New dice server

TheDog

Here is my dice stats, for a local game me v 5 AI.
Found by Game> Show Dice Stats

Looking at the Total block.
There are almost 960 rolls, meaning that each number on average should be rolled 160 times.

The internal dice roller looks fine to me.

CaptainSquareyez

Here is my dice stats, for a local game me v 5 AI.
Found by Game> Show Dice Stats

Looking at the Total block.
There are almost 960 rolls, meaning that each number on average should be rolled 160 times.

The internal dice roller looks fine to me.

Throw REAL dice and see if it works out like that. Bet it dont.
Also, im talking about the Marti dice, not the builtin dice for local dice. The builtin dice are better than the marti dice!

CaptainSquareyez

@ubernaut said in New dice server:

@captainsquareyez said in New dice server:

Why?

because it has not been established that there is an actual problem and our developer resources are extremely limited to invent a new dice server without any indication that it would improve anything

Is it a bad idea to for us to have a selection?

you do, you can use the local dice roller, but that involves trusting the other party to be fair and not reroll bad outcomes.

Yeah i can tell dev resources are lmited coz of the amount of bugs in some of the games. But at least we now know why there wont be any new dice servers. Guess i will just go back to the board game version where dice throws are more realistic and dont miss 3 or 4 times in a row

ubernaut

@captainsquareyez i'm sorry you feel that way but the number the dog put up and my own experience with marti doesn't support your claims. if you can provide evidence to the contrary i'm sure the priority would be made.

CaptainSquareyez

@ubernaut Dont get me wrong, im not having a go at you, i just think these dice are horrible. Maybe they're bugged, i dont know, maybe its defender favored.

So you think its normal to get 3 rounds of misses in a row? Infantry i can understand coz they throw at 1. But, it doesnt really matter what number they throw at, there is always a 1 in 6 chance of throwing that number you need. But i think logic would say, the more units you have, the more chance you would also have in throwing more of required numbers, which would also lower the chance of getting total misses or 1 lousy hit. But that does not seem to be the case. It sounds like what you have said to me, these dice go by a percentage. Well, thats not random is it? Or am i misinterpreting what you're saying?

Heres some examples of dice marti has thrown me. Im going by a current game, starting at round 1. Will see if i can find that round where i missed 3 times in a row,(found it, its actually 4 times in a row i missed) :
Germans roll dice for 1 armour, 1 bomber, 2 fighters and 3 infantry in Karelia S.S.R., round 2 : 1/7 hits, 2.67 expected hits
1 lousy hit out of 7 units. When i have 2 fighters a tank and bomber.

Germans roll dice for 2 artilleries and 2 infantry in East Poland, round 2 : 1/4 hits, 1.33 expected hits
Again, 1 hit even though the infantry are now boosted to attacking at 2 instead of 1 by the artilleries.

Germans roll dice for 3 armour and 2 infantry in Ukraine, round 2 : 1/5 hits, 1.83 expected hits
3 tanks and 1 hit? So im starting to think there is a 99% chance of the infantry always missing when attacking.
The above 3 are from round 1, so a new game.

Germans roll dice for 2 armour, 1 fighter and 4 infantry in Karelia S.S.R., round 2 : 1/7 hits, 2.17 expected hits
Seeing a pattern here yet? This is from 1 game, the Germans turn. This one is from round 2 of the same game.

