Do you understand your dice? Thoughts on how six-sided dice design affects what you roll.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 лис 2017
- I read recently read an article (from 2007) about the randomness of the results six-sided dice produce compared to the mathematically expected outcome. I was genuinely fascinated by this research, particularly as it found that the small six-sided dice shipped with many table top wargames gave highly skewed results; please join me in this video to share my thoughts on this.
Check out the research article here:
www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Th...
Support the channel at Patreon:
/ leakycheese
Or leave a tip for tea with PayPal:
leakycheese@tutanota.com
Tweet the cheese: @Leaky_cheese
Leakymail: Leakycheese@tutanota.com
If you would like to subscribe please follow this link:
/ @leakycheese - Ігри
Ive always find painted minis roll better results.
Two_Heads_Talking What really makes the difference is the overall effort put into all aspects of a gaming miniature. Me and my mates termed a phrase for this almost thirty years ago: killpower. It was true then and remains so to this day. Thanks for watching :)
Im not sure what you mean by all aspects of a gaming miniature.
I was meerly making a joking observation that an unpainted mini never seems to perform well.
Of course its complete crap, it makes no odds either way, its just superstition.
This is quite close in concept to chaos magic.
The problem with casino dice is that they're not designed to be rolled in a normal wargaming environment. The sharp edges and corners mean they prefer to slide rather than roll on hard surfaces, and they're also made with the understanding that you should have them bounce against a wall, not just roll on a flat surface. They also wear out more quickly, expecially if you roll them on harder surfaces. If you roll them against a wall and on a softer surface, they're good. If you don't, I'd recommend less sharp-edged dice.
The article referred to in the video is also a bit suspect to me. The numbers in it are quite far from what I've seen from others who have tested dice a large number of times. I'm not saying there aren't unfair dice, but 29% ones is something you'd quickly notice. I've never seen anywhere close to that in my games, and I've used a lot of different dice, including Chessex but not GW ones.
haze no ki True about casino dice - although not a bad thing if you play on the increasingly common rubber gaming mats. Another commentator noted the same and suggested professional backgammon dice which are designed to be rolled on a hard surface and are like casino dice with slightly rounded edges and corners.
In terms of the research article I agree the 29% 1 results seems staggeringly high but I've done enough statistical and numerical modelling to understand that results can sometimes be unexpected and even counterintuitive.
Lets say for some reason his rolling mechanism was creating a skew towards 1 results and the 29% is too high. It did however lead him to look to an industry where having hardware that gives results in line with the theoretical probability of a game is essential and found their dice are very different to the small design so often used in GW games.
Thanks for watching :)
I've heard backgammon dice being suggested too. While I haven't tried them myself, they do seem like a good alternative.
@@leakycheese Yes, great video, but to this commentators point, even the roll you made on this video, I think nearly all of them just slid without actually rolling. In which case it's just something one has to be intentional about as they are rolling. I usually pick dice according to how I like their feel and appearance, etc.
I got some casino dice once out of curiosity. It was like trying to roll hockey pucks.
I switched to precision backgammon dice a decade ago. Never looked back.
They offer that flat face like casino dice but also have slightly rounded corners. Look them up. Not cheap but so nice.
Adam V Thanks, that is a good suggestion for us wargamers as they are designed to be rolled on a hard surface. Thanks for watching :)
Just looked the price, a pair is 35€ here, makes a set worth playing more expensive than my fig collection...
Maxime Bakleh as I said, not cheap. Check if you have a local backgammon group that uses them for tournaments or group orders. It is how I saved a fun pennies.
The side with less carving is going to show up more (most cases the 1). Thus slightly heavier side is generating foce to roll on the way down and is stopping on the way up
Thanks for your thoughts and your interesting video. In Backgammon precision dice are used. They have also rounded corners. Made with small tolerances. Special expensive polymer material is used and the holes are filled with the same material. Special Backgammon online shop in the UK offer these dice as well and on the website there is also an explanation about the differences to the standard dice.
