League Rule Changes for 2014 AAG40 2.0

[hobo]

triplea is not rigged, the numbers(dice) are random, it is just how we perceive luck.

I strongly disagree here.  Triplea, as great as it is, has a flawed random dice generator.  Yes over a decent number of rolls, you will get “random” like results with numbers rolled totaling about the same.  As a result, the statistics reported will appear as if everything is within the standard deviation.

However within those rolls, you will see sets of numbers rolled fairly consistently.  It could be all lows, or all highs rolled for say 10 dice being thrown.  Often it’s even the same number rolled.  Tell me the probability of 7 straight 1s being rolled?  I haven’t played many games and its not very often 7-10 dice are thrown in one roll, but I know that’s not statistically probable.  More over, I’ve seen these results repeat over and over again.

This is why you see some people complaining AA guys seem to hit too often.  Well on “average” they only hit the average throughout a game, for like 20-30 rolls.  But when they hit, they hit in bunches.  I’ve seen snake eyes or triple 1s way too often for this to be coincidence.  Of course this also means they can all miss even vs a dozen air.

Hopefully these sequences affect both players equally but it can throw off a lot of planning when it occurs in critical situations.

If people keep this in mind and pay attention to the actual dice thrown instead of the results, you’re probably see this too.

[gamerman01]

@Cmdr:

As for technology, in those games using technology (i.e. both players agree to use technology in their league game) should we allow technology tokens to be the default rule?

I think no tokens should be the default, because no tokens is what is in the rulebook.

[gamerman01]

@Boldfresh:

should a loss against a tier 1 be worth 3 points (same as win against a tier 4?) and loss against tier 2 worth 2, loss against tier 3 worth 1, and loss against tier 4 worth 0?

No, I think that’s too many points for losing

[gamerman01]

You need a lot of data and tests to back up those allegations/perceptions, Hobo

I do pay attention to individual dice and not just results - always - and I haven’t noticed “strings of repetitive numbers”
I did a little research a while back and learned that repetitive results are commonly perceived by people to be non-random, when that is not necessarily the case.

I don’t know how good of a job these dice servers do at approximating real dice, but it seems pretty good to me.
I seem to recall about 25 years ago reading that it is impossible for computers to create true randomness.  I’m sure this is oversimplifying it, but it has something to do with needing a “seed” to start.

If you’re going to point out a perceived problem, at least provide a suggested solution, else you’re just eroding faith in the dice server and that does not benefit anyone unless you have a better alternative.

Perhaps we should only roll dice live when the other player is there, and show it on a live video feed?

[gamerman01]

:lol: About the live video feed…

I prefer imperfect computer RNG’s to debating with Boldfresh about what is and is not a “legal” roll…  How much they need to be spun, “trick” rolling, landing on a corner, missing the box, and on and on…

Let us know if you find a better dice server that can be linked to Triple A.
Or provide reliable data/testing/results/conclusions using a proper scientific method if you’re going to allege that the dice are not random and spew out improper strings of repetitive numbers.

[boldfresh]

Everyone knows that if a dice is on greater than 0.45% tilt due to coming to rest partially on an object that the roll is not valid!  :-P

Dice on shaggy carpet?  Not valid.  Dice coming to rest atop other dice…. clearly not valid.

if I recall we solve this dilemma by rolling into a box. Simple enough :-D

remember when I rolled 57 twos and missed every single one of them against you with real dice?  What are the chances of that hobo?

[Jennifer]

All I am going to say is, if I ever get to Vegas, I am so playing Cr@ps because I can throw any number on 2d6 I want.  So an RNG is far superior to playing me using real dice. :P

As for tokens, I was thinking if we used them there may be more tech games.  I like tech and I feel it is an integral part of the game.  I am not saying it IS integral, just that I feel that playing without technology is not as much fun as playing with it.  Nothing like Russia pulling Advanced Artillery out of no where and retaliating against the German aggressors to make a game fun!  OR maybe the other way around, Germany’s being hit hard but gets Paratroops and is able to fly around the Russian front and drop troops directly into Moscow.

[MrRoboto]

Well the technology is designed totally wrong in my opinion.

At the current state, it is way too weak. USA is the only power who could at least try researching at all, and even that isn’t really cost effective.

In my opinion even with tokens, technology isn’t too strong. Maybe even still too weak.

So I am with Jennifer here. We barely have any tech games at the moment. With tokens, these might happen more often.

[hobo]

@Gamerman01:

You need a lot of data and tests to back up those allegations/perceptions, Hobo

I do pay attention to individual dice and not just results - always - and I haven’t noticed “strings of repetitive numbers”
I did a little research a while back and learned that repetitive results are commonly perceived by people to be non-random, when that is not necessarily the case.

I don’t know how good of a job these dice servers do at approximating real dice, but it seems pretty good to me.
I seem to recall about 25 years ago reading that it is impossible for computers to create true randomness.  I’m sure this is oversimplifying it, but it has something to do with needing a “seed” to start.

If you’re going to point out a perceived problem, at least provide a suggested solution, else you’re just eroding faith in the dice server and that does not benefit anyone unless you have a better alternative.

Perhaps we should only roll dice live when the other player is there, and show it on a live video feed?

The dice generator for forum dicing is pretty good.  I’ve played a lot more games using forum dicing than triplea, and never questioned the dice generator.

But after about 3 games of triplea, it was clearly apparent there was an issue.  How to fix it?  I can’t tell you without seeing how the program generates its random numbers.  Maybe changing the seed would do it.  Maybe linking the seed to a real time clock for each separate individual roll instead of rolling the dice for a particular round with the same seed.  You get the picture.

