Dice Wars Tournament
September 29th, 2010 at 10:41:20 AM
permalink
Looks like I'm the second person to win all by the 7-player game.
| Players | Position | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 1 | W |
| 3 | 1 | W |
| 4 | 1 | W |
| 5 | 1 | W |
| 6 | 6 | W |
| 7 | 4 | L |
| 8 | 7 | W |
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 29th, 2010 at 12:54:01 PM
permalink
I didn't register, but thought I would put up my results anyhow.
I'm not particularly proud of my performance...
| Players | Position | Result | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
2 | 2 | Loss | |
3 | 3 | Loss | |
4 | 3 | Win | |
5 | 3 | Win | 4th place |
6 | 3 | Loss | |
7 | 2 | Loss | 6th place |
8 | 4 | Loss | 7th place |
I'm not particularly proud of my performance...
September 29th, 2010 at 1:36:30 PM
permalink
| Players | Position | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2 | L |
| 3 | 3 | L |
| 4 | 4 | W |
| 5 | 2 | W |
| 6 | 5 | W |
| 7 | 4 | L |
| 8 | 1 | W |
Starting in the "last" position the 1st 3 games really sucked. Didn't even have a chance the 1st 2 games.
I had to really grind out a victory in that 3rd game.......I gave it the good 'ole college try......
September 29th, 2010 at 1:59:21 PM
permalink
This performance was not the winner, but this was fun! Beat 500 which sure was in doubt! Glad I didn't stink out the joint.
| # players | plyr start pos | Result | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
2 | 2nd | W | Bot went first but over-extended itself, first time I ever saw that , how nice it was tournament! The last game of my 7. |
3 | 2nd | L | one Bot had all the luck |
4 | 1st | L | A quicky, one Bot got too strong early |
5 | 3rd | L | hard fought first game and got an L, grrr |
6 | 5th | W | good strategic position to start on this one |
7 | 5th | W | virtually wiped out first turn, come-from-behind W |
8 | 4th | W | one Bot hated my guts, it ran out of luck |
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
September 29th, 2010 at 6:09:11 PM
permalink
Here are the results I have gathered thus far:
GenWyzgy: 5
RaleighCraps: 1
miplet: 6
Wizard: 6
Ericayne: 4
odiousgambit: 4
Let's give it until the end of the day (PST) for more. Assuming Miplet and I are still tied after that, the two of us should do a tiebreaker round by the same rules tomorrow.
GenWyzgy: 5
RaleighCraps: 1
miplet: 6
Wizard: 6
Ericayne: 4
odiousgambit: 4
Let's give it until the end of the day (PST) for more. Assuming Miplet and I are still tied after that, the two of us should do a tiebreaker round by the same rules tomorrow.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 29th, 2010 at 7:33:54 PM
permalink
And this is why I should hate gambling..........
Since my dismal 1-6 record, I have managed to go 3 for 3 ------ 3 player started 3rd , 4 player started 1, and 5 player started 3rd.
Where the hell was this performance 20 hours ago ? This is why I am becoming a bitter, grumpy old man.
Since my dismal 1-6 record, I have managed to go 3 for 3 ------ 3 player started 3rd , 4 player started 1, and 5 player started 3rd.
Where the hell was this performance 20 hours ago ? This is why I am becoming a bitter, grumpy old man.
Always borrow money from a pessimist; They don't expect to get paid back !
Be yourself and speak your thoughts. Those who matter won't mind, and those that mind, don't matter!
September 29th, 2010 at 9:23:52 PM
permalink
| Players | Position | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2 | L |
| 3 | 3 | W |
| 4 | 3 | L |
| 5 | 5 | W |
| 6 | 2 | W |
| 7 | 5 | L |
| 8 | 6 | L |
Some really bad starting positions and bad starts. First attack on 8 player was 5 dice vs 3. Thud, game over after that.
September 30th, 2010 at 4:11:54 AM
permalink
Quote: RaleighCrapsAnd this is why I should hate gambling..........
A love/hate relationship must be pretty normal.
I was afraid I'd be the guy to lose em all or something. I really did need to practice and get some advice, I was shocked to hear that my reported 'one out of four' win rate a while back was pretty bad. I think someone who can get 6 out of 7 really is a better player than me, so when it is over maybe we can compare notes on strategy.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
September 30th, 2010 at 5:01:32 AM
permalink
I had a 4-3 record. See above. But I did it before the contest started (see post above). Do I get another shot?