Here it is, so, same game, round 3 of the game, i miss completely 4 throws in a row, and yet, British only had 1 tank. How is it that he had better luck to get 3 hits over 4 throws then what i did in 5 throws? Can you now see why i think these dice are horrible? Can you see why i think they are defender favored, or even bugged?
Also, im not sure how "expected hits" work, to me it means you got whats expected. So, when you miss it should be reading as "0 expected hits", shouldnt it?
Germans roll dice for 2 fighters and 3 infantry in France, round 2 : 0/5 hits, 1.50 expected hits
British roll dice for 1 armour in France, round 2 : 1/1 hits, 0.50 expected hits
1 infantry owned by the Germans lost in France
Germans roll dice for 2 fighters and 2 infantry in France, round 3 : 0/4 hits, 1.33 expected hits
British roll dice for 1 armour in France, round 3 : 0/1 hits, 0.50 expected hits
Germans roll dice for 2 fighters and 2 infantry in France, round 4 : 0/4 hits, 1.33 expected hits
British roll dice for 1 armour in France, round 4 : 1/1 hits, 0.50 expected hits
1 infantry owned by the Germans lost in France
Germans roll dice for 2 fighters and 1 infantry in France, round 5 : 0/3 hits, 1.17 expected hits
British roll dice for 1 armour in France, round 5 : 1/1 hits, 0.50 expected hits
1 infantry owned by the Germans lost in France
Germans roll dice for 2 fighters in France, round 6 : 2/2 hits, 1.00 expected hits
Then finally i get a couple of hits. Sorry, but i still think there is something not right with these dice.

How many units do i need to get more than 1 hit? Or to not miss 4 times in a row?
I would be more understanding if it was 1 infantry on 1 infantry missing all the time. But when multiple units are in play and we get constant misses, then something is not right. And even to get only 1 lousy hit on a regular basis is just wrong as well, no one is that unlucky

You said this to me yesterday, "missing with 2 fighters basically happens 25% of the time or so"
Well, i missed 99% of the time in that last round. 4 times out of 5 throws. And with 5 units. Against 1 unit.

ubernaut

@captainsquareyez honestly, the action you are outlining is a bit hard to follow seems like you are picking certain battles that had bad outcomes. to truly demonstrate a problem i think you'd have to give enough complete rounds of results (for both sides) to show that you're consistently getting results that different from what would be expected.

expected hits gives you the number of hits expected so in the first example the 2 armour give 1 (1/2 each), the fighter and 3 of your infantry give you the second 1 for a total of 2, the last remaining infantry gives you the .17 remainder (1/6).

ubernaut

@captainsquareyez also, would be helpful if you can share your dice stats screen that gives you the total results of all dice rolls for any game.

CaptainSquareyez

@ubernaut Fair enough. But i still dont think we should be getting so many complete misses like that, especially 4 in a row with multiple units. Just go through a thread with my gamertag on it in Axisandallies.org. It does feel like its too frequent.

ubernaut

@captainsquareyez reality is streaky oftentimes. a single bad battle can in some cases decide a game.

TheDog

@CaptainSquareyez
If the map/scenario supports Low Luck try that in the Map Options.

CaptainSquareyez

@thedog tried it, thats even worse again, seems to favor defender even more

CaptainSquareyez

@ubernaut yeah, again, fair enough, a game every now and then, yeah sure. But just about every game? No, i dont think so. Out of a dozen games, i have lost nearly all of them due to your so called "bad battles". Again, look at the posts. Guess you didnt even look though,right? Not unless you sped read thru pages worth of rolls and games.
But i get it, you are set in your ways that is absolutely nothing wrong with the dice. You ask for evidence and quickly dismiss it. Keep your broken dice. Im done! A good developer listens to their community. You tell us to show evidence, and you quickly dismiss it.

LaFayette

@captainsquareyez Pointing out flaws in statistics requires large data sets. That means 100s and 1000s of examples. 20 examples can just be variation.

One should also keep in mind it's more important to look at deviation from the expected rolls than the exact roll. For example, you might expect 6 hits, but only get 4, the odds of a -2 or worse could be quite good. If you compute the odds of exactly 4 hits, it's a misleading probability. That's one key, the odds that are more interesting is that many hits or fewer, not just that many hits.