Interesting, and original idea to cover this. Never even thought about this...
JEKAZOL Me neither... I'd based my dice buying choices on look and feel and always assumed they mathematically were true. I was lucky in that numbered cube type I've used for the last 20+ years seem to be better than the old little GW ones. Thanks for watching :)
I use the blue small gw dice in the cube frame.... was definitely known for my dice rolling lots of 1s.
My friends noticed an improvement in my roll whenever I use the dark imperium dice.
Jamie Vs The Internet Interesting, I've not used the little D6s for about 25 years so fascinating to hear someone who has noticed an effect in line with the conclusions of the experiment. Thanks for watching :)
@@leakycheese interisting I have those dice and it really rolls lots of 1
Very interesting video; well done! I hadn't thought about this and I'm in the middle of painting my 40k army to join my brother in playing. After watching this video my thoughts are that unless you can get those casino dice in smaller sizes, at least for 8th edition (which often has people rolling mass numbers of dice) it may just be that the ease of using smaller more rounded dice outweighs the drawbacks but I don't know. Maybe it would be worthwhile to have a small set of casino dice for smaller more important rolls like HQ units' attacks and saves, or heavy weapons.
In any case one thing I think I would prefer to do, is make sure that my brother and I are using the same dice each game we play. That will at least ensure that the probabilities are even. Of course I can control that and I will likely only be gaming with him and that's not a variable most wargamers are going to have any control over since all of their opponents will no doubt have dice of their own.
As the simplton that I am, I have a slight problem with the explanation that removing the materials for the pips make them more likely to roll ones than sixes. Should not the larger amount of material removed on the six side make this one slightly lighter and so more likely to land on top?
That depends on the weight of the paint. If I'm not mistaken, casino dice use small holes, and drill the depth of their pips with respect to the amount of pips on that side. The pips are filled with a material that weighs about the same.
But I don't remember where I read all that ... :P
Sorry, should have stated that my comment was more geared towards the GW dices. But yeah, they could have tried the same thing there and sometimes overfill their side with the six on
Martin Adi I thought that about the 6 being the most likely result i.e. face with least mass is more likely to occur. Reading through the warseer article linked in the page I have in the description he does answer this question as the outcome appears counterintuitive. He says he spoke with a physicist about it who said he thought the force acting on on the dice is rotational to the centre and the face with the most mass had the greatest momentum and was therefore less likely to come to rest with that facing facing upwards.
I've probably butchered the physics there so I hope you get my meaning!
Thanks for watching :)
leakycheese no, my physics knowledge is not good enough for that 😁 but I still apreciate your effort in bringing the topic up. No matter if I agree or disagree
+Steve Turner As I said in the video, read the original article, and the Warseer comments thread.
The dots on the casino dice are made of the same acrylic as the rest of the die. They're designed to be balanced so as to produce as random a roll as possible. Casinos even use a device similar to a caliper to test the balance of their dice. The die is placed with the clamp holding opposite corners and then spun. If the die is properly balanced it will spin freely. If it's not balanced it will quickly come to a stop.
Great video. Honestly haven't noticed a problem with my GW dice cube, in fact I'd say my rolls tend to be better than a friend who uses others, certainly good points to think on though an something that I'll have to check in future. I've often wondered about the possibility of internal flaws with opaque dice too, would there be a way to check aside from a fancy laser tool?
The dice from the D.I box seem better in relation to the research and noted factors too so might have to find some now, thanks for any potential new 'luck' received :)
Robe Cheers mate, it's a topic that certainly caught my eye.
On the subject of sectioning dice the researcher used a fancy cutter in one of the science labs to section a load of the dice used in the experiment and check for flaws. I think he said they didn't notice anything that was linked to the experimental results and favours an explanation linked to the differing masses of the opposing faces. Thanks for watching, and may your luck continue to be improved ;)
Hey I´m designing a logotype with just one dice icon and shows 3 faces, but I don´t really know if there´s any special combination that I can use, For example 1,2,3 or 2,4,6 I really need help with these issue, let me know if you can help me with this. Thanks !!