Like I said throughout a game, things should “average” out despite the dicing coming in clusters, but for any given battle it can change the results noticeably.

[gamerman01]

I didn’t even think of that last night….

So you could roll all of your dice on the forum and edit for the results.  Good luck finding opponents who are willing to comply…  Maybe Karl will  :-)

[gamerman01]

@Gamerman01:

I think no tokens should be the default, because no tokens is what is in the rulebook.

I knew I should have underlined certain words so I wouldn’t be misunderstood.

Tech tokens will continue to be allowed in league games.
No tokens being the DEFAULT means that if not specified, you are not playing with them.

Example:
“Hey Karl, wanna play a league game with tech?”
“Sure!”

If nothing else is said, this game will be without tokens.  The rule book should be the default.  If you want to play with tokens, go right ahead, but you’ll have to specify that and have mutual agreement.  Triple A allows you to play with tokens, just have the appropriate option check box ticked or unticked

[Guest]

@hobo:

@Gamerman01:

You need a lot of data and tests to back up those allegations/perceptions, Hobo

I do pay attention to individual dice and not just results - always - and I haven’t noticed “strings of repetitive numbers”
I did a little research a while back and learned that repetitive results are commonly perceived by people to be non-random, when that is not necessarily the case.

I don’t know how good of a job these dice servers do at approximating real dice, but it seems pretty good to me.
I seem to recall about 25 years ago reading that it is impossible for computers to create true randomness.� I’m sure this is oversimplifying it, but it has something to do with needing a “seed” to start.

If you’re going to point out a perceived problem, at least provide a suggested solution, else you’re just eroding faith in the dice server and that does not benefit anyone unless you have a better alternative.

Perhaps we should only roll dice live when the other player is there, and show it on a live video feed?

The dice generator for forum dicing is pretty good.� I’ve played a lot more games using forum dicing than triplea, and never questioned the dice generator.

But after about 3 games of triplea, it was clearly apparent there was an issue.� How to fix it?� I can’t tell you without seeing how the program generates its random numbers.� Maybe changing the seed would do it.� Maybe linking the seed to a real time clock for each separate individual roll instead of rolling the dice for a particular round with the same seed.� You get the picture.

Like I said throughout a game, things should “average” out despite the dicing coming in clusters, but for any given battle it can change the results noticeably.

Regarding the dice. In my first game I played against MrRoboto. I attacked a minor IC twice in a row and both rounds a 1 was rolled, which means my bombers are gone. Now fortunately that game was already lost to me a long time before that. However bad luck happens. You can re-roll as much as you want until you get satisfying casualties, but at that point you might as well not roll at all and simply assume what is going to die and what is going to live.

[Jennifer]

I do feel that TripleA is exceptionally harsh on bombers when it comes to SBR.  I routinely send 3 strategics against an undefended major complex because I figure I have an 80% chance of losing one to the built in AA Gun.  I don’t have any hard data to support that claim, it’s just a feeling I have.  Then again, my luck at sea is similar in TripleA as it is on the house dicey - I routinely score better in naval combat than expected.  Hence my nickname.

Anyway, I don’t think I would bother playing technology without tokens.  Just my opinion, but as was pointed out, the cost/reward ratio is too screwed up to go with current rules in the book (ie not having tokens.)

[gamerman01]

I have played tech games without tokens and I have hit several techs.  I disagree that only America should buy tech when there are no tokens, but this isn’t the place to go into it.  It’s been discussed exhaustively in other threads before, and does not need to be discussed here, because tech is allowed, tech tokens are allowed, there’s nothing to discuss about league rule changes in 2014 regarding tech.

Triple A is not harsh on bombers when it comes to SBR.  I have seen many, many misses, usually when my opponent is flying over me.  I think I get less than 1/6 on AA hits, so I am balancing you out, Jenn.  Small sample sizes.  Perception.  Etc.

[Jennifer]

Hence why I said “I feel.”    :lol:

Okay, so technology tokens are allowed for next year.  Unless there is a counter argument to disallow them entirely.

[boldfresh]

Just say NO! to tech.

[gamerman01]

@Boldfresh:

Just say NO! to tech.

When I imagine my opponent getting paratroopers with Germany on G1 and Japan getting LRA on J1 for $5 each, I would agree with you.

You know when we had the whole low luck discussion…  I have to recall that we did not have the option of closing the Dardanelles in the AA50 league (this is an optional rule in the rule book), and also did not really have the option of playing with no NO’s (was an optional rule in AA50 I believe).  I mean, I suppose it was allowed (not sure), but good luck finding someone who would agree to it.  And it would mess with your ability to play the “standard” game well anyway

[Guest]

@Boldfresh:

Just say NO! to tech.

I can’t say no to tech.

[boldfresh]

@Soulblighter:

@Boldfresh:

Just say NO! to tech.

I can’t say no to tech.

:lol:  i understand.  it’s addictive, i get it.

however, my point is, there are so many “children” out there that have no idea how to play this game yet WITHOUT tech.  let alone with that ridiculously complicating dimension.  if playing for “fun” tech would be great i guess.  if playing for “skill” tech takes the game up 15 notches in complexity.  just sayin.

[Guest]

You misunderstand me. Nobody introduced me yet to tech, so how can I say no to tech :lol:

On a side note and a more serious note I am unfamiliar with tech. However it is my belief that the difficulty about playing with tech lies not within the randomness of it all, but more in the fact that it requires timing about when to use it and when not to. Also logically speaking if you plan on using tech, then you make sure your entire strategy can benefit from any of the given outcomes of the branch you want to try. Can somebody explain me how tech works rl tho. If you buy a tech dice. Is it just for that round or permanent? I never really saw an explanation to that question inside the rule book I downloaded.