Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

generalgrog wrote:I have seen a couple of different studies were the tests involved rolling dice multiple 1000's of times. These tests were done by university people, not by Joe blow in his basement. :-) I can't get warseer from work, so I will have to put a link up when I get home.

Maybe you could search here on DAKKA and find a link as well.

GG

And whats the difference? Scientific studies are only valuable if they can be replicated. Sorry buddy I am still getting my PhD and only teach high school physics... but you seem to have a grave misconception on what a study is about.

Unless you can actively disprove them by having an experiment at a tourny I am at, I will have to say the data I have gathered shows different results and I can do this with anyone that wants at the Necro

frgsinwntr wrote:

generalgrog wrote:I have seen a couple of different studies were the tests involved rolling dice multiple 1000's of times. These tests were done by university people, not by Joe blow in his basement. :-) I can't get warseer from work, so I will have to put a link up when I get home.

Maybe you could search here on DAKKA and find a link as well.

GG

And whats the difference? Scientific studies are only valuable if they can be replicated. Sorry buddy I am still getting my PhD and only teach high school physics... but you seem to have a grave misconception on what a study is about.

Unless you can actively disprove them by having an experiment at a tourny I am at, I will have to say the data I have gathered shows different results and I can do this with anyone that wants at the Necro

Dude Chill out. :-)

I think your playing a bit of a semantical game with me here. The "study" I read was done in a lab to try to ensure that there was no influence on the the way the dice rolled, like leaning tables, bumps and things like that.

The bottom line is that they rolled muiltiple thousands of dice in a lab test environment and you rolled 4 sets of 250 dice "somewhere". I'm sorry but the university test had a higher sample distribution than yours and therefore was superior to your test.

Also I'm not trying to make this into an arument or anything, I was just trying to point out that "studies" or what ever semantical descriptor you want to call it have been done. And it wasn't done by just a bunch of gamers in a basement trying to create an urban legend. Which is what GBF appeared to be attempting to intimate.

Good luck on your PHD. I know how hard postgrad work can be.

GG

I seriously caution you not to believe everything that you read on the internet... and don't try to conduct these types of experiments at home because they are very very dangerous to the novice... aka n00b.

G

generalgrog wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:You come across as not having read the OP. No one said anything about loaded dice... it was about using dice that appear to roll better for certain odds. The thing is no one ever takes these dice and rolls them over 1000 times to perform any statistical analysis to see if they really do. It's really just like superstition at the end of the day.

G

I cry BS on that. BS I say!

People have done studies on the difference between chessex dice and have shown that they roll a higher percentage of 1's than what they should statistically.

As much as you roam these forums and others I have a hard time believing that you haven't read the same studies as me.

There are a lot of people that read the same studies as me and you,and they go ..Hmmmmm chessex dice roll more 1's? I'll just use them for me leadership or toughness tests, and use my casino dice for my shooting and wounding rolls.

However I agree with your point that maybe it's not "THAT" big of a deal when you look at the Big Picture of things.

But most people agree with me that it is kind of shady, if your trying to gain an advantage by "hustling the dice".

I think it's just good manners to try to keep things on the up and up.

GG

Yo froggy I would be very interested to see your dice in action.

G

Over and over i see these threads where someone rolls their dice 10 times, counts them, and "proves" something. If you wanted to prove that Chessex dice roll more ones, take 100 bricks of random dice, roll them 100 times each, and then do the same for 10 other types/brands of dice. You need large numbers and repetitive experiments to get any type of result.

I like the idea of sharing dice. I know a lot of people don't, so I wouldn't suggest it.

There's just something nice about sharing dice before you play with your little men.

malfred wrote:I like the idea of sharing dice. I know a lot of people don't, so I wouldn't suggest it.

There's just something nice about sharing dice before you play with your little men.

Malfred gets 1 Gay point for that comment!

LOL

GG

generalgrog wrote:

malfred wrote:I like the idea of sharing dice. I know a lot of people don't, so I wouldn't suggest it.

There's just something nice about sharing dice before you play with your little men.

Malfred gets 1 Gay point for that comment!

LOL

GG

"Every little bit helps" said the old lady as she peed into the ocean.

Cosmic!

They have done dice studies.

60% of the time, they work everytime.


btw I believe in murphy's law more than the dice, (refer to sig).

