u/delarkius

hello!

I'm trying to work out probabilities for game dice math. I'm doing it in what i assume is the slowest and least efficient possible way. How do I do it smarter?

key information:

• Player versus Player contested dice rolls to determine win/loss/tie
  • I roll, you roll, and we see who won (or tied)
• Variable # of dice per roll
  • I can choose 1 die or 3. You do the same
• Dice have different values
  • i.e., one die rolls [0,1,1,2,2,2] versus another that rolls [0,0,1,1,1,1]
  • W/L/T is determined by total points on each side

need:

• I want to change individual die outcomes to see the difference in win %.
  • i.e., [0,1,1,1,2,2] versus [0,0,1,1,1,1] has a 50% win percentage. What's the win % if I change the first die to [0,2,1,1,2,2]? (it's 61.11%, in case you were curious)

attempt:

• I modelled out ALL possible outcomes for 2 dice vs 2 dice to get me the #s I wanted.
  • this means i made a big table with "1,1,1,1" then "1,1,1,2" and so on, to model all possible permutations of 4 dice rolls. Then I ascribed a winner for each permutation

https://preview.redd.it/fgnieu5hz5kh1.png?width=3043&format=png&auto=webp&s=522732979af04165422ad024c5e09771f803933e

help?

• I would LIKE to do this in a more sensible way so that I can have more dice involved without having 100k rows in excel.
• How can I calculate these win % without modelling everything?

thank you !

hello!

I'm messing with game dice math. I'm doing it in what i assume is the slowest and least efficient possible way. How do I do it smarter?

key information:

• Player versus Player contested dice rolls to determine win/loss/tie
  • I roll, you roll, and we see who won (or tied)
• Variable # of dice per roll
  • I can choose 1 die or 3. You do the same
• Dice have different values
  • i.e., one die rolls [0,1,1,2,2,2] versus another that rolls [0,0,1,1,1,1]
  • W/L/T is determined by total points on each side

need:

• I want to change individual die outcomes to see the difference in win %.
  • i.e., [0,1,1,1,2,2] versus [0,0,1,1,1,1] has a 50% win percentage. What's the win % if I change the first die to [0,2,1,1,2,2]? (it's 61.11%, in case you were curious)

attempt:

• I modelled out ALL possible outcomes for 2 dice vs 2 dice to get me the #s I wanted.
  • this means i made a big table with "1,1,1,1" then "1,1,1,2" and so on, to model all possible permutations of 4 dice rolls. Then I ascribed a winner for each permutation

help?

• I would LIKE to do this in a more sensible way so that I can have more dice involved without having 100k rows in excel.
• How can I calculate these win % without modelling everything?

****UPDATE-SOLVED******

Thank you for all the help!

Ended up using INDEX & RANDBETWEEN functions in excel to generate a big dataset of random rolls.
=INDEX(Dice!H$8:H$13,RANDBETWEEN(1,6)) . This calls the custom dice faces in H8:H13, selecting 1/6 random values from within that set.

I used that to create a big ol' set of rolls, and judged wins/losses/ties from that as functionally good for determining probability. So I just plug in my custom dice faces to see how they fare in the big set, and adjust them to see how they affect the win %.

In case you're curious, I first made the set ONE MILLION ROLLS. Which was fun, but made it lag, so I cut it down to 100k. It swings as much as ~2% each time it recalculates. But it MOSTLY stays within the same few tenths of a %, and it serves my purpose.

cheers,

When civ 7 first launched, it was genuinely difficult to reach "7 wonders", owing to the total pool of wonders being the smallest it'd ever be.

Now with so many expansions and new wonders, I find that when I actively "try", I basically never miss the 7 wonders triumph in antiquity.

(perspective disclosure: hundreds of hours of deity games)

Triumph Balance

I find most of the major triumphs to be well in line with each other. "Conquer 6 settlements" is very difficult in a baseline, average game. Still it's very achievable when I'm "going for it". It's a realistic goal that i won't do in most games, but can do in most militaristic games. This seems to be what the devs had in mind for the triumph system. I feel the same about "collect codices" & science. And I mostly feel the same about "build 7 wonders".

