I Leave CC This Week

[berlin1945]

I'm leaving soon too. The dice are just too mercurial. Up down, up down, up down, up down.

Me too. Shitty dice. I will play at other dice maps sites where the dice are more stable. But I think it will take me a few weeks yet to wind down my games.

I've played at a number of different sites, I have yet to find one with "stable" dice. Some sites might be a bit better than CC for dice but none are even close to good enough to make up the difference in community activity.

I always find the dice complaint so interesting. Like sure cc has some crazy dice but I think it is people just not realizing how assault probability works. The few key complaints I see all to often are.

1) My 6 vs 2 attack failed (or something similar) - Like sure a 6 vs 2 is expected to win most of the time but even then it is only a ~90% success rate. Not to pick on YukFoo but when you are playing 50+ games like he is you are just going to see the 10% often enough to notice. That doesn't mean the dice are bad per say...just that when playing a larger number of games the non probable outcome is going to happen more often because there is a larger sample size.

2) Your 160 beat my 175 so you got lucky - I probably get this one more often because of playing city mogul where troop counts get large but its really a troubling complaint as that attack is actually a 2/3 favorite to win. Now to the point above that doesn't make it a sure thing but I personally think the expected outcome happening is not necessarily luck.

3) 3 vs 2 attacks should win - In playing hive it is surprising how often people think attacking with 3 troops (2 attacking dice) vs 2 troops will work for them. For example multiple times people have attacked with a 3,3,3 vs 2 and acted like they should have never once lost that attack when it is only going to be successful 84% of the time.

Ultimately while it is frustrating to have the 10%/20% etc. happen part of playing a game like Risk is that there is a little bit of luck in the game. Now I am sure you can go find games of mine where I have complained about the dice or cards in the game chat so don't misunderstand this to say people can't be free to complain about the dice. Its more to say that just because bad dice happen and you get unlucky it doesn't necessarily mean that CC has bad dice as that is part of the nature of rolling dice.

It's not luck. It's not random. It's a computer algorithm, and it does patently cheap things. My opponents wipe me out, while I can't even get a card off of them. Strategy, the thing that attracts me to the game, is irrelevant, so I'm out.

[ljex]

I'm leaving soon too. The dice are just too mercurial. Up down, up down, up down, up down.

Me too. Shitty dice. I will play at other dice maps sites where the dice are more stable. But I think it will take me a few weeks yet to wind down my games.

I've played at a number of different sites, I have yet to find one with "stable" dice. Some sites might be a bit better than CC for dice but none are even close to good enough to make up the difference in community activity.

I always find the dice complaint so interesting. Like sure cc has some crazy dice but I think it is people just not realizing how assault probability works. The few key complaints I see all to often are.

1) My 6 vs 2 attack failed (or something similar) - Like sure a 6 vs 2 is expected to win most of the time but even then it is only a ~90% success rate. Not to pick on YukFoo but when you are playing 50+ games like he is you are just going to see the 10% often enough to notice. That doesn't mean the dice are bad per say...just that when playing a larger number of games the non probable outcome is going to happen more often because there is a larger sample size.

2) Your 160 beat my 175 so you got lucky - I probably get this one more often because of playing city mogul where troop counts get large but its really a troubling complaint as that attack is actually a 2/3 favorite to win. Now to the point above that doesn't make it a sure thing but I personally think the expected outcome happening is not necessarily luck.

3) 3 vs 2 attacks should win - In playing hive it is surprising how often people think attacking with 3 troops (2 attacking dice) vs 2 troops will work for them. For example multiple times people have attacked with a 3,3,3 vs 2 and acted like they should have never once lost that attack when it is only going to be successful 84% of the time.

Ultimately while it is frustrating to have the 10%/20% etc. happen part of playing a game like Risk is that there is a little bit of luck in the game. Now I am sure you can go find games of mine where I have complained about the dice or cards in the game chat so don't misunderstand this to say people can't be free to complain about the dice. Its more to say that just because bad dice happen and you get unlucky it doesn't necessarily mean that CC has bad dice as that is part of the nature of rolling dice.