You know you have been doing a hobby a a long ole ass time when watching guy unwrap proper casino dice and audibly appreciate the precise* geometry of them. 🤣 I think understand this asmr thing now 😐
I was always interested in dice and eventually looked up cheating to see if there were ways people try to get away with it. Turns out there's a whole world on dice cheating. Found a great casino guide video covering dice and ways people cheat with them. Since watching that neat video I've wondered about the weight distribution of my small Chessex dice.
Well I bit the bullet and got myself some of the Nurgle dice. And to be honest out of around 250 throws (of the set of dice) they do actually roll pretty randomly - none of the faces seem to turn up any more or less, outside of one standard deviation. Am really surprised by my findings
I would have guessed the opposite of that. the 1 has more weight to it so it would pull down the side with the least amount of weight (6) giving MORE 6's then 1's BUT I haven't done the test and the test is where the data is made.
I can basically make roll a one every time with a six sided no matter if casino or gaming. Part of it is making sure the roll is 6 over 1. This also causes certain numbers to not be rolled. So if you can control your roll and set the die facing when it leaves your hand you control the outcome. Think about the dice as rows once it rolls end over end the we sides are eliminated. This is why casino have you throw dice a distance and hit a diamond studded wall to turn the spin of the dice.
I believe that the pips are drilled and then filled with paint of matching density to maintain its fairness. I am working on a video about them myself.
I wonder if mini dice roll diffirently compared to "normal" sized dice, i mean in some armies you get to roll 60+ dice in those cases mini dice could come handy.
If I drill holes in things they become lighter, right? Asuming that the cube is absolutely even on all sides shouldn't the side with the 6 be the lightest and the side with the 1 the heaviest? And then shouldn't the dice land more on the side with the 1 showing a 6 on the top?
Escylon I thought that about the 6 being the most likely result i.e. face with least mass is more likely to occur. Reading through the warseer article linked in the page I have in the description he does answer this question as the outcome appears counterintuitive. He says he spoke with a physicist about it who said he thought the force acting on on the dice is rotational to the centre and the face with the most mass had the greatest momentum and was therefore less likely to come to rest with that facing facing upwards.
I've probably butchered the physics there so I hope you get my meaning!
Thanks for watching :)
I was a machinist for about 20 years, assuming each pip is drilled to the same depth, the 6 face should be lighter than the 1 face obviously because of the amount of material removed. Which brings up the question, does it all balance out, or should it all balance out once you add the other 4 numbers, again assuming each pip is drill ed to the same depth.
How does a tumbler(toy) work? Why is the probability of a spread slice of bread landing on the spread side if dropped so high? Sorry, but I don't buy this momentum argument. Not that it matters much since most dice throughs are not controlled in any way, e.g. by using a dice cup, a dice tray, uneven surfaces or obstacles that bounce the dice in unpredictable ways.
Considering the layout of the dice, I'd wager the increased prevalence of 1:s implies overcompensation for the grooves. I know most dice makers try to make the colour filling the holes is usually meant to make up for the groove, and 1:s coming up more often presumably means it's opposite side (the one with more holes) is heavier.
I also know there are those who take dice quality further still. The FLGS has had a pair of backgammon dice on offer for a while (a pair for ~22 quid) cut to sub-micrometer precision and carefully weighted. Supposedly so much so that touching them with bare hands induce a statistically measurable deviation for the worse, from the oils etc. creating a weight imbalance.
Casino dice from now on. Thanks for highlighting.
Did you ever roll the infamous beastmen dice?
Incredible amount of 1s. Allegedly because of weight lost from beastmen image carved out.
I didn't but that's another good example of novelty dice affecting game play.
