Coin Flip option

[Robinette]

SUGGESTION: Coin Flip Option

WHY: an option for players who don't like the streaks that come from 6 sided dice.

HOW: each attack pits one army against another, and is decided with a coin flip. Heads = win 1, Tails = lose 1...

ADVANTAGES: 1) Reduced streaks... it's simple math,,, streaks can still happen with coin flips, but the variables are reduced significantly and will result in fewer and lest severe streaks overall. Streaks are NOT eliminated, just reduced. 2) relatively simple coding to implement as a Game OPTION

DIS-ADVANTAGES: 1) Removes the statistical attacker advantage... it's not much, but the current 3v2 dice method with ties going to the defender gives a very slight advantage to the attacker. 2) Will require more attack clicks in manual attack mode. Each attack will remove just 1 unit, while the current 3v2 method removes 2 units per click.


BACK STORY In another cyber-galaxy, far far away... there is similar game, where the complaints of dice streaks run rampant, where riots break out, where anger flares, where random is unappreciated for what it is... MC could be the leader in solving this,, be the 1st to offer a simple alternative, one that reduces those streaks while maintaining the element of chance, and allows the gamers to not feel like they have just gone through a TSA enhanced patdown, lol.

 

[ORBOTRON]

I'd love to try this out, maybe we can at least get it set up to try on DevCom

 

[Badorties]

Correct me if wrong, but this would not reduce streakiness or the perception there of. Just as people's blood boils when they lose a 20v2, imagine if they lose 10 or more flips in a row?

It would reduce the attack advantage though.

The fixed force option we have will put the dice to bed when its released.

Also, the best defense against 'dice rever' is education. I think a nice wiki article on "The Nature of Dice, Luck, and Streaking" would go a long way.

 

[Robinette]

Correct me if wrong

yes, you are quite wrong,,, every "flip" would have only 2 possible results,,, with the dice, a 1v1 attack has 36 possible combinations... and this increases tremendously with more dice. So like i said in the original post, this would reduce streaks.

The beauty of this is that there will still be an element of chance... there will still be an element of RISK... there will still be times that you will hold your breath hoping your rolls hold out...

Maybe you'd like the idea if we could come up with a catchier name for it.

 

[Badorties]

My brain is not processing this right. Dice are no more streaky than coins.

In Risk you have a .5% chance of losing a 10v2. You have about the same chance of losing 8 coin flips in a row. Both events (streaks) are as likely to happen.

I don't see your logic.

 

[Spazm]

A 50/50 chance with coin flipping would only change the probabilities from about 57/43 if I'm remember correctly (attacker/defender). So while the probability changes, the method of determining the outcome - dice vs coins - does not change the rules of probability.

 

[Robinette]

yes, dice ARE more streaky than coins...
here's proof using your example...

the chance of losing 8 coin flips in a row is .35%
while losing 10v2 with conventional dice is actually .58%

it should be obvious by now, but go ahead and compare the 2 numbers above...
the dice streak is 66% WORSE than the coin flip streak (.58/.35=1.657=+66%)

Lets do another one to show an even more extreme streak...
Assume it's 15 v 2, and you are denied...
chances with the coin flip are .011%
chances with the dice are .025%
in this case the dice streak is 127% WORSE than the coin flip streak

This spread will continue to grow with even larger numbers...
in other words, coin flips are LESS streaky than dice... A LOT LESS STREAKY.

If you are still not convinced, then i would suppose you are just basing it on feelings, and not looking at the math.

 

[Badorties]

Well my handle on math is quite poor, however my gut tells me that the streakiness of something is not determined by its shape (cube, coin). Infact, I would say that streakiness itself is not a mathematical concept, and one that is only determined by own own perception.

I think we need a math whiz to settle this.

calling all math geeks...

 

[Robinette]

lol, i understand... those "gut feelings" are hard to let go of...

y'know, it was that same "gut feeling" that prevented people from believing that the earth was round, despite the mathematical calculations that had shown it's actual size (within 10%) over 2,000 years ago...

and even more "gut feelings" that prevented people from accepting that the earth was not at the center of our solar system, again despite centuries of mathematical proof...

but to be fair to all those people from centuries past, the "proof" was far less concrete than the simple math i am using to prove the obvious coin toss advantages...
:alberteinstein:

 

[mapguy]

This coin flip idea sounds interesting. What would make it more interesting is, if you could choose how many armies to risk on each flip. You could choose as many as you want, up to the amount of armies on the territ being attacked.

As for it being less streaky, I do not know, but I would guess that it is so. With dice there are 5 dice with 6 sides. A whole lot of variables here. With a coin flip, there is one number, with only two variables (heads or tails). So, it becomes a task of tuning in to the algorithm, try to use your intuition as to how many troops to risk on each particular flip.

If there were a choice to how many troops to risk with each flip, then I imagine that severe defeats would be even greater. But, the fault would be perceived as belonging to the player, that just lost a massive stack with one flip. So, the player has only himself (and not the dice), to blame for any severe loss.