It's not luck. It's not random. It's a computer algorithm, and it does patently cheap things. My opponents wipe me out, while I can't even get a card off of them. Strategy, the thing that attracts me to the game, is irrelevant, so I'm out.

Just ask yourself what would be easier to program, a random (or at least computer generated random) number or something that favors a particular user group on the site? And then if you were going to try and monetize that site which would be better for business? I understand that dice are streaky on CC but they are in real life as well and I have played enough board games to see them happen there as well.

Strategy is not irrelevant its just not the only thing that decides risk. You can play perfectly and still lose and so it goes but if you want something that has zero element of luck then it is going to be much more solved and dominated by computers and memorizing play patters (i.e., chess, go, etc). That type of game is preferable to some, and if that is the case for you then I totally understand why you don't want to be here but risk is not that and never will be.

[Extreme Ways]

Would you rather have a game in which every troop kills 1 enemy troop? That would require another strategy and make the game unfun, unless you change more fundamentals of the game. Ever played the board game diplomacy? All strategy and diplomacy, no luck. The only unlucky thing that can happen to you is that nobody wants to be your friend in the beginning.

[Shannon Apple]

Here's another thing...

On many occasions in public games, I've come across bad players who just blamed my dice for their losses, where my dice rolls were very average. It had nothing at all to do with their terrible decisions. Now, if I get insanely good dice in a game, I'll be the first to admit it and say "yeah, sorry about the dice." There is an equal amount of strategy and dice involved. If strategy is lacking, there are a group of people on this site who tend to blame the dice EVERY time in game chat. It gets tiring. (We do have a game ongoing that saw an opponent get mega dice, but... it's part of the game. Importantly, they didn't make any mistakes so we could come back. It's an acceptable loss. You can't win them all.) Sure, the dice can be streaky, but you take the bad with the good.

Having said that, if you have 2 players of equal skill playing a game and neither of them makes a strategic mistake, that game would probably be determined by whoever moved first if there were no dice, unless the game had other objectives. Dice adds unpredictability to the game. Without dice, the game would be VERY boring. You can't just take away the randomness.

I play other digital games too. Used to play Hearthstone a lot, currently playing games like Armello and Slay the Spire. Each of those are card-based. You're relying on the hands you pull. Again, it's 50% luck and 50% strategy. You can get good hands and make bad plays and vice versa. Same happens with the dice. Some people don't even realise when they get good dice because they make a bad play.

[Extreme Ways]

Here's another thing...

On many occasions in public games, I've come across bad players who just blamed my dice for their losses, where my dice rolls were very average. It had nothing at all to do with their terrible decisions. Now, if I get insanely good dice in a game, I'll be the first to admit it and say "yeah, sorry about the dice." There is an equal amount of strategy and dice involved. If strategy is lacking, there are a group of people on this site who tend to blame the dice EVERY time in game chat. It gets tiring. (We do have a game ongoing that saw an opponent get mega dice, but... it's part of the game. Importantly, they didn't make any mistakes so we could come back. It's an acceptable loss. You can't win them all.) Sure, the dice can be streaky, but you take the bad with the good.

Having said that, if you have 2 players of equal skill playing a game and neither of them makes a strategic mistake, that game would probably be determined by whoever moved first if there were no dice, unless the game had other objectives. Dice adds unpredictability to the game. Without dice, the game would be VERY boring. You can't just take away the randomness.

I play other digital games too. Used to play Hearthstone a lot, currently playing games like Armello and Slay the Spire. Each of those are card-based. You're relying on the hands you pull. Again, it's 50% luck and 50% strategy. You can get good hands and make bad plays and vice versa. Same happens with the dice. Some people don't even realise when they get good dice because they make a bad play.

Also why in 90% of clan wars between the top4 clans, the losing side will mention dice (my clan very much included, also when we win). The difference in skill is often not great enough to overcome difference in dice. You can play better (or at least think you play better) than your opponents and still lose, that makes you salty. Some maps also are just designed in a way that made dice/drop/start more important. If I'm starting first in a doodle earth quads and eliminate someone turn 1, I blame the game not the dice.