I use the small GW dice, I lost 3 games in a single day due to my low rolls. I noticed my friends use a more squared dice and they roll less ones than I did.
I accept my fate.
Paladin Demo Dice rolls are but one factor that influence a players chances on the table top, list design and tactics are big players as well. As I always say you make your own luck. Thanks for watching :)
leakycheese I prefer the rounded corners because those dice actually roll. To me using casino dice is like playing with loaded dice.
Also when in a controlled situation you can find dice roll to a certain way. But then you need to control the humidity in the air, the direction of wind 100% consistent rolling.
It may sque some results but overall you will most likely find it average.
ShadowFox178 That's not what the researcher found however, they suggested the exact opposite that the dice design has a significant effect on the rolled outcome.
Now, any piece of research might contain flaws but having read through the article and the Q&A in the Warseer article I think the methodology seems sound. What really caught my eye is how different the design of the casino dice is and the clear interest such businesses have in making hardware that produces results to match the mathematical principles of the game involved.
Thanks for watching :)
I doubt humidity would have much of any effect and wind shouldn't be an issue unless you're either playing out doors or sitting in front of a fan. Both are completely moot if you're playing in an air conditioned environment, which is where I'd expect the vast majority of these sorts of games to be played.
dice may or may not influence this, but most important thing is to never give up.
awakened one Indeed, and as I always say about wargaming, you make your own luck. You need a good list, good tactics and a set of randomisers that give results consistent with the mechanics and mathematics of the game to do well. However, I wouldn't intentionally penalise myself on any one of these three for a competitive game. Thanks for watching :)
I get the whole weight thing wih the holes drilled into them effecting the outcome.
However I don't see why the rounded edges effect your rolls.
If the holes weren't drilled and each side weighed the same surely having rounded edges would make zero difference?
Also another question. Has here been studys on which dice to pick up and roll?
I tend to pick up the 1's hoping that they are less likely to roll 1's again. And don't like my odds when I pick up dice showing 6's. I be honest this doesn't really seem to pan out for me. Just look at my last game for proof of that!
Curse those command re rolls!!
Stevo 4TK The researcher did a second set of tests (another 144K rolls) where they modified the original dice by squaring of the edges so the die were true cubes. This gave a set of results where a 1 occured 19% of the time vs. 16.666% expected. From this result the conclusion is the drilled pips unbalance the dice but it is the rounded edges and corners that allow it to roll more easily and then allow the said weight imbalance effec the result.
Funny you mention the rerolling of a failed result with the same dice, another guy mentioned it and said he had seen a piece of testing to say always pick up a new dice to do a re-roll as using picking up the dice immediately after the failed test and throwing again increases the chances of repeating the original result, that's a trick I'l remember!
Thanks for watching :)
What was your favorite part of the shaman origin in Realm of Chaos : The lost and the Damned, leakycheese? My favorite is how the Emperor lived through all of human history, including ancient Sumeria and Egypt. I'm getting Realm of Chaos : The lost and the Damned for Christmas - it's being shipped to my house. I bought it. So excited! Thoughts?
RPG players think about dice outcomes. Players sometimes buy "dice jails" for badly performing dice. Players notice when they keep rolling 'natural' ones and never twenties on d20 dies.
The more rounded the dice the more effect the differing weight distribution has, in theory those gw dice should roll more 6's due to the larger distribution on the opposing side (the 1), it's still possible that study had skewed results, to get a truly accurate probability you have to roll essentially infinite dice
Harris Richards I thought that about the 6 being the most likely result i.e. face with least mass is more likely to occur. Reading through the warseer article linked in the page I have in the description he does answer this question as the outcome appears counterintuitive. He says he spoke with a physicist about it who said he thought the force acting on on the dice is rotational to the centre and the face with the most mass had the greatest momentum and was therefore less likely to come to rest with that facing facing upwards.
I've probably butchered the physics there so I hope you get my meaning!
