have 3.51 average instead of 3.50?
It looks like we all have slightly less odds of rolling 1s in attack or in defense than we should. Just have a look around at dice pages. These supposedly random dice generators are actually configured to make people roll less 1s that they should.
It looks like we all have slightly less odds of rolling 1s in attack or in defense than we should. Just have a look around at dice pages. These supposedly random dice generators are actually configured to make people roll less 1s that they should.

Re: dice thread about 1s
BENCLUB 4.8 all opponents
Luck Avg Roll
Assault 0% 3.51
Defend 0% 3.50
I guess some players have 3.49 no ?
Luck Avg Roll
Assault 0% 3.51
Defend 0% 3.50
I guess some players have 3.49 no ?
Re: dice thread about 1s
This has been discussed before at length. There is clearly a bias against rolling 1's that seems to impact almost every player. There is also a corresponding increase in the number 2...
I do not feel like going back through old threads but one player actually graphed the issue using a large and random sample of players.
I do not feel like going back through old threads but one player actually graphed the issue using a large and random sample of players.
Re: dice thread about 1s
I have rolled 2028245 dice
16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s
In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%
While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.
My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s
shockingly close.
16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s
In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%
While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.
My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s
shockingly close.

Re: dice thread about 1s
I tell ya the 2's are still winning. So which number do you roll the most revisited
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... t=Agent+86

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... t=Agent+86

We are the Fallen, an unstoppable wave of Darkness.
Re: dice thread about 1s
Yes and we all have something similar. Loutil seems to say the same thing, and the very common 3.51 average proves there is a problem and those dice are biaised (although i personally roll 3.50 average and my opponents 3.51 lol).Gilligan wrote:I have rolled 2028245 dice
16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s
In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%
While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.
My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s
shockingly close.
I am pretty sure that it s the way the program works and that they tried to roll slightly less 1s as it s supposed to annoy the most. As a result, not having fair dice annoys people even more. And each time we calculate odds, they are wrong as they are based on fair dice, but the dice we play with are biaised.
Oh, and totally missed the thread you are talking about.

-
ManBungalow
- Posts: 3431
- Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:02 am
- Location: On a giant rock orbiting a star somewhere
Re: dice thread about 1s
I think the Agent 86 thread linked above was fairly definitive on this subject - we can say that the probability that the bias in the dice is due to chance is very low.
There's some good data in that thread. See this post in particular for a nice graph:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 0#p4254756
There's some good data in that thread. See this post in particular for a nice graph:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 0#p4254756
Re: dice thread about 1s
Interesting. Well sorry guys, missed that conversation as I thought it was dice ranting thread.. And it was actually an interesting one! 

Re: dice thread about 1s
.41 may not seem like a lot but it is statistically significant as the pattern holds true across the CC landscape.Gilligan wrote:I have rolled 2028245 dice
16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s
In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%
While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.
My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s
shockingly close.
My numbers:
16.37% 1s
16.81% 2s
16.70% 3s
16.81% 4s
16.71% 5s
16.60% 6s
- BigBallinStalin
- Posts: 5071
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
- Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
- Contact:
Re: dice thread about 1s
15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s
Re: dice thread about 1s
according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)BigBallinStalin wrote:15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s