-----
You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
September 30th, 2010 at 5:04:42 AM
permalink
Dween's Record: 5-2
2 players: WIN
3 players: WIN
4 players: lose
5 players: WIN
6 players: WIN
7 players: lose
8 players: WIN
I feel as though I am using a good strategy... but maybe not the BEST strategy.
And when you're pinned down to 1 or 2 countries, with everyone else growing exponentially around you, it's hard to gain traction.
2 players: WIN
3 players: WIN
4 players: lose
5 players: WIN
6 players: WIN
7 players: lose
8 players: WIN
I feel as though I am using a good strategy... but maybe not the BEST strategy.
And when you're pinned down to 1 or 2 countries, with everyone else growing exponentially around you, it's hard to gain traction.
-Dween!
September 30th, 2010 at 7:17:36 AM
permalink
Quote: boymimboI had a 4-3 record. See above. But I did it before the contest started (see post above). Do I get another shot?
At this point I am neutral about it , so I'd say give it a go and see if anyone complains. The Dice Wars police are notoriously ineffective.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
September 30th, 2010 at 8:31:51 AM
permalink
Quote: boymimboI had a 4-3 record. See above. But I did it before the contest started (see post above). Do I get another shot?
Sorry, I already closed it for new submissions. Here are the results of my tiebreaker round.
| Players | Position | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2 | L |
| 3 | 2 | W |
| 4 | 1 | W |
| 5 | ? | W |
| 6 | 5 | L |
| 7 | 2 | L |
| 8 | 3 | W |
After Miplet submits his tiebreaker results we can do another tournament.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 30th, 2010 at 8:55:47 AM
permalink
So who won?
Thank you Wiz for organizing this "tournament." Regardless of one's own record, i'm sure we all had a blast. I know I did!
In the spirit of fair play and tournaments, i'm curious to know how many of you would participate in a "wincraps" tournament??
I'm just throwing it out there......
Thank you Wiz for organizing this "tournament." Regardless of one's own record, i'm sure we all had a blast. I know I did!
In the spirit of fair play and tournaments, i'm curious to know how many of you would participate in a "wincraps" tournament??
I'm just throwing it out there......
September 30th, 2010 at 9:48:25 AM
permalink
2 to 5
| Players | Position | Outomce |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2 | L |
| 3 | 2 | L |
| 4 | 3 | L |
| 5 | 2 | W |
| 6 | 2 | L |
| 7 | 6 | L |
| 8 | 2 | W |
“Man Babes” #AxelFabulous
September 30th, 2010 at 10:53:23 AM
permalink
Congratulations to the Wizard!
I wouldn't mind comparing notes about strategy.
I was corrected when it came to thinking the game just increased reinforcements based on territory owned; I can now confirm the numerical figure given to each player is an indication of how many territories connect, and the reinforcements are exactly based on that number. Thus it is possible to predict how many you get, but not where they will go [possibly older stacks are favored over new, not sure.] Importantly, only your largest group counts!
This lead to a more intelligent strategy for me. Previously I was more concerned about my flanks than building any link-ups. Certainly this is important, it sure helps to have zones that are reasonably safe from attack when you are about to attack, your rear gets left with 'not much' as you attack. But the other matter is more important, you just can't expect to win without having your zones joined. It is possible the Bots are programmed to try to disrupt this. So that was change #1, staying linked up.
As the tournament approached, I tried disrupting the bot link-ups with priority almost equal to the above concern. I think this pays off. It took me a long time to figure out that for getting more reinforcements, it did me no good to increase any smaller groups I had; all choices equal otherwise, you want to increase your main group. Likewise, if a Bot gets aggressive and tears into you, you can isolate out the vanguard, which will be strong, and cut the links to it, which will be likely vulnerable. If the Bot is left with one isolated strong island out of his latest expedition, it does it no real service.
Well, I was not the winner and something tells me there are elements of strategy I am still missing.
I wouldn't mind comparing notes about strategy.
I was corrected when it came to thinking the game just increased reinforcements based on territory owned; I can now confirm the numerical figure given to each player is an indication of how many territories connect, and the reinforcements are exactly based on that number. Thus it is possible to predict how many you get, but not where they will go [possibly older stacks are favored over new, not sure.] Importantly, only your largest group counts!