Another thing to keep in mind is that conditional probably is not intuitive. The probability tree could depend significantly on initial outcomes that have higher probability than the total. AA is a good example, there might be 100 possible outcomes in a battle with 90 going for the attacker and 10 going for the defender. Now, if the AA hits, then the subtree that remains has perhaps 12 branches, with 9 of those going for the defender and 3 for the attacker. So while the initial odds were 90% for the attacker, if the AA hits then suddenly the battle is a 25%, and on the flip side if the AA misses then it's probably a 98% battle. So that 90% is misleading, it's actually a 1/6 chance that you'll get a battle where the defender is overwhelming likely to win, that is twice as likely as a 10% chance would have you think. So in part, the problem is remaining in battles where the initial rolls are against you, it flips the odds and then remaining in the battle is an expected loss.

With all that said, the source code is open, MARTI uses the mersenne-twister algorithm to generate random numbers.

CaptainSquareyez

@lafayette The one thing i think you are missing, is i keep mentioning how it keeps happening. zero hits or 1 hit back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. But, dont listen, dont care anymore. A game is not fun when you keep losing due to bad throws constantly. But, theres absolutley nothing wrong with these dodgy dice!
Edit, just to be clear i have managed to win a couple of games, but they seem to be rare due to the dice keep giving me cruddy outcomes.

LaFayette

@captainsquareyez That's the game, it depends heavily on dice. I can give you examples where in real world dice I got unbelievably bad odds and had runs of games where I "lost" due to that.

Are the dice actually "dodgy", seemingly not as much as you describe, but perhaps are to some extent, it's unclear. One also cannot rule out confirmation bias from the examples given. Notably, how about all the other battles where you got really decent dice? Then when it counts, the battles you really want to win, instead you had the more variable dice rolls there.

Overall, constructive criticism and research is welcome. Bitching about a run of 3 bad games is not helpful. GL, sorry you are feeling frustrated with the dice.

CaptainSquareyez

@lafayette Bitching huh? Nice. The arrogance is really shining through now.
I WAS giving you constructive criticism, but seems like i am talking to walls that dont want to hear me. Hows that for bitching? As for good throws, i dont think i have had any worthy of talking about as they all seem to be frustrating, all misses or 1 hit, on the rare occasion i might get lucky and 2 hits IF i have 10 units there.
If you want to start throwing insults, go for it, i can throw em back too though and i wont care if i get banned. As an admin, u should know better than to say something like that to the community.

LaFayette

@captainsquareyez Before you edited your comment, you said "whatever, I don't care anymore". I don't know how to view that as constructive dialog or a continuation of the analysis of where deficiencies and improvements could be made. Given these are stats and we are talking about randomness, anecdotal examples don't prove much one way or another. It could even be that you are the lucky lottery ticket winner to have the worst TripleA dice out of all, but that does not mean the dice are dodgy.

You mentioned that the dice seem to favor the defender. That is not possible as a systematic bias considering the dice rolls are requested blind to whom it is for. There cannot therefore be a bias towards attacker vs defender, AI vs human, instead it would just so happen that one or the other received the better rolls when requested.

Kindwind

I have been busy with work. Our 1st step is find out what these values are:

Average roll:
Median:
Variance:
Standard Deviation:
Normal 1 d 6 distribution patterns.

I found the average roll to be: 3.5
google
what is the median roll of 1 d 6
I found the median roll to also be: 3.5
google
what is the median roll of 1 d 6
Standard Variance to be: 105/36 or 2.916
https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/198025/what-are-the-variance-and-standard-deviation-for-a-standard-six-sided-die
Standard Deviation: I am looking for still. Could some look these up?

After these values are found we can hire a programer to add the dice server. A buddy of mine has some comp. sci. degree folks that can help us out. I doubt it will cost more than 100. Adding button and a 1 d 6 standard dice model should be easy to do.

ubernaut

@kindwind everytime i have looked the dice stats for d6 based map it has been pretty close to 3.5

Kindwind

So I am going to do some quality of life changes for the new update of triple-a. Does anyone have any ideas how they would like transports to load or anything else?