Hopefully that one time out of ten will occur in games versus other players the calibre of Marc Parker and Bill Kim.

G

Over on 40k forums, about 5 posters rolled their little chessex dice 1000 times, and posted the results, for a total pool of 5000 dice. With our results aggregated, we received results that were very, very close to 16.6% for each roll.

The "study" done that shows Chessex dice roll lots of 1s is simply internet apocrypha. If you weren't actually physically there to see it happen, you have no way of saying "OMG THIS IS REALLY REAL," but people seem to be very, very attached to the idea that the study is true.

I encourage everyone to roll their own dice 1000 times (just 100 rolls of 10 dice each) and record the results. If the chessex dice were really as biased as the "study" purports, you would see that a large percentage (more than just one or two) of your dice would be 1s. The study claimed 29% 1s by the way, which is ludicrous.

WillyD... my thoughts exactly.

But generalgrog would disagree... appearantly doing it yourself is not good enough : ) it needs to be done on a lab and written up so it looks believeable! (Something tells me he believes we didn't go to the moon, and that 9/11 was a conspiracy but Those are just guesses)

But yes, on small samples of 250 dice I found it does not matter. And any time i go to a tourny I will chuck dice with the best of them to show this.

frgsinwntr wrote:WillyD... my thoughts exactly.

But generalgrog would disagree... appearantly doing it yourself is not good enough : ) it needs to be done on a lab and written up so it looks believeable! (Something tells me he believes we didn't go to the moon, and that 9/11 was a conspiracy but Those are just guesses)

But yes, on small samples of 250 dice I found it does not matter. And any time i go to a tourny I will chuck dice with the best of them to show this.

Dude you are very rude, and a troll.

I'm done with your ignorance.


GG

Here is a link to one of the threads

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php%3Ft%3D65531+%22Do+you+roll+a+lot+of+1s%3F+A+40k+must+read%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

While I agree with the premise of "just believing" what you read on the internet, as dangerous. I find it amusing that the same people that want to roll different dice are so willing to "believe" what they have read "on the internet" or expect us to believe them and their "tests" as gospel, "on the internet".

A bit of a hypocracy if you ask me.



I'm done with this thread, and it appears to be off topic anyway from the original poster.

Feel free to make smarmy, ignorant comments, have a tantrum or whatever else you want to call it.

I'm out.

GG

Actually, what I've been saying is that I believe my own test, and I encourage everyone to do some independent testing of their own. It takes about an hour to roll 1000 dice, and that's a fair size sample.

generalgrog wrote:Here is a link to one of the threads

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php%3Ft%3D65531+%22Do+you+roll+a+lot+of+1s%3F+A+40k+must+read%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

While I agree with the premise of "just believing" what you read on the internet, as dangerous. I find it amusing that the same people that want to roll different dice are so willing to "believe" what they have read "on the internet" or expect us to believe them and their "tests" as gospel, "on the internet".

A bit of a hypocracy if you ask me.

First, the link appears to be broken.

Second, I think you need to distinguish between a person saying "I read that report, but i have my own results that I have more faith in" and somebody saying "You shouldn't believe those results, you should believe my results instead."

If a person watches their own dice roll for average, than the credibility of the other test would need to be Nobel worthy to get a person to change their mind, particularly since odds are they used different dice.

I think you are reading into my posts a little bit. I never really said much else. If you think I am rude or a troll maybe you are looking for it?

Telling me to chill out and saying I don't know what I am talking about because you read something on the internet is going to get a response like mine. If anything It was Curt, but not rude. Calling me Joe Blow is rather rude however

I simply said try it yourself or come to a tourny I am at and we can try it together.

People tend to bail when they lose an argument. I guess I will keep rolling different dices.



G

generalgrog wrote:Here is a link to one of the threads

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php%3Ft%3D65531+%22Do+you+roll+a+lot+of+1s%3F+A+40k+must+read%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

While I agree with the premise of "just believing" what you read on the internet, as dangerous. I find it amusing that the same people that want to roll different dice are so willing to "believe" what they have read "on the internet" or expect us to believe them and their "tests" as gospel, "on the internet".

A bit of a hypocracy if you ask me.



I'm done with this thread, and it appears to be off topic anyway from the original poster.

Feel free to make smarmy, ignorant comments, have a tantrum or whatever else you want to call it.

I'm out.

GG