This lead to a more intelligent strategy for me. Previously I was more concerned about my flanks than building any link-ups. Certainly this is important, it sure helps to have zones that are reasonably safe from attack when you are about to attack, your rear gets left with 'not much' as you attack. But the other matter is more important, you just can't expect to win without having your zones joined. It is possible the Bots are programmed to try to disrupt this. So that was change #1, staying linked up.
As the tournament approached, I tried disrupting the bot link-ups with priority almost equal to the above concern. I think this pays off. It took me a long time to figure out that for getting more reinforcements, it did me no good to increase any smaller groups I had; all choices equal otherwise, you want to increase your main group. Likewise, if a Bot gets aggressive and tears into you, you can isolate out the vanguard, which will be strong, and cut the links to it, which will be likely vulnerable. If the Bot is left with one isolated strong island out of his latest expedition, it does it no real service.
Well, I was not the winner and something tells me there are elements of strategy I am still missing.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
September 30th, 2010 at 11:09:46 AM
permalink
Quote: odiousgambitCongratulations to the Wizard!
Thank you!!!
I'd like to suggest we a tournament every weekend, starting this coming weekend, until we get bored with it. Submissions may start at 12:01 AM Saturday morning, and close 11:59 PM Sunday evening. You can go by whatever time zone you are in.
I saw the thread about suggestions for rule changes. I'll look that over, and post later on that. Since I won, I am entitled to make one change. I don't think that scheduling counts as a change.
Quote: odiousgambitII can now confirm the numerical figure given to each player is an indication of how many territories connect, and the reinforcements are exactly based on that number. Thus it is possible to predict how many you get, but not where they will go [possibly older stacks are favored over new, not sure.] Importantly, only your largest group counts!
I think that is usually the case, and is always a minimum. However, I've noticed that when I'm on a tear, I get rewarded even more. The game seems to reward aggression. Sorry, I don't have time to comment on strategy; I've got too much on my plate today.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 30th, 2010 at 11:55:07 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardThank you!!!
I'd like to suggest we a tournament every weekend, starting this coming weekend
Do we need to register each time? I'm in.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
September 30th, 2010 at 1:00:04 PM
permalink
There is definitely something beyond the "one reinforcement per captured contingent territory" going on. I've notice that when I have a computer player down to three or four territories with full stacks on all of them, they almost always get fully reinforced even when they lose a battle. That is, their 8 high stack loses to one of mine, they end their turn, and it rebuilds to a full 8 high stack again even though they control fewer than seven territories.
September 30th, 2010 at 1:22:17 PM
permalink
Quote: GenWyzgyThere is definitely something beyond the "one reinforcement per captured contingent territory" going on. I've notice that when I have a computer player down to three or four territories with full stacks on all of them, they almost always get fully reinforced even when they lose a battle. That is, their 8 high stack loses to one of mine, they end their turn, and it rebuilds to a full 8 high stack again even though they control fewer than seven territories.
you can save up your reinforcements... I think that has been the explanation for that when I've seen it.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
September 30th, 2010 at 3:08:21 PM
permalink
Quote: odiousgambitDo we need to register each time? I'm in.
No registration required this time. Anybody who submits results during the allowed timeframe is in.
I looked at the Features you'd like in Dice Wars 2 thread, but it was about ideas for a player vs. player version. So I'm inclined to keep the rules the same for the second round. Again, I suggest that whoever wins may change one rule going forward.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 1st, 2010 at 3:12:42 PM
permalink
Quote: odiousgambityou can save up your reinforcements... I think that has been the explanation for that when I've seen it.
Oh! I always figured that if you didn't use all of your reinforcements on a turn, they were lost. That makes a lot of sense. That game moves just fast enough that it isn't always clear what's going on.
October 2nd, 2010 at 4:21:59 AM
permalink
The Bots humbled me this time. Ouch.
| # players | plyr start pos | Result | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
2 | 1st | L | Blew it somehow |
3 | 2nd | L | one bot dominated early |
4 | 2nd | L | one bot's luck killed me |
5 | 1st | W | favorable bot vs bot action |
6 | 4th | L | one bot dominated |
7 | 5th | L | down to one zone almost imm. |
8 | 4th | W | down to one zone, but soon controlled a corner. Come-from-behind W |
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:44:48 AM
permalink
Here are my results for the Oct 2-3 tournament:
2: W
3: W
4: L
5: L
6: W
7: W
8: W
5 points total.