[General Quigley]

If you don't like diplomacy, there are plenty of good suggestions in this thread already:
[list][*]Switch to playing escalating
[*]Switch to playing polymorphic or team games
[*]Make a list of friends who agree not to use diplomacy (Talk the the XI Games people, for instance.)

I have been reading the responses with interest. Most of the responses are of little value, this one I quote being the exception for at least sincerely trying to be helpful rather than just further some agenda, like advocate permitted cheating of the game by recommending the verbal manipulation of weak-minded co-players (calling it "diplomacy"), or complain about dice (stupidest of all) and revealing a Trumpian world-is-out-to-get-me mindset.

Addressing the suggestions:
1) Winning at escalating requires the simplest and dullest strategy possible: pile and wait. It's why I never play it. For the truly mindless only.
2) I don't like team games because I have to deal with "partners" who always apologize for using half their minds on the game as they make mistake after mistake. This happened in my one current team game (a mistake I regret involving myself) already. I have no idea what "polymorphic" means because it's an idiotic descriptor word to choose for the concept--"many changing"--means nothing! I've seen it as an option, but am not interested enough to investigate further.
3) I didn't know there were enough pure strategy game-lovers here to make an "agree not to use diplomacy" group. That would be a solution for me except I like to play nuclear games exclusively. The pool of players for that alone is so small already that it can take months to get a game launched. The pool for those intelligent enough to play purely strategically AND nuclear games is probably only one. You just read his post.

[keyborn]

Enjoy life away from CC.

The rest of the CC world is wasting their time trying to help you see this game from another perspective. After reading your posts, I don't believe any one or any suggestion will ever help you change your mind about leaving the site. I too have " been reading the responses with interest", and I believe many of the suggestions given were truly meant to try and help your situation. But, as stated earlier by someone else in this thread, you have decided to be rude and abusive towards those with good suggestions. You like to pick those suggestions apart while pointing out how stupid everyone else on this site is for not playing the game the way you think it should be played.

Does this sound like someone with an open mind who is willing to listen to others' suggestions?

Most of the responses are of little value... advocate permitted cheating of the game by recommending the verbal manipulation of weak-minded co-players (calling it "diplomacy")... For the truly mindless only... I don't like team games because I have to deal with "partners" who always apologize for using half their minds on the game as they make mistake after mistake...

As I said...enjoy life away from CC...

[Swimmerdude99]

Lol, insulted others, quotes the other for being sincerely helpful that said basically the same thing. You don't sound like a very diplomatic person. As said before, your responses to the thread indicates you don't have much interest in risk.

Check for some other games and see if you can find something to fit your taste!

[Dukasaur]

I have no idea what "polymorphic" means because it's an idiotic descriptor word to choose for the concept--"many changing"--means nothing!

Polymorphic does not mean "many changing" it means "many shaped".

morpho-

before vowels morph-, word-forming element of Greek origin meaning "form, shape," from Greek morphē "form, shape; beauty, outward appearance," a word of uncertain etymology.

Whether or not it correctly describes the game form, I cannot say. I didn't choose the word.

However, if you like (at least in theory) the concept of team play but are unhappy with the available choice of team-mates, polymorphic may be something to try. It is essentially a type of team game, except that you play all the different members of the team. If you still hate your team-mates after trying this, it may truly be time to give up CC.

[Nut Shot Scott]

Lol. You are definitely the guy who tells everyone how smart he is then immediately does something to undermine the assertion.

1. I actually agree and guess what? Saying "I've tried it and isn't for me, thank you" would have been a perfectly sufficient response. But yes, needlessly throwing in comments implying how much smarter you are than everyone who plays escalating is necessary.