Thanks for watching :)
leakycheese I suppose that is a possibility, I've always been very dubious about anything anyone says on the interent unless they have solid objective evidence 😂 Who knows I mean these forces are probably so insignificant that it almost doesn't matter, though I question his bias in this situation, considering he is a wargamer that has been using the dice for years he could have come up with this "study" to account for his "bad luck" and he's actaully just a bad player... ;)
And excellent video btw, greatly enjoy your content :)
I love the look of some of the new GW themed dice but won't use them in games as I don't think they will roll fair. My mate *always* think the dice are against him. So for the last few weeks we've been writing down every single roll! Out of around 1,200 rolls to date using the new GW clear red dice we found that the dice are reasonably fair - the only number that doesn't come up very often for us is the '4'. So out of 1,200 rolls we're seeing about 150 instead of 200 fours.
+gregtdude Agreed, those themed dice are bad news I think. An interesting experiment you have going there, how did you find the little white dice?
We've not tried objectively with the white dice - will start this weekend making records :) Out of curiosity our measurements did settle my opponent's perception his dice rolled lower than mine ;)
Mass & air resistance, as a dimpled golfball
Is grade A dice better than AAA dice?
I use the standard GW dice and I roll terribly a lot and none of my friends do as consistently and they all have themed dice.
Casino 🎲 Paradise
Also, 🎰 Board.
Casino Machine.
I have considered ordering casino dice... BUT... In the end I never bothered paying the money for it and went with the practical, if imprecise, dice from GW.
If GW uses a less precise method of production for the dice, then it's possible you'll end up with dice rolling 1's or some other number.
I think a more accurate test would be to test several dice individually and see if they produce very different results.
Either way, you need to consider the alternative explanations for that "I roll a lot of 1's" feeling. A small difference in probability on your dice probably wouldn't be felt as much as you'd believe. So unless there is a gross imbalance in the dice, there could be other reasons that explain this subjective impression.
The biggest one is probably confirmation bias. Especially negative values and outcomes tend to become a longer lasting memory.
Another one is false expectations. I studied probability outcomes for a while. I developed a few tools to help illustrate the probability of combat/shooting outcomes for AoS/WFB:
tools.druchii.net/
When devising a strategy on the table, we either tend to math out expectations based on averages or simplified numbers (ie: half will hit, half will wound so X wounds..).
We often get results well within the normal range of probable outcomes, but this range might be bigger than expected.
Dieter I don't think cost is a real issue with any dice (unless metal) for a serious wargamer as the miniatures, tools, paint, rules and terrain are much bigger expenses overall.
In terms of the research the author used a batch of 36 small GW dice and threw them a total of 144,000 times, the intention being to even out manufacturing inconsitencies between them. After the rolling he said they sectioned the dice with a special cutter and examined them for imperfections.
This and the method they were rolled in was designed to remove and identify possible bias and therefore why he stated his results are statistically confident. This combined with the corroboration with research from an industry where the consistency of dice results to the probabilities designed into the game and their selection with a dice design very different to GW adds further weight to the conclusion he reached. I don't see confirmation bias as being an issue here as the experiment was designed to challenge that very notion i.e. the test was designed to prove his hypothesis that 1 is the most common result was wrong.
You make a good point about outcomes in a real game. Dice results are only one part of many factors that influence how a game plays and if victory is achieved. Army design, player tactics and terrain all influence and a great set of dice rolls will still lose a game for a badly thought out army and poor tactics. As I always say, you make your own luck.
Thanks for watching :)
The test from the original article is absolutely superb, no doubt there. But when people look for reasons why they lost or didn't get the outcome they expected, dice are a very popular target. Perhaps the dice do play a role, but even some imbalance in the dice might not be as noticable as we'd expect. Maybe instead of 1's you would have rolled more 2's :)
Imagine that the dice would lean to rolling a lot of 4's then I'd wager that people wouldn't have noticed the imbalance. They'd consider their results average. But because it's that awful 1, suddenly eyes turn red and breathing becomes brisk. It seems to me that the article and the reactions to it are seeped with an emotional bias from start to finish.