2: W
3: W
4: L
5: L
6: W
7: W
8: W
5 points total.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 2nd, 2010 at 11:12:16 AM
permalink
I got 4 points.
| Players | Position | Result |
|---|---|---|
2 | 1st | W |
3 | 3rd | W |
4 | 4th | L |
5 | 3rd | L |
6 | 3rd | W |
7 | 3rd | L |
8 | 2nd | W |
October 2nd, 2010 at 11:54:39 AM
permalink
Back for another arse kicking, no doubt...... Oct 2-3 Entry
Decided to work this one from bottom to top.......
Beginning to really dislike this game. I'm getting beat too many times when I have a 2 or even 3 die advantage
Decided to work this one from bottom to top.......
| # players | plyr start pos | Result | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
2 | 2nd | L | 5 die against 2 and I lost. No chance to recover. Game over |
3 | 2nd | W | won 2 key battles, unlike games 4 and 5 |
4 | 2nd | L | bots kept me in center of board. couldn't get position |
5 | 1st | L | total BS. I lost 5 of 5 when my 4 dice attacked 2 bot dice. Odds of that happening? |
6 | 3rd | L | lol. got arse kicked. 2nd player out. Never had a chance. |
7 | 7th | W | beat my last tournament after 2 games. Yeah |
8 | 6th | W | long 3 way battle each with 10 spots in a corner |
Beginning to really dislike this game. I'm getting beat too many times when I have a 2 or even 3 die advantage
Always borrow money from a pessimist; They don't expect to get paid back !
Be yourself and speak your thoughts. Those who matter won't mind, and those that mind, don't matter!
October 2nd, 2010 at 2:17:29 PM
permalink
Quote: RaleighCrapsBeginning to really dislike this game.
I often feel that way, but can't seem to let go.
Today, after tournament, am getting my butt beat bad most of the time, nowhere near .500
As far as luck goes, there seem to be lucky and unlucky bots. Beating the field, then, sometimes feels like a tall order
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:43:38 PM
permalink
Somebody please beat me. I don't want to win twice in a row.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 3rd, 2010 at 5:36:27 AM
permalink
Quote: RaleighCrapsWell, welcome, and let me be the first to tell you to stay away from Mafia Wars on Facebook.
It is a stupidly brain dead game that sucks you in, and steals your life away from you a few minutes every day.
(Yeah, I'm an addicted daily player)
Of course I went to play it after that. To play the game I had two choose one of the following to play it:
1. Access my basic information: Includes name, profile picture, gender, networks, user ID, list of friends, and any other information I've shared with everyone
2. Send me email: Mafia Wars Game may email me directly at (my e-mail address)
I didn't choose #1 because I don't want them bothering all my friends, and I didn't choose #2 because I didn't want them to bother me. Somebody should teach them about a lesson about free samples. At least the player vs. player dice wars game gave you that.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 3rd, 2010 at 9:01:02 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardOf course I went to play it after that. To play the game I had two choose one of the following to play it:
1. Access my basic information: Includes name, profile picture, gender, networks, user ID, list of friends, and any other information I've shared with everyone
2. Send me email: Mafia Wars Game may email me directly at (my e-mail address).
I didn't choose #1 because I don't want them bothering all my friends, and I didn't choose #2 because I didn't want them to bother me. Somebody should teach them about a lesson about free samples. At least the player vs. player dice wars game gave you that.
Yeah, Facebook has made a number of changes since I started playing 18 months ago.
1.) If I recall, I think there is a setting to restrict the info MW can see on your profile. I was concerned about bombarding my friends with MW messages (and there are hundreds of them a day). You can fix this by creating a Friend group, and then restricting MW messages to only that Friend group. MW will still see all of your friends though, and try and entice you to invite them to play. There is also an option to spend real dollars to buy extra equipment! And, unbelievably, there are idiots out there who do just that.
2.) I refuse to give them my email, or let them email me at FB.
Trust me, you are not missing anything. The only thing remotely close to strategy involves trying to use your energy to maximize the amount of experience you can get. You need the experience to move up to the next level. The one cool thing about the game is it is a very socially oriented game. You become stronger by inviting other people to join your mafia, and in turn, you join theirs. You then help each other by doing jobs, and giving gifts to each other. Many of my invites have been completely blind invites. I see someone playing the game, and ask them to join me. I have met people from all over the world who joined my mafia, but I learn about their lives from their FB postings, which is really cool. Somehow I have ended up with a lot of Europeans and Australians. That is probably why I am still playing the game.
