Dam i thought i was gonna get ya in a mistake yet u did mention stronger opponents,
well, i was gonna say, beeing unpredictable beats strongest players but works bad with ai since they play so badly that they are unpredictable themselves.
So if you play the normal ai as if ur playing a srong player you would basicly waste your time, whilst if the ai knows that you are a strong player and takes precautions and has specific options to use when he knows he is playing a good player then your style of playing is worthed. Up to now the ai proved to be weak so tryen to predict his movments as a strong player ends up wasting your time in actually killing him asap.

What the ai needs is the ability to predict the enemy(us) level and act accordingly like we do. If that is done then the ai can be unpredictible itself.

What the hell are you talking about? 10000 miles away off topic :D

Replying to the original post, i didn't see any real bad luck in the game.
What i saw, was real bad picks and bad tactics in tryen to guess the enemy attacks.

Also if you want so see bad luck look at this game:
(eighter BUG, Cheat or insane bad luck)

I won the game at turn 4 !!!! Yet the Unluckiest game of my life.

Game settings:
-Def and Off luck are standard(60% offense and 70% defense).
-I hosted game and its in my templates and played several times with it(any of these NEVER ever hapened before).
-I'm not a member.


http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?GameID=2971170

(for who is wondering why i started in caucasus, i didn't. Chose my first in w.russia and second caucasus, yet with my luck enemy chose with his first w.russia too and won it :( )

Crazy; Bug/Cheat/Luck:


• 1-Enemy attacking with 12 vs 9,(ofc) LOST, but he had 7 losses ONLY and I lost 8 :S (Dam lucky), according to average he should have lost nearly all.
  
  
• 2-Enemy attacking with 10 vs 6, WINS :O, with only 2 losses(speachless with jaw on the floor)(ffs impossible)
  As average you need 4 to beat 2(around 80% chance) in a normal game, so to beat 6 you need 12 when attacking. When you attack with 10 only, on average your chances of winning are slim (maybe 35%-40%). Though even if you win your losses should be high and the 10 become 2-3 on average, if your very lucky maybe 4. However here he was 8 !!!!!!!!!!!! I mean 10 vs 2(ai) you get 8 left, not when defending with 6 ffs!!
  
  
• 3-Enemy attacking with 4 vs 2(AI), WINS, with 0 losses, WTF, this was a first for me, but its not impossible.(i could have accepted this if the previous didn't just happen :o)
  
  
• 4-(Well this one really deserves some description)
  Since I am a man that checks for every possible solution I thought of one that fits.
  Here i was starting to think that maybe our luck in offence was beeing boosted just in this game and because i haven't attacked yet, I was getting this dam badluck feeling only on me.(maybe a bug)
  That made sens to me at the time, so I changed tactic instead of defending then attacking, i went on attacking first since I had bonus advantage now.
  -I attacked 21 vs 9.
  Since the 10 vs 6 had only 2 losses and it was below twice the army of 12 to beat 6, it was logical that if i had 21 vs 9 i would get 2-3 losses and maybe with some bad luck also 4, and to the very extreem bad luck, at most I would get 5 losses. Also 12 vs my 9 gave 7 losses so 21 vs 9 should be much less at least half, like 3-4.
  Guess what, I get 6 losses :O (although in a normal game its not a bad loss).
  It just proved to me that the enemy was at least twice as lucky in offence and in defence.
  There is no way this game was fair.
  Only won because the guy was bad enough not to realise he had this huge advantage and surrendered. If he continued(with that low losses) he would have won for sure.
  Although I did demoralise him by knowing where he was from start, playing better, picking better starting locations and having tactical advantage in antartica. The fact is, I wasn't tryen to demoralise him but beat him and yet I couldn't, although I did no mistakes :O.
  

The probability of all these 4 things to happen in a single game, to the same guy, in 4 turns, on every of his attack or defence, without a bug or cheat but by simple incredible luck, is less then 1/∞.
Which make me not the unluckiest person:
on the continent
or on the planet
or of the galaxy
or of the universe

but of the MULTIVERSE!!!

Yea not getting the first move is bad however first move is not everything in a game, however important in the beginning though.
Just a suggestion, when you suspect that you might not get the first move just reinforce where the enemy would not predict you will reinforce and attack only with a few the enemy location. So when the enemy attacks the reinforced location he will loose down to 1 and you little attack takes down the one. It usually works even if you loose, ur enemy would have lost its strength, its harder to beat big numbers on defence even if you get the first move.
This way at least you weakened the enemy even if your plan didn't fully work.