- BigBallinStalin
- Posts: 5071
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
- Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
- Contact:
Re: dice thread about 1s
That's one possibility!Gilligan wrote:according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)BigBallinStalin wrote:15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s
Re: dice thread about 1s
The other is that you are a lying communist bastardBigBallinStalin wrote:That's one possibility!Gilligan wrote:according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)BigBallinStalin wrote:15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s
- BigBallinStalin
- Posts: 5071
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
- Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
- Contact:
Re: dice thread about 1s
In school, I learned Soviet Economics. It is superior to Western Economics!loutil wrote:The other is that you are a lying communist bastardBigBallinStalin wrote:That's one possibility!Gilligan wrote:according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)BigBallinStalin wrote:15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s
Re: dice thread about 1s
Most people would not consider a Gulag to be school...BigBallinStalin wrote:In school, I learned Soviet Economics. It is superior to Western Economics!loutil wrote:The other is that you are a lying communist bastardBigBallinStalin wrote:That's one possibility!Gilligan wrote:according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)BigBallinStalin wrote:15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s
- BigBallinStalin
- Posts: 5071
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
- Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
- Contact:
Re: dice thread about 1s
Yeah, but I'm really good at estimating the present discounted value of a rock pile.loutil wrote:Most people would not consider a Gulag to be school...BigBallinStalin wrote:In school, I learned Soviet Economics. It is superior to Western Economics!loutil wrote:The other is that you are a lying communist bastardBigBallinStalin wrote:That's one possibility!Gilligan wrote:according to your dice stats, you roll 3 the most yet it doesn't have the largest percentage (unless you're including opponents?)BigBallinStalin wrote:15.21% 1s
16.17% 2s
16.44% 3s
16.76% 4s
17.14% 5s
17.50% 6s
Re: dice thread about 1s
The assumption that deliberately reducing 1s by that percentage hoping players will notice less 1s and thus get less frustrated, as well as the assumption that players do notice such a disturbance and complain because of it are similar to the probability of spreading pure materials in a field, hoping a strong wind will blow, twisting them around and making them form a fully operational, fully fueled and ready for take-off airplane full of living passengers.betiko wrote:Yes and we all have something similar. Loutil seems to say the same thing, and the very common 3.51 average proves there is a problem and those dice are biaised (although i personally roll 3.50 average and my opponents 3.51 lol).Gilligan wrote:I have rolled 2028245 dice
16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s
In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%
While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.
My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s
shockingly close.
I am pretty sure that it s the way the program works and that they tried to roll slightly less 1s as it s supposed to annoy the most. As a result, not having fair dice annoys people even more. And each time we calculate odds, they are wrong as they are based on fair dice, but the dice we play with are biaised.
Oh, and totally missed the thread you are talking about.
Re: dice thread about 1s
cnn will spend months trying to find it ...
Re: dice thread about 1s
So where exactly do you stand here? Do the stats, or read the stats. It s a fact. 1s are not represented as they should. The general dice average on the site is 3.51 and it proves there is a bias.Kaskavel wrote:The assumption that deliberately reducing 1s by that percentage hoping players will notice less 1s and thus get less frustrated, as well as the assumption that players do notice such a disturbance and complain because of it are similar to the probability of spreading pure materials in a field, hoping a strong wind will blow, twisting them around and making them form a fully operational, fully fueled and ready for take-off airplane full of living passengers.betiko wrote:Yes and we all have something similar. Loutil seems to say the same thing, and the very common 3.51 average proves there is a problem and those dice are biaised (although i personally roll 3.50 average and my opponents 3.51 lol).Gilligan wrote:I have rolled 2028245 dice
16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s
In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%
While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.
My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s
shockingly close.
I am pretty sure that it s the way the program works and that they tried to roll slightly less 1s as it s supposed to annoy the most. As a result, not having fair dice annoys people even more. And each time we calculate odds, they are wrong as they are based on fair dice, but the dice we play with are biaised.
Oh, and totally missed the thread you are talking about.

Re: dice thread about 1s
This site has the most fucked dice any atmospheric noise could produce..the end. Get a new dice program CC..decline will keep happening unless you do so.
There, the end to stupid dice threads..not even close to random
There, the end to stupid dice threads..not even close to random

We are the Fallen, an unstoppable wave of Darkness.
Re: dice thread about 1s
Yes, it may be a fact, an irrelevant fact. Each time we calculate the odds, they are not wrong because "they are based on fair dice, but the dice we play with are biased". They are correct. If you calculate 42.5% chance to win the battle, then it is 42.5%. Maybe it is not 42.546% the calc says, but 42.545% because of "reduced odds of 1s" that should offer some tiny edge to the defender, but that's all. We are not playing a game with biased unfair dice. This conversation about unfair dice has become ridiculus over the years.betiko wrote:So where exactly do you stand here? Do the stats, or read the stats. It s a fact. 1s are not represented as they should. The general dice average on the site is 3.51 and it proves there is a bias.Kaskavel wrote:The assumption that deliberately reducing 1s by that percentage hoping players will notice less 1s and thus get less frustrated, as well as the assumption that players do notice such a disturbance and complain because of it are similar to the probability of spreading pure materials in a field, hoping a strong wind will blow, twisting them around and making them form a fully operational, fully fueled and ready for take-off airplane full of living passengers.betiko wrote:Yes and we all have something similar. Loutil seems to say the same thing, and the very common 3.51 average proves there is a problem and those dice are biaised (although i personally roll 3.50 average and my opponents 3.51 lol).Gilligan wrote:I have rolled 2028245 dice
16.38% 1s
16.79% 2s
16.65% 3s
16.79% 4s
16.75% 5s
16.62% 6s
In a perfect world, they should all be 16.66%
While the actual quantity of numbers rolled may differ by a few thousand, it hardly makes a difference percentage-wise, only 0.41% in greatest difference.
My opponents have rolled 1940030 dice
16.36% 1s
16.76% 2s
16.68% 3s
16.77% 4s
16.70% 5s
16.70% 6s
shockingly close.
I am pretty sure that it s the way the program works and that they tried to roll slightly less 1s as it s supposed to annoy the most. As a result, not having fair dice annoys people even more. And each time we calculate odds, they are wrong as they are based on fair dice, but the dice we play with are biaised.
Oh, and totally missed the thread you are talking about.