And.. I'm not different.. Back in 2003 I had a bit of an anger issue about it. I nearly swore blood oaths and declared feuds to fellow players for being so lucky, or me being unlucky. I was going to record every single dice roll, if only to prove that my percieved bad luck was real.
Then I quickly got lazy and declared that, instead, I'd record every outcome of every action (ie: 10 shots- > 1kill). Then I reasoned that I'd need a comparable statistical calculation for outcomes and turned to binomial and multinomial distributions. And those very same statistics showed me that my expectations were at fault.
I would often play tactics that had a reasonable chance of success. But their combined chance of success would quickly drop below 50%. IE: 2 moves with 70% chance of success, which is reasonably good for WH, have a combined success chance of 49%.
And so, naturally, my whole tactic swarmed the table and completely deflated like a souflé gone wrong the moment dice came into play.
But not because of the dice.
That doesn't mean I look badly at casino dice. If anything, they might remove that dice-bias from people's mind and encourage them to seek a solution for their loss elsewhere.
But before I hit that send button.. let me say what I forgot in my original reply: I really enjoy your video, your content and deeply appreciate the discussion :)
I figured that my dice was able to roll more 4,5,6 for some reason.
Late comment. It doesn't matter as long as both player are using the same dice set or the same dice "quality" since it distribute the error to all the players. The cemetery will just fill up more rapidly.
I just think the rounder edged ones look and feel better lol
just thinking the GW dice will take longer to stop rolling so more time less bets
I got a dice Roller tray that should make the rolles as close to mathematically random as possible. Square dice seem to do about the same. I tested 4+ on 6 dice 10 times. The rounded edges did the highest. But I only tested 8 or 9 rounds. But on average it doesn't seem to make a big difference in my dice roller that has 5 bouncer walls. I could test the outcome of each number but that would take forever. Seems about the same when you control the roll with a dice tray. Did a quick test of rolling for 1s the rounded dice did score worse. 21% vs 15% for square dice out of 60 rolls. I'll test more another day. That could easily just be variation.
I found when I first started the hobby, the dice outcomes seemed to be fine with my small army. But as I got more into the hobby, the worse my dice rolls were using my own gw dice. After awhile it kinda sucked always loosing units but made those heroic saves and winning dice rolls more thrilling. Who knows, maybe its planned design.
The reason we dont get casino dice is that children play these games and a common rule for children is«No sharp corners »
I think a lot has to do with HOW people roll as well. Most people, especially in "dice heavy" games like 40K where you're rolling for 30 or 40 shots at a time, simply get a big old wad of dice in their hand and tip their hand over. They don't shake the dice, they don't even really roll the dice. They just drop the dice. Even if a die was perfectly random, you are influencing it by not really rolling it.
i assume, from geometric design, and you mention it, that casino dice are replaced more frequently. and i assume they are designed that way. those corners are probably really prone to chipping or breaking. and should wear down more noticeably, resulting in significant changes to the rolls. where as GW dice are more robust in nature. their rounded corners probably wear down less or at least wear down more gradually and evenly. i couldnt say for sure but i dont think wargamers change their dice because they wore out. maybe smash it with a hammer for rolling so many ones but not really throw out. as to why make casino dice that needs replacing? probably regulations that state that dice need to be replaced to keep results more consistent. and having dice that wears out more noticeably might help. maybe
also ergonomically, less sharp corners mean less possibility of injury to handlers, especially when children and younger people play wargaming where as casinos are strictly for adults.
also, just looking at probability, the rounded corners themselves wont effect the results. it will most likely be due to the indents on the faces. and this coupled off with the rolled edges means that the dice rolls more easily until it lands with the more lighter side. why use indent at all? again, durability issue. casino ones are painted on. they probably wear off. GW ones are indented and will not wear off so easily. it does mess with the weight distribution but i assume tho that GW would have preferred to have their dice last longer than be so minutely accurate as casino standard dice.
to really be accurate, the same tests would need to be carried out by rolling dice with rolled edges but with painted dots. to see if rolled edges or sharp edges matter.