Last 2 posts are so inaccurate and senseless, they gave me cancer...

one of them is way to long to read so ill take your word for it

lol yea don't bother yourself with such nonesense, its too much for ya to handle anyway

i think i can handle nonsense, i pride myself in my ability to handle nonsense. in fact i believe handling nonsense is the thing i am best at

but i still wont bother myself

Completly agree with ya
since i was talking on szeweningen (retiring) post to be the nonsense :) lol

o ok good cuz u dont want to know what i do to people that dont think i can handle nonsense

hope you wont lay your hands on tetragrammaton. right?

btw you know why guys play with wastelands in games?

Ryan I can summarize that post pretty easily. Really, there are only three types of statements in it (although repeated in various ways):
1. "bla bla bla.. I know nothing of statistics, all the numbers in this post are randomly generated.. bla bla bla.."
2. "bla bla bla.. When good things happen to me it's cause I am very, _VERY_, good.. bla bla bla.."
3. "bla bla bla.. When good things happen to the enemy it's cause he's lucky he doesn't even realize what is going on.. bla bla bla.."
4. "bla bla bla.. Here is a link to support my 3 previous statements.. bla bla bla.."

Thanks for wasting your precious time reading my post :)
Shame you understood nothing lol

Crazy; Bug/Cheat/Luck:

Bugs (especially serious ones) are pretty rare on WL. I've never heard of a cheat in multiplayer (other than multi-accounting). So I'm a bit hesitant to believe you... Anyway, let's have a look:

---

1-Enemy attacking with 12 vs 9,(ofc) LOST, but he had 7 losses ONLY and I lost 8 :S (Dam lucky), according to average he should have lost nearly all.

No, he didn't "(ofc LOST)", he had a 16.15% (practically 1 in 6) chance of winning that attack...!
9 * 0.7 = 6.3, so "7 losses ONLY" is completely wrong, he lost more armies then he "should have".
12 * 0.6 = 7.2, so yes, 8 is a little higher than expected, but nothing too out of the ordinary (approximately 15% chance in a 100% luck game, the probability for a 75% luck game is slightly more complicated to calculate; let me know if you really want the exact number).
Seriously, nothing weird happened.

---

2-Enemy attacking with 10 vs 6, WINS :O, with only 2 losses(speachless with jaw on the floor)(ffs impossible)
As average you need 4 to beat 2(around 80% chance) in a normal game, so to beat 6 you need 12 when attacking. When you attack with 10 only, on average your chances of winning are slim (maybe 35%-40%). Though even if you win your losses should be high and the 10 become 2-3 on average, if your very lucky maybe 4. However here he was 8 !!!!!!!!!!!! I mean 10 vs 2(ai) you get 8 left, not when defending with 6 ffs!!

Actually, 10 attackers are expected to kill 6 defenders. Sure, those 6 defenders will kill 4.2 attackers on average before being defeated, but still, just killing 2 attackers comes in at 6% chance (a 1-in-16 chance).

No, you cannot extrapolate from "4vs2" to "12vs6". Those 4 kill 2.4 defenders on average; you "need" 4, because attacking with 3 (expected to kill 1.8 defenders) has a much lower chance of succeeding (87.46% and 68.40%, respectively). Attacking 12vs6 has a 89.73% chance of succeeding, but 10vs6 comes in at 68.33% (much higher than your "maybe 35%-40%", not to mention being an actual calculation, instead of a gut-instinct guess).

Attacking 10vs6, the absolute worst you can possibly do is losing 6 armies, if every defender kills an attacker (0.70^6 ~= 11.765% chance, between 1-in-8 and 1-in-9), leaving 4 armies. Both 2 and 3 are utterly impossible (and I mean that literally; it couldn't possibly (in the mathematical sense!) happen), not the "average" case at all. For reference, the average would be to have 5 or 6 attackers left to occupy the territory.

---

3-Enemy attacking with 4 vs 2(AI), WINS, with 0 losses, WTF, this was a first for me, but its not impossible.(i could have accepted this if the previous didn't just happen :o)

0.81% chance, 1-in-123. Granted, this is rather unlikely. However, since we do a lot 4vs2 attacks, it's bound to happen sooner or later. No matter how unlikely an event is, so long as it's not actually impossible (merely incredibly unlikely), given enough attempts, it will eventually happen.