Wonder Creep Problem

The more new wonders they add, the easier the "build wonders" triumph becomes. Right now, when I'm "going for it", I might stall out on conquering 5 settlements instead of 6. I rarely stall out on wonders in my heavy culture games. Worst case, I end up having to build 1 or 2 lower tier wonders (e.g., Byrsa, Mireuksa).

I find that even when I'm NOT having a heavy culture game, I'm *still* able to secure 7x, as long as I go for things like Mireuksa.

This "problem" is only going to get worse. It stands to reason that once we add 5x more antiquity wonders, I might always hit 7x as a matter of course.

Don't Stop Adding Moar

That said, I love the new wonders. I probably enjoy them MORE than I do the new civs/leaders, since I get the opportunity to consider them in EVERY run.

I know that different triumphs are far from even, and probably can never be balanced. Some I hit in every game without thinking about. But some, like "conquer 6 settlements" feel like they're The Big Ones that I only hit when i'm really trying. I have felt like "build 7 wonders" was one of those Big Ones. It seems like that will be the case less and less as the game goes on.

Any ideas?

Anybody clock whether they fixed the "xp achievements" for major triumphs? Would love to stop re-loading each one

today for the first time ever, the AI *almost* had me in the end game.

I have played ~500 hours of Deity games since the release of Civ 7. I have never "lost" because the AI won.

**full disclosure**: I am not above restarting if everything goes wrong in the first 50 turns and it feels unsalvageable. so take my perfect record with that significant grain of salt. this is about AI & victory conditions specifically.

usual focus: unlock as many achievements as possible per run

optimize?: never. I never focus down one victory condition, because i'm always trying to max out everything. it's slow. it's methodical.

delay: I often delay victory conditions, or age progress, to give myself more time to focus on other achievements/yields.

game context: Amina's Great Britain cruised into late modern, snowball in full effect, when I noticed old Ben Franklin had 92/100 science innovation.

I had *purposefully* delayed an economic victory while I waited on rounding out achievements. I was leading all 3x other victory types, but was going to need to wait for the threshold to lower for any of them to trigger. Ben was going to get there first!

I pivoted, and immediately invaded him, targeting launch pads & science buildings. but war takes a while. he got up to 97/100 innovation by the time I had pressure on his capital, and even without access to projects, I expect he was within 1x "Future Science" tech from sealing it.

I took his capital (it was like 15 fortified districts 🙄), and the wonders there were enough to trigger the culture victory.

For the first time ever, I started a war I had not intended to be in because it looked like that was my only recourse to stop an AI win. For the first time ever, I dropped a nuke because I was scared the invasion was going too slowly.

This was my ~4th run since ToT, and I had noticed the difficulty increased in the others. But here for the first time EVER I felt like the AI kept competing, in spite of my snowball, right up until the last turn.

Bravo game, would go again.

if I have a successful war in antiquity + exploration, I find I cannot NOT win a domination victory in modern.

a civ strategy I like is to take a few early wars, then pivot completely into a different victory for end game. this no longer feels possible, owing to the domination points system.

I like the fantasy of a civ that WAS barbaric and violent, but becomes more progressive and less violent over time.

I don't want to turn domination victory OFF completely. I want my decisions in mid & late game to matter more than the settlements i captured a thousand years ago. Would love to see the "domination point" values more heavily weighted toward modern, or else maybe allow them to deteriorate over time.

**edit** modern era starts in 1750 CE. I might get to the late 1800s when the timer starts. why am I winning via "DOMINION" when my empire hasn't killed a single unit since turn 50 of exploration back in 900CE? it's been almost a thousand years of peace 🤷‍♂️

playing my first ToT and noticed CITY STATES in modern era did not spawn until TURN 10. I was expecting them on turn 2. Else maybe I remember they cut that and added them back on turn 1 after backlash about turn 2?

In any case TEN felt like a million years. Bug? Change? Maybe I missed it, or haven't played tecumseh in a while.

loving update otherwise 🎉

recently played a few games into modern and felt like AIR units were craaaaawling slow compared with every other unit animation.

is this a known issue? is there a mod anyone could point me to? I like to run through all the legacy paths on modern, and air is often necessary for the military one.

please & thank you,