2. You seem like such an incredible communicator. It shocks me that you have been unable to get along with a teammate. Side note - you've won 17% of your games. If you were my teammate, I wouldn't care what you had to say, either. As for polymorphic, as the previous caller stated, "many changing" is not really the definition of the word nor do I see how you could interpret it as such. But hey, I'm probably a moron like everyone else who knows what it means. For such a smart guy, you didn't even think to investigate an option that is the closest thing to what you're asking for? And when presented with said option, explained well enough for even the dullest person to understand, you still refuse to explore the option? Real thirst for knowledge in you, eh? I see how you became so intellectually and strategically well rounded.

3. Sounds like a "you" problem. As suggested, maybe branch out into something else. Your attachment to nukes seems like it maybe veers into the unhealthy.

In closing, when you constantly have the same issue with various external forces, it's not them, it's you. Peace brother, go find another game to suck at.

[riskllama]

don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out, Quigler...*waves*

[TotoroHat]

I Will be sad to see you leave this Game! You were one of the few honorable players on this site and a good damn player to boot. Regardless of what you decide, your memory will live on. Every time I play a nuclear game I will think of you. Also your username is simply awesome. Goodbye old friend. See you around!

[mookiemcgee]

[mookiemcgee]

I have no idea what "polymorphic" means because it's an idiotic descriptor word to choose for the concept--"many changing"--means nothing! I've seen it as an option, but am not interested enough to investigate further.

Please see my signature for response:

[Extreme Ways]

I have no idea what "polymorphic" means because it's an idiotic descriptor word to choose for the concept--"many changing"--means nothing! I've seen it as an option, but am not interested enough to investigate further.

Please see my signature for response:

What he says is interesting for so many reasons!

1) Has no idea what the word means and proceeds to define it
2) Defines it wrongly, while calling it 'idiotic'.
3) Acknowledges that poly is a gameplay option which exists
4) Thinks a gameplay option requires "investigation"
5) Chooses not to try out something that's being suggested by everyone, all while also indirectly asking for help.

[mookiemcgee]

I have no idea what "polymorphic" means because it's an idiotic descriptor word to choose for the concept--"many changing"--means nothing! I've seen it as an option, but am not interested enough to investigate further.

Please see my signature for response:

What he says is interesting for so many reasons!

1) Has no idea what the word means and proceeds to define it
2) Defines it wrongly, while calling it 'idiotic'.
3) Acknowledges that poly is a gameplay option which exists
4) Thinks a gameplay option requires "investigation"
5) Chooses not to try out something that's being suggested by everyone, all while also indirectly asking for help.

He's probably going to pivot now to saying 'even if there is a game mode that provides exactly what i want, I'm leaving because you are a bunch of bullies'

[riskllama]

i've noticed that folks who make grand gestures in a thread & declare they're leaving CC, rarely actually do so...*shrugs*.

[Extreme Ways]

He did start a new game 12h ago . He's at least not dedicated enough to drop his waiting games.

[General Quigley]

Sigh, I've little interest in educating children any more. Here goes anyway. Since you all said I was wrong on the meaning of "morph," I checked, figuring I must have made a mistake. After all, I was "corrected" and called idiot for my "mistake" by so many. I should have known who the real idiots were and kept my confidence. Unlike you twits, I looked up the word whose meaning I assumed I knew from the top of my head, and now stand vindicated: https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/morph

What you are calling "insulting" is just honesty. I know you all recently had parents supplying you trophies for participating and you can't really deal with honesty. It's not entirely your fault therefore. Nevertheless, I'm not like your parents. I'm real world. Deal with it, or prove unable to; it makes no difference to me. If it makes you feel better, keep crying your little hearts out about getting beat down by those bad, awful dice that aren't rewarding you for just participating either, and that you can't talk into rolling your way.

Thanks to those kind few who offered sensible words and good sentiments. There are many fierce, dedicated competitors during the last couple years who have joined me in the many nuclear games that battled silently and honorably. I apologize for my failure to adequately acknowledge you due to my pique over those few who play less honorably. It was fun, but it's still time for me to move on. I add no games at present, but intend to honor my commitments. It's who I am and what I do. Keep conquering, friends.