I think I mentioned this link before, but just for ease of reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R5OWh7luL4

---

4-(Well this one really deserves some description)
Since I am a man that checks for every possible solution I thought of one that fits.
Here i was starting to think that maybe our luck in offence was beeing boosted just in this game and because i haven't attacked yet, I was getting this dam badluck feeling only on me.(maybe a bug)

If I take a fair coin and flip it 10 times, it "should" come up heads 5 times, right? Now if I actually try and it comes up heads 7 times, that's not really noteworthy, right, that can happen. But that in no way means that if I toss that same coin ten more times, it will come up heads 7 more times. Same with a roulette wheel; having it land on red three times in a row is not "special" and it surely does not mean the next spin "has to be black".

That made sens to me at the time, so I changed tactic instead of defending then attacking, i went on attacking first since I had bonus advantage now.
-I attacked 21 vs 9.
Since the 10 vs 6 had only 2 losses and it was below twice the army of 12 to beat 6, it was logical that if i had 21 vs 9 i would get 2-3 losses and maybe with some bad luck also 4, and to the very extreem bad luck, at most I would get 5 losses. Also 12 vs my 9 gave 7 losses so 21 vs 9 should be much less at least half, like 3-4.
Guess what, I get 6 losses :O (although in a normal game its not a bad loss).
It just proved to me that the enemy was at least twice as lucky in offence and in defence.

A 21-vs-9 attack has about a 0.88% chance of failing; very unlikely, but could still happen. (In your case it succeeded.)
The amount of losses you should've expected are 6 or 7, because 9 * 0.7 = 6.3.
Your "proof" is not mathematically valid, to phrase it politely...

There is no way this game was fair.
Only won because the guy was bad enough not to realise he had this huge advantage and surrendered. If he continued(with that low losses) he would have won for sure.
Although I did demoralise him by knowing where he was from start, playing better, picking better starting locations and having tactical advantage in antartica. The fact is, I wasn't tryen to demoralise him but beat him and yet I couldn't, although I did no mistakes :O.

You can argue about what is "fair", but you cannot argue about what you seem to be implying: WL was not helping your opponent. In a game based on luck (or, in this game, based on 75% luck) deviations from the average case are to be expected! You could try playing the "1vs1 strategic" template, if memory serves that will let non-members play games with a low luck modifier (16%). If you also want to play with the other settings, try asking a member to set up a game for you (or, you could get a membership yourself of course :) ).

If the game would have continued, your opponent would have gotten some bad luck sooner or later, just as you would have gotten some good luck. (Assuming he even was very lucky, which I don't agree with.)

I didn't study the game in detail, so I have no opinion on whether you made any tactical mistakes in-game. However, your calculations (well, guesses) are full of mistakes...

---

The probability of all these 4 things to happen in a single game, to the same guy, in 4 turns, on every of his attack or defence, without a bug or cheat but by simple incredible luck, is less then 1/∞.
Which make me not the unluckiest person:
on the continent
or on the planet
or of the galaxy
or of the universe

but of the MULTIVERSE!!!

Yeah, either that, or he simply doesn't understand probability theory (abusing notation and writing "1/∞" seems to point in this direction...). Also, there's some room for improvement of your understanding of WL; I suggest you read up on how defence kill ratio works; your expectations for the number of attacking armies killed by the defenders aren't just way off, you actually expect outcomes which are completely impossible. And finally, on the attack button there's a button which says "Analyse", use it! While it isn't perfect, it's much, much more accurate than the estimates you are making.

Tetra, with a default 75% luck factor, you can expect to get the weirdest situations. I dislike luck as much as you do (though I feel slightly relieved when I get into lucky situations), but there's not much you can do about it other than joining games with a low luck percentage.

btw you know why guys play with wastelands in games?

Because it makes the game more interesting, Tetra...
;-)

thx bais very helpful

now can u summarize RvW's?

Thanks for the nice reply

well, the main reason for the way I was thinking like that is mainly because from preivious experiences with other risk games, it was standard that you'll need an average of twice the enemy army to win on offence. Thus since i saw the 4 vs 2 thing I went to the wrong conclusion that it was the same.

