I don't get that last one. glarb had 54% defense losses and 27% attack losses, just like jenkinswoody. Of course he played more but still that doesn't make up for the difference.

Looking at his dice they're also very evenly distributed. He's actually got fewer 6s than 1s.

Just had a turn where I went 5-and-23 overall and 1-and-11 with 3v1 dice. Somewhere, I read that 3 dice beats a singleton over 65% of the time.  Just ain't seeing that in my experience.  Events 1491 thru 1516 in the game below (which you can view once it completes since it's fogged).

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/640118

Just lost 25 guys to get 1..... regular dice.....new record?

i lost 33 to get 1 quite a while back. that's my worst.

Since I joined the site, my luck factor is at a cumulative -6347.4 against Andernut. I don’t think anyone else has that bad a luck factor against another player.

How did u get that figure?....imagination? Down to the .4? I Love it

My biggest luck factor must be against Babbalouie, in the positive sense. I have no accumulated number for it, though. 

Mad Bomber wrote: How did u get that figure?....imagination? Down to the .4? I Love it

It's one of those things where I like to say: "I can't prove it, I just know it is"  

For you mathematicians out there, of which I no longer qaulify, what are the chances of a 4 territory location defeating a singleton? Meaning, winning atleast one of the 3v1, 2v1 or 1v1 battles.

Well, 3 vs 1 is 66% chance of success. 2 vs 1 is 58% chance and 1 vs 1 is 42% chance.

So that's equates to 66% chance of initial success, 85,7% chance of losing no more than 1 unit and 91,7% chance of winning at some stage. 8,3% chance of defense holding, which should happen roughly 1 in 12 times.

Yup, that's what my handy tool tells me too:

http://gamesbyemail.com/games/gambit/battleodds

Thanks guys.    The 1 seems to do quite a bit better than 1 for 12 in my experience. 

Thingol wrote:

Thanks guys.    The 1 seems to do quite a bit better than 1 for 12 in my experience. 

How often do you attack down to the last man?  I do it but only in special circumstances, and certainly not often enough to notice if my luck is within expectations, of say 1 or 2 standards of deviation.

When we get down to that last attacking unit, the probability of winning is not in our favor - and that's what we tend to remember.

M57 wrote:

Thingol wrote:

Thanks guys.    The 1 seems to do quite a bit better than 1 for 12 in my experience. 

How often do you attack down to the last man?  I do it but only in special circumstances, and certainly not often enough to notice if my luck is within expectations, of say 1 or 2 standards of deviation.

When we get down to that last attacking unit, the probability of winning is not in our favor - and that's what we tend to remember.

It's common to attack 1 vs 1 to try and prevent the opponent from holding a bonus. If he holds a +2 then you have an about 42% chance of taking three units from him and an about 58% chance of losing one yourself. That's normally worth it in a 1-on-1.

Litotes wrote:

M57 wrote:

Thingol wrote:

Thanks guys.    The 1 seems to do quite a bit better than 1 for 12 in my experience. 

How often do you attack down to the last man?  I do it but only in special circumstances, and certainly not often enough to notice if my luck is within expectations, of say 1 or 2 standards of deviation.

When we get down to that last attacking unit, the probability of winning is not in our favor - and that's what we tend to remember.

 

It's common to attack 1 vs 1 to try and prevent the opponent from holding a bonus. If he holds a +2 then you have an about 42% chance of taking three units from him and an about 58% chance of losing one yourself. That's normally worth it in a 1-on-1.

Of course - though I don't know about the "it's common" part.  On some boards, I suppose it might happen a handful of times in a game, but others ..not so much.

My point; In an average game, how often does that circumstance present itself where you start with 4 and get down to 2, and then lose because you need to stop a bonus?  Maybe a half dozen at most?  Not much of a sample size unless you're keeping track of it in 10 or 20 games.

M57 wrote:

Litotes wrote:

M57 wrote:

Thingol wrote:

Thanks guys.    The 1 seems to do quite a bit better than 1 for 12 in my experience. 

How often do you attack down to the last man?  I do it but only in special circumstances, and certainly not often enough to notice if my luck is within expectations, of say 1 or 2 standards of deviation.

When we get down to that last attacking unit, the probability of winning is not in our favor - and that's what we tend to remember.

 

It's common to attack 1 vs 1 to try and prevent the opponent from holding a bonus. If he holds a +2 then you have an about 42% chance of taking three units from him and an about 58% chance of losing one yourself. That's normally worth it in a 1-on-1.

Of course - though I don't know about the "it's common" part.  On some boards, I suppose it might happen a handful of times in a game, but others ..not so much.

My point; In an average game, how often does that circumstance present itself where you start with 4 and get down to 2, and then lose because you need to stop a bonus?  Maybe a half dozen at most?  Not much of a sample size unless you're keeping track of it in 10 or 20 games.

Well, common was meant to indicate what you do in the situation, not how often the situation arises. I might have phrased myself badly.

I've had this happen quite a few times in my games, though. I remember at least double figures of incidents where 4 didn't take 1. Logaically there will be 12 times as many times they succeeded, those are of course harder to remember as they leave no impression of success or failure, just of business as usual.

Right, you would have to count the times when you attacked with 3 and won, ..then with 2, ..then with 1.  11/12 sounds about right, though without doing any math I probably would have guessed it to be 7/8, ..but then I'll bet that's because I only remember the bad too.

Besides the bonus breakup that Litotes mentions, I would attack down to the 1v1 also when I’ve got all of a large area of a map except for the one spot, to remove the threat to my flank and bonuses. Also, when trying to close out a map. So, it happens a lot more than you would think.

So, just had a game where a player attacked me with a singleton against my 4 defending units. He won 4 consecutive battles (3 at 1v2 and the last as 1v1). Dice are d8 and no border mods. Of course, at start of my next turn, I lost the first 3 battles attacking the singleton at 3v1.  Anyone else run into the wunderkind unit like this, and what are the odds of the singeton winning those consecutive rolls?

Thingol wrote:

..what are the odds of the singeton winning those consecutive rolls?

running 10,000 simulations on the wargear calculator it's slightly under 1%