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.

 Icculus wrote:
Here was one article that I was referring to. About studying the small D6 rolls

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/That%27s_How_I_Roll_-_A_Scientific_Analysis_of_Dice

Icculus, this is a hoax:

http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?112701-Dice-the-reports-of-their-bias-is-greatly-exaggerated

If the chance of rolling 1s is 29% everyone and their brother could demonstrate this with 100 rolls. Any die with that much bias would consistently show it.

There is undoubtedly a tiny bias in every die, and it would be expected that cheaper dice have a wider variance. But unless the participants are using loaded dice, the variance is probably far less (IMHO) in non-random dice than the occasional mis-placed model or mismeasurement.