And once again, proving that men are pigs, the fastest way to get people to join your mafia, is to post a picture of 'yourself' in a string bikini. That will get you hundreds of responses in minutes. I bet there are thousands of men playing MW with a girl's alias.
Always borrow money from a pessimist; They don't expect to get paid back !
Be yourself and speak your thoughts. Those who matter won't mind, and those that mind, don't matter!
October 3rd, 2010 at 11:39:17 AM
permalink
Arrrg. I can't believe I went first in a 2 player game and lost!!!
3 to 4
3 to 4
| Players | Position | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 1 | L |
| 3 | 3 | L |
| 4 | 4 | L |
| 5 | 3 | W |
| 6 | 2 | L |
| 7 | 2 | W |
| 8 | 5 | W |
“Man Babes” #AxelFabulous
October 3rd, 2010 at 5:07:09 PM
permalink
5-2
Lost with 2 and 5 players.
Lost with 2 and 5 players.
October 3rd, 2010 at 8:30:20 PM
permalink
Quote: crazyiam5-2
Lost with 2 and 5 players.
So far you and I are tied. Unless somebody claims an equal or better record by the end of the day we'll have a tiebreaker.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 3rd, 2010 at 9:05:24 PM
permalink
I had a go, won 4, lost 3. I won the 2, 3, 5 and 7 player games and lost the rest.
[This space is intentionally left blank]
October 3rd, 2010 at 9:22:38 PM
permalink
Quote: RaleighCraps
Beginning to really dislike this game. I'm getting beat too many times when I have a 2 or even 3 die advantage
I did a google of "dice wars results not random", and in the first result there is a lot about this.
"Intriguing game - but the 'randomization' is suspect to say the least. Did the programmers bias the rolls against the player intentionally - to 'balance' the flaws in the AI? Or did they simply botch the random number generation that badly?"
"I too crunched the numbers on this game after I became suspicious when I lost three 8-5 matchups in the same game. I calculated the probability of this happening to 1 in 985,000. So imagine my surprise when it happened a week later. After I began to fixate on how many times I've lost an 8-5 attack, I decided this game is rigged and not for me."
"It cheats. I ran the game to 8 dice in every territory and watched how often my stack won vs the computer one - this should be about 50-50 (slightly defender biased on ties). The computer won (out of 2000 battles) 69%. And it attacked most of the time. Given a binomial distribution with 1 for a win, 0 for a loss, the computer gets 0.69, more than 4 sigma from the mean (0.5). "
| # players | plyr start pos | result | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 1st | W | first turn won all but 2 territories, then lost a bunch of 8v5 & 5v3 until the AI gave up |
| 3 | 3rd | W | got smoked early, left w/2 stacks, connected & waited |
| 4 | 4th | L | never had a chance, left w/3 singles and a double on my first play |
| 5 | 3rd | L | lost a 5v3 and 4v3 first turn, hung on but eventually a 3 way game at a 3-1 ttl dice disadvantage (3-1 against each) |
| 6 | 6th | W | surprised. built an edge across the bottom and got left alone, picked up a single here and there as the others beat themselves up. |
| 7 | 1st | W | Never really a question. Build a decent patch, refreshed at a higher rate, never challenged. |
| 8 | 2nd | W | full board of 8s with a 3-1 advantage, one entry point, took about 15 minutes to beat the AI down. Yellow won about 2 of 3 8v8, over and over and over. Both of us were on full refresh (64 in the hopper), but I was earning 20+ each turn and yellow was earning 7, 8, or 9. |
I never declared for the tourney, I just felt like building a table. I never did it before. It's 12:30 here, and I'm going to bed.
A falling knife has no handle.
October 4th, 2010 at 2:08:20 AM
permalink
3-way tie needs to be settled?
I didn't really want to claim it cheats without the facts, and felt the game goes too fast to check the facts. But it looks like some are starting to emerge. My gut feeling has been that the streaks of luck the bots have is within realistic distribution. If you never saw any streaks of good or bad luck that would be suspicious in itself.
Of what you found, one claim in particular of cheating appears to be done by someone who knows what he is doing. If so, maybe if the computer didnt cheat, it couldnt hold up to the superior strategies that a human will develop. This is just typical for a computer game, you may check out my blog for my thoughts on that.