The death guard dice always roll ridiculously high they always seem to pass 5+ rolls all the time.
the shape of the die is inconsequential what matters is the consistency of edges and parallel sides, Take a d20 for example
Charles Balliet That is pretty much what the study says, adding that any marking needs to be weight balanced across all faces. Thanks for watching :)
I can basically make a six sided dice even casino die roll a 1 every time and most of the time make it roll the number that left my hand. Casino dice are made to tumble balanced and hit the table and hit the back wall which have diamond heads which change facings and bounce of a die. Also even casino die if rolled normally rolls a 1 19% according to that study. I took balanced casino dice set it in a dice tower and dropped it same way each time it landed on same number more times then the rounded die. Also edge on casino dice catches the felt and there is ribbing on some tables not sure if anymore that stops sliding dice. I would never play a board game or miniature game with someone with Casino dice because they would roll more controlled numbers because they are balanced. I use a felt and leather dice tower because when you drop the die it lands in a different spot more often then wood or plastic ones which creates more random dice rolls I think this is because each time the die drops it moves the felt a little bit causing different drop from level to level.
I really like the rounded gaming dice...
And really DISLIKE those hard sharp edged casino dice lol
Edit:
Something to consider, as far as I know aren't all those casino tables where you would roll dice covered in that green card table felt? Those hard edges probably tumble better on something soft like felt.
I've heard that casino dice are designed to be thrown in a craps pit. The 'gaming' dice that GW use are designed to be rolled on a table, not thrown.
Alex Dodds I can see casino dice are larger and have bold spots to make them clear to read at a distance. A craps pit is perhaps designed to suit the dice more than the other way round 😉 If the little white dice have been designed to roll on a table then the researcher is saying those choices have affected their outcomes, skewed towards 1. Thanks for watching :)
Thanks for replying.
Play blood bowl with any dice n see how many "go for its" result in a 1
I've just spent £17 on some Death Guard dice. Bollocks!
Nooooo!!
In my case, it's not just the GW Dice...in fact, the dice only like me in games of RISK (That one army must have either been Death Guard or Raven Guard in Spirit as they held out against 20+ opponents...twice!). My dice hate me so bad that I really think they're plotting to kill me in my sleep...anyone who is a fan of Wil Wheaton's Tabletop series thinks his dice are bad, they're just being polite to his opponents compared to me. (7th edition Kill Team Orks vs my opponent's Tau was really just a shooting gallery with the Orks individually making 1-2 inch rolls to get across a 4 foot board...yet my foe continued to insist that it was fair and balanced with his ability to start in cover and just stand and shoot into an open field)
I am aware that it is at least partly my dice's fault, a friend of mine that doesn't play Tau (Still had his old Imperial guard, but was at best just painting it with no intention of getting back in, we've since tempted him to give 8th a try) has actually measured most of our group's dice with calipers and found that they are indeed skewed...I'll have to try and get a hold of Casino Dice...
On a side note, I did get a set of the Death Guard Dice, It's more like soft rubber in a plastic frame. They seemed to roll fine the few times I've rolled them, but I'll try to do more tests and let you all know.
SwordlordRoy Sounds like some casino dice are worth a look.
I have noticed how some players do seem to throw poorly... or at least believe they do. I have also noticed how certain players who get defeated if a game is going against them seem to get a run of bad luck. I can't prove this but have noticed that players in such a situation don't throw their dice with the usual gusto. I think they might be picking dice up from failed tests and throwing them again without effort and thereby increasing their odds of repeating the result.