 

[RjBeals]

This sounds like your golden palace casino map all over again.

 

[WidowMakers]

Basically the coin vs dice is not a comparable example.

1) A single coin toss that is compared to nothing
vs
2) a sets of dice compared to other dice

You can't compare a single coin to 3:2 dice.

Also there will still be streaks because all of these, regardless of coin or die, are based on probabilities.
And since they are all random (not dependent on previous results) they can have streaks.

Only way to get rid of streaks is to get rid of random chance and Bado already stated the FIXED FORCE is under development.

END OF LINE.

 

[WidowMakers]

Read This
http://www.diceinstitute.com/2006/08/streaks_trends_and_opportunity_part_i.html

The “Math” View:

“Math guys” will tell you that streaks do occur, and that they fall within the realm of standard deviation. They will also tell you that at the end of infinity, all the dice-numbers that are supposed to roll, will have “evened out” to their mathematically-perfect expected rate-of-occurrence.
Before the end of eternity (sic), they agree that there will be streaks, but you will never be able to predict:

- When a streak will happen.
- How long the streak will last.
- When the streak will end.​

In addition to all of that, they will opine that there is no such thing as “trends”, and instead, there will be short, medium and long streaks that are interspersed by an equal number of opposite streaks of short, medium and long length.

 

[Robinette]

hey widow.. so are you saying you DO like this idea?

Bahahahaaa... now calm down, i'm just kidding...


Just one question for you... Did you even LOOK at the empirical proof that i presented?
Do you know what empirical proof means? oh darn, that's a 2nd question, lol...


For the record, I am not against the "Fixed Force" option the you and bado brought up, although i'm not sure i'll like it...
All I'm saying is that it would be nice to have a middle ground option,,,
one that is neither pure scotch, nor pure water,, but a blended mixed drink... aka: a smoooooooooth drink

 

[WidowMakers]

I was not saying that you had no proof. I said that random coins or dice are random and thus prone to streaks.

Even if there is less chance with coins to lose 10 in a row. It will happen and then people will complain about the coins not being random.
And to quote a frequently used Dilbert cartoon

Plus anything that removes the attacker advantage 3:2 dice will change the way people play the game. Attacking 10 v 15 in an attempt to break a bonus to win the game or take reserves will now be more difficult.

 

[zspBANNED]

So to respond to this, I was thinking about typing some long ass post explaining why I'd hate the idea of a coin flip option. But for now, I think Widz' explanation will suffice (nice dawg!).

The fixed force option, like he said, is apparently in the works and will be a way to fight the streakiness of the dice.

 

[ORBOTRON]

I still think it bears testing out. That's one sure way to know how it would act, and it sounds like this is one of those issues in which one side will never convince the other.

 

[mapguy]

They are exactly the same except for the amount of "variables". A coin has only TWO variables, heads or tails. Where as, a group of 5 dice has many variables.

I do not think that anyone has fully understood the point that I was trying to make. That is, if it was set up as a coin flip, or roulette wheel, or any other device that has only two variables, and you give the attacker the opportunity to choose for himself if he wants heads or tails, red or black, etc.
Then the streaks will still happen, but they will NOT be the determining factor of killing or loosing armies. The players bet on one or the other, WILL.

So it becomes more of a hands on, player experience. Much like any casino game sch as roulette, the outcome of where the ball lands is NOT what determines the outcome. The players bet IS. When you combine that with a wager (how many armies to risk), then you start to move away from any and all valid complaints about streaks.

Like I said, This idea is very interesting. I can see it as being the biggest thing for the game since Fog.

 

[zspBANNED]

With this option, the game would be based MUCH less on skill, and more on chance; this much is obvious. Now you're relying solely on a 50% chance of winning or losing each attack, which in the end, even you'll begin to get frustrated with. You'll argue that it's skill to know how much to wager and when to do it, but really, it's still not skill. You're just being more or less conservative and hoping the coin is on your side. The game of risk would be so unbelievably different, and much more luck reliant. I'd rather not have this..

 

[mapguy]

With this option, the game would be based MUCH less on skill, and more on chance; this much is obvious. Now you're relying solely on a 50% chance of winning or losing each attack, which in the end, even you'll begin to get frustrated with. You'll argue that it's skill to know how much to wager and when to do it, but really, it's still not skill. You're just being more or less conservative and hoping the coin is on your side. The game of risk would be so unbelievably different, and much more luck reliant. I'd rather not have this..

How would it be any more "luck" oriented than dice ? It is based on luck either way, but with the coin flip you are at least in control of the choice of picking heads or tails. With the dice, the computer is in control. Yes, both are luck, but with the flip, nobody can complain about "bad" dice.

The only thing that needs to be worked out is, coming up with a comparable advantage for the attacker. Maybe if it was a roulette wheel instead of a coin, then you could work in the two green spaces on the wheel.