So there you are right based on that fact, I was wrong in my judgements that were based more on previous experiences rather then mathematical calculations of probability.

No, he didn't "(ofc LOST)", he had a 16.15% (practically 1 in 6) chance of winning that attack...!
9 * 0.7 = 6.3, so "7 losses ONLY" is completely wrong, he lost more armies then he "should have".
12 * 0.6 = 7.2, so yes, 8 is a little higher than expected, but nothing too out of the ordinary (approximately 15% chance in a 100% luck game, the probability for a 75% luck game is slightly more complicated to calculate; let me know if you really want the exact number).
Seriously, nothing weird happened.




• 1 st is granted i was wrong, thanks for giving me this information however i would like the probability for that one.
  
  

  Actually, 10 attackers are expected to kill 6 defenders. Sure, those 6 defenders will kill 4.2 attackers on average before being defeated, but still, just killing 2 attackers comes in at 6% chance (a 1-in-16 chance).

  
  
• 2 nd no mattar what calculations you put in, there is no way only 2 losses could accour in a 10 vs 6 game. I have played 98 games and in those never ever ever had only 2 looses when hitting a 6 and im not talking a 10 vs 6 only here but all the 10+ vs 6 hits.(usual losses are 4)
  Maybe i was unlucy or lucky, however that 6%, i beleave is way off the target.
  So your 6% chance, a 1 on a 16 chance seems very off to me. (OFC except this game)
  
  

  0.81% chance, 1-in-123. Granted, this is rather unlikely. However, since we do a lot 4vs2 attacks, it's bound to happen sooner or later. No matter how unlikely an event is, so long as it's not actually impossible (merely incredibly unlikely), given enough attempts, it will eventually happen.

  
  
• 3 we agree on this one.
  
  
• 4 21 vs 9 was an other thing i didn't know , which is, that it doesn't mattar what forces you are attacking with, it won't make a difference in the defending losses after a certain ammount of offence(if i undertood correctly)
  Thus having a 12 vs 9 and a 21 vs 9 have an average of same losses of 6-7
  allthough if the game is like that, to say it politly it just is different from what i used to play. It was so unexpected that i couldn't ever immagine it was so unnatural that the ammount of forces had no effect on losses.
  

However i still stand by my first asserion, that in that game that guy was simply too lucky or a bug.

so according to your calculation:
1st: 15%(i know its less at a 75% luck though leave it like that for now)
2nd: 6%(i think its much less since i never got it or saw it before)
3rd: 0.81%(i never ever got this and i hit a lot of 4vs2 like you all)
4th: (if what you said is correct this one does not count)

also I forgot to mantion the times where he had only 1 loss when hitting the 4vs2 and not a miss on all AI territories which also was a bit lucky considering the above things.

• well in your answer you seem to forget that for all these things to happen in a single game its also a very unliky possibility.
  so there is a small % there too
  
  
• Apart from that small %, there is an even smaller percentage that all those things happan in just 3 turns.
  
  
• Apart from that, there is even a smaller percentage that all those things happan in the first 3 turns
  

Lets be generious and give all the above a 20% chance of happening.
(if you would be so nice to give me your estimate, it's better since you seem to have more experience then me in the matter)
Whick means a 1 every 5 chance of happening which i belave its much less.

This shows: 15+6+0.81+20+20+20 = 81.81/600 = 0.13635% chance of happening

Although I beleave its even less then that(unless there is something else i don't know)

If you are playing someone the first time that doesn't even talk and has this kind of luck, if you are human you cannot not suspect something.


Apart from that because the game ended so quickly we wouldn't know if the guy will or will not have the same luck throughout the game. Claming that his luck will change is just your openion which must be respected. The fact is, considering the 3 turns, there is a higher probability that it will continue like that.

In a game like RISK calculating probability is the key to win so you cannot blame me for taking in consideration that his luck won't change.

I am a game programmer and trust me, bugs that happen at a particular event are the hardest thing to find even for the most expert game programer, even if they have the logs of the bytecode running at that particular time. If they don't know what they are looking for(the event) it may take a professional programmer years to find it. It may also be a conbination of events. If its something not as vital like this one, they don't even bother. Since this thing happened only once to me.
I don't think it was luck but thats my openion, there is allways a reason for everything in life.