Quote: MoscaI did a google of "dice wars results not random", and in the first result there is a lot about this.
"Intriguing game - but the 'randomization' is suspect to say the least. Did the programmers bias the rolls against the player intentionally - to 'balance' the flaws in the AI? Or did they simply botch the random number generation that badly?"
"I too crunched the numbers on this game after I became suspicious when I lost three 8-5 matchups in the same game. I calculated the probability of this happening to 1 in 985,000. So imagine my surprise when it happened a week later. After I began to fixate on how many times I've lost an 8-5 attack, I decided this game is rigged and not for me."
"It cheats. I ran the game to 8 dice in every territory and watched how often my stack won vs the computer one - this should be about 50-50 (slightly defender biased on ties). The computer won (out of 2000 battles) 69%. And it attacked most of the time. Given a binomial distribution with 1 for a win, 0 for a loss, the computer gets 0.69, more than 4 sigma from the mean (0.5). "
I didn't really want to claim it cheats without the facts, and felt the game goes too fast to check the facts. But it looks like some are starting to emerge. My gut feeling has been that the streaks of luck the bots have is within realistic distribution. If you never saw any streaks of good or bad luck that would be suspicious in itself.
Of what you found, one claim in particular of cheating appears to be done by someone who knows what he is doing. If so, maybe if the computer didnt cheat, it couldnt hold up to the superior strategies that a human will develop. This is just typical for a computer game, you may check out my blog for my thoughts on that.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
October 4th, 2010 at 3:10:12 AM
permalink
Quote: Mosca"I too crunched the numbers on this game after I became suspicious when I lost three 8-5 matchups in the same game. I calculated the probability of this happening to 1 in 985,000. So imagine my surprise when it happened a week later. After I began to fixate on how many times I've lost an 8-5 attack, I decided this game is rigged and not for me."
According to http://fatknowledge.blogspot.com/2006/08/dice-wars.html, the probability of winning an 8-5 battle in your favor as attacker is 0.9538, and defender 1-0.0384=0.9616.
In my opinion, the dice seem fine. I would attribute the phenomena of the dice seeming non-random to the same one that honest and fair online casinos get accused of cheating all the time.
Quote: odiousgambit3-way tie needs to be settled?
Yes, it does. I see Mosca missed the deadline by 31 minutes. I'm okay with letting that slide, but I think crazyiam should need to give a thumbs up too for Mosca to be included in the tiebreaker too. Meanwhile, I'll start to play my tiebreaker games. Let's try to submit them sometime today.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 4th, 2010 at 5:38:23 AM
permalink
I'm OK with you guys playing it out. I probably won't have time today to string together 8 games, I'll shoot for the next tourney if there is one.
A falling knife has no handle.
October 4th, 2010 at 7:03:19 AM
permalink
Quote: MoscaI'll shoot for the next tourney if there is one.
If the Wizard wins this one, there must be a rematch!
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
October 4th, 2010 at 7:32:22 AM
permalink
Quote: odiousgambitIf the Wizard wins this one, there must be a rematch!
We'll keep doing this as long as there is interest. Tournament #3 will be the Oct 9-10 weekend.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 4th, 2010 at 8:19:36 AM
permalink
Quote: Wizard
In my opinion, the dice seem fine. I would attribute the phenomena of the dice seeming non-random to the same one that honest and fair online casinos get accused of cheating all the time.
You're probably right. I just like complaining about it, it's fun. Since there's no money involved, It doesn't really matter; it's fun and free, both the game and the complaining.
A falling knife has no handle.
October 4th, 2010 at 9:09:59 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardAccording to http://fatknowledge.blogspot.com/2006/08/dice-wars.html, the probability of winning an 8-5 battle in your favor as attacker is 0.9538, and defender 1-0.0384=0.9616.
In my opinion, the dice seem fine. I would attribute the phenomena of the dice seeming non-random to the same one that honest and fair online casinos get accused of cheating all the time.
Yes, it does. I see Mosca missed the deadline by 31 minutes. I'm okay with letting that slide, but I think crazyiam should need to give a thumbs up too for Mosca to be included in the tiebreaker too. Meanwhile, I'll start to play my tiebreaker games. Let's try to submit them sometime today.
I"m fine with him playing if he has the time.