[Swimmerdude99]

Lol

[Shannon Apple]

2) I don't like team games because I have to deal with "partners" who always apologize for using half their minds on the game as they make mistake after mistake...I have no idea what "polymorphic" means...not interested enough to investigate further.

This part of your post made me laugh? Are you for real?

Polymorphic pretty much resolves your teammate issue by letting you play all parts of the team. I find it hard to believe that you've been a member of this site as long as you have and didn't know that. Wait... that would have taken away your reason to complain on point 2.

I don't play escalating myself, but I find your manner to be quite... rude. You called players who like those settings mindless/brainless. That's unfair.

You talk about honesty. I'll go ahead and be honest with you. You're maybe just not as good at the game as you think you are, and have an elevated opinion of your own playing ability. I know some great players on this site, brilliant all-round strategists, people whom I acknowledge are better at this game than I. You are not one of those players.

I know you all recently had parents supplying you trophies for participating and you can't really deal with honesty.

More arrogance.

So please stop being an arrogant douche to everyone just because you're having a bad week.

[Nut Shot Scott]

lol incorrectly defines polymorphic.

posts definition for morph.

thinks that proves his previous incorrect definition of an entirely different word correct.

is either the michael jordan of misplaced arrogance or trolling.

[riskllama]

is either the michael jordan of misplaced arrogance or trolling.

hmm...i always thought that title belonged to caff... .

[mookiemcgee]

A few posts ago:

He's probably going to pivot now to saying 'even if there is a game mode that provides exactly what i want, I'm leaving because you are a bunch of bullies'

Sigh, I've little interest in educating children any more. Here goes anyway. Since you all said I was wrong on the meaning of "morph," I checked, figuring I must have made a mistake. After all, I was "corrected" and called idiot for my "mistake" by so many. I should have known who the real idiots were and kept my confidence. Unlike you twits, I looked up the word whose meaning I assumed I knew from the top of my head, and now stand vindicated: https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/morph

What you are calling "insulting" is just honesty. I know you all recently had parents supplying you trophies for participating and you can't really deal with honesty. It's not entirely your fault therefore. Nevertheless, I'm not like your parents. I'm real world. Deal with it, or prove unable to; it makes no difference to me. If it makes you feel better, keep crying your little hearts out about getting beat down by those bad, awful dice that aren't rewarding you for just participating either, and that you can't talk into rolling your way.

Thanks to those kind few who offered sensible words and good sentiments. There are many fierce, dedicated competitors during the last couple years who have joined me in the many nuclear games that battled silently and honorably. I apologize for my failure to adequately acknowledge you due to my pique over those few who play less honorably. It was fun, but it's still time for me to move on. I add no games at present, but intend to honor my commitments. It's who I am and what I do. Keep conquering, friends.

TL/DR: 'even if there is a game mode that provides exactly what i want, I'm leaving because you are a bunch of bullies'

[General Quigley]

Side note - you've won 17% of your games.

I see you have won 50% of your games and have a chess King's emblem to denote your rank. You probably believe you are due veneration for your skill and intelligence and receive such from sycophantic twits. Helicopter hunters no doubt rank 100% against polar bears. Is that your speed? Many here at CC with no life or means of obtaining respect otherwise make a Conquer Club rating their be- and end-all. You, no doubt, number among them.

Overrated twits like you would seldom but occasionally (and to my surprise) enter a random nuclear game I originated. They were usually excreted fairly quickly, and I would never see them again in a nuke game. No, they weren't targeted. They, like you, just didn't know how to handle being in a fair, wide open brawl of a game. And they couldn't conceive of any other strategy than pile and wait, which doesn't work particularly well in most nuke games. That I have a 17% win ratio, but a relatively high rating in the wide open brawls of games I prefer, ones in which I take on all comers all the time should indicate something to you, and would if you had any intelligence or concept of sportsmanship. That it doesn't comes as no surprise to me whatsoever.

I judge there to be nothing more to gain from reading this thread and have no desire to disseminate unappreciated wisdom further. Ignorance always gets the last word. So have yours.