That's why I always try to throw my dice as if I'm winning.
Thanks for watching :)
P.s. And no, your buddy was not being fair with his Tau.
Can't believe it took me this long to find this again...
Did more rolls with the Death Guard Dice, they are oddly enough my dice with the best range of probability...
Hey leakycheese, small correction on the sample size, it was actually 288,000 rolls. He did the test rolls twice. The second time he took the gw dice, and some extras, melted down the extras, and put the melted plastic onto the corners of the gw dice and filed them to be square corner dice and retested the results. In the first sample, he also tested square corner dice with pips that rolled 1's on a 19% chance. When he retested the gw dice that had the added corners, their 29% chance of ones went down to 19%, being in line with the square corner pipped dice. Another factor that supports this is he did the same methodology with cheesex dice and got the same results
+Robert Stanley I was intentionally referring to the first run through of 144K rolls with the unmodified dice (x36) because that is the result that illustrated the conclusion with stock GW small dice rolling a very high number of 1s.
The second run through showed how the rounding appears to be the main factor that causes the high number of 1s although the 19% measured shows the weight and relief of the drilled pips is still causing a skewed result. This compares to the casino dice that gave 16.66666% chance of any single result occurring.
What interests me here is that someone mentioned professional backgammon dice as being a design better suited to rolling on hard wargaming tables, I wonder if the slight rounding of the edges on those affects what they roll?
Thanks for watching :)
Did you ever test the casino dice in game?
i recently got my hands on some casino dice just as a bit of an experiment and im really pleased with them so far. they roll really well and so far seem much better than the GW custodes dice i was using. i've now got a set of 20 green ones and i hope they last me a long while.
great video, love stats and use it every day at work, bye the bye i dont use GW dice either, may have to invest in some new dice...
+Back of beyond Tech Cheers dude, I'm like you in terms of mixing business with pleasure on this one. Thanks for watching :)
I am now going to use casino dice, thank you.
Zz Zzzz You're welcome, perhaps we compare notes on our experiences next year? Thanks for watching :)
The pantheon are fickle patreons.
42
Rogal Dorn This video is nothing to do with my age. Thanks for watching ;)
I have no need for dice in my life but damn are those casino dice ever sexy!
That actually is really interesting. I probably need to switch over to casino dice exclusively (I've had a set mixed in with my other stuff for a while) but unfortunately I'm such a ho for specialty dice. I'm actually waiting on a d20 from Artisan Dice made with hops & inlaid with brass numerals. I'm sure THAT won't skew the results any...
+Brooks Sligh Cheers mate, glad you found it interesting. Dice made with hops and brass inlays?! Wow, that sounds like a randomiser for the man who likes a quality feel. Thanks for watching :)
I've used casino dice for years. They are just bulky to play with in tabletop. The marks should be drilled and filled so that the dice remains the same weight and balanced. There are a few videos on how they test them. It is amazing in how much math, science and statistics goes into those dice.
Getting my degrees I had a class on probability and one of the labs was on probabilities and was there ways to throw dice to maximize outcomes if things were supposed to be random. I loved that and reading up on it. I "feel" that I benefited in my gaming as the dice gods seem more with me.
you happen to have a link to a public version of that lab?
It's be over a decade since I took that class, I am sure I could try and find my notes from it. But a lot of it was the physics of the dice throw. The less you let the dice roll the more you control the outcome essentially. But I will see what I can find.
huh, interesting, I'll see if I can find a class about that somewhere else so you don't have to find your notes.
RedPandaSeven Well, I always say we make our own luck on the wargaming table.
Like you, what really struck me about this is how specifically designed the casino dice are and how given the money involved there is a huge incentive on the casinos to create hardware that gives outcomes consistent with the conceptual math behind the game.
Thanks for watching :)
I stopped using GW dice. Roll way too many ones.
I only use my casino dice whenever possible.
Love them!
Jerry Macias Cool mate