October 4th, 2010 at 2:00:03 PM
permalink
6-1 in tiebreaker. Lost with 8 players. Got lucky a few times. Going first in 2 seems to be key.
October 4th, 2010 at 5:50:28 PM
permalink
I'm not in the tiebreaker, but I want to share a rare deadlock. This started as the default 7 teams. I went third. I started with a stack of 4 on the isthmus. No one had enough to challenge the stack and eventually it became an 8. I cleared out the right, the greens reached equilibrium as shown on the left, and wouldn't attack each other.
Everyone is stacked to 8s with 64 in the hopper. The greens won't attack each other. We've traded the border property that the light green is standing on repeatedly; I've gotten that spot +1, either the light or dark green. If I get that territory, and light green doesn't, then dark green attacks it. Sometimes one of the greens wins that territory +1 more; I get them both back. Sometimes I'll win that spot, defend, then win one more. After about 10 minutes, I decided to count 50 more rounds, and then I did a screen capture and exited out. I think that if I had a way to auto run it, I could have let it run all night and it would have stuck here.
Everyone is stacked to 8s with 64 in the hopper. The greens won't attack each other. We've traded the border property that the light green is standing on repeatedly; I've gotten that spot +1, either the light or dark green. If I get that territory, and light green doesn't, then dark green attacks it. Sometimes one of the greens wins that territory +1 more; I get them both back. Sometimes I'll win that spot, defend, then win one more. After about 10 minutes, I decided to count 50 more rounds, and then I did a screen capture and exited out. I think that if I had a way to auto run it, I could have let it run all night and it would have stuck here.
A falling knife has no handle.
October 4th, 2010 at 6:33:36 PM
permalink
Quote: crazyiam6-1 in tiebreaker. Lost with 8 players. Got lucky a few times. Going first in 2 seems to be key.
Congratulations, you win! Here are my tiebreaker scores:
2: W
3: L
4: W
5: W
6: W
7: L
8: W
As the winner, you may make one rule change, if you wish, for the next tournament.
Quote: MoscaI'm not in the tiebreaker, but I want to share a rare deadlock...
Yes, I've seen those too. I wrote before that in a tournament if there is no progress after several turns, then you get half a point. Here is a for fun game I just had. I can't remember ever such a maximum longest distance between territories.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 9th, 2010 at 9:41:44 AM
permalink
I had 2 great come from behind wins and 1 where I thoght I would win but didn't.
4 to 3
4 to 3
| Players | Position | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2 | L |
| 3 | 1 | L |
| 4 | 2 | W |
| 5 | 2 | L |
| 6 | 3 | W |
| 7 | 3 | W |
| 8 | 5 | W |
“Man Babes” #AxelFabulous
October 9th, 2010 at 7:42:26 PM
permalink
Tournment #3 results
2: W
3: L
4: L
5: W
6: W
7: W
8: W
5 points.
2: W
3: L
4: L
5: W
6: W
7: W
8: W
5 points.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 10th, 2010 at 10:09:17 AM
permalink
conceding after 3 losses
| # players | plyr start pos | Result | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
2 | |||
3 | |||
4 | 2 | L | situation came down to who would win battles, 'tweren't me |
5 | 4 | L | bot partner was an idiot |
6 | 5 | W | I had all the luck |
7 | 5 | L | bots had an allliance |
8 | 1 | W | come from behind |
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
October 10th, 2010 at 12:07:07 PM
permalink
My first attempt in under tourney rules
2:W
3:W
4:W
5:W
6:L - Poor starting positions and a dominant enemy. Is it just me or do the Greens seem to do best?
7:L - I did not win a single battle when I had a greater Dice Stack. Although I probably did win more than my share of even stack battles.
8:L - Started with 3 seperate territories in 3 different corners, and just couldnt get a run.
Not a bad first effort though.
2:W
3:W
4:W
5:W
6:L - Poor starting positions and a dominant enemy. Is it just me or do the Greens seem to do best?
7:L - I did not win a single battle when I had a greater Dice Stack. Although I probably did win more than my share of even stack battles.
8:L - Started with 3 seperate territories in 3 different corners, and just couldnt get a run.
Not a bad first effort though.
[This space is intentionally left blank]
October 11th, 2010 at 9:56:34 AM
permalink
Looks like I won tournament #3 then. With only four participants last time, maybe that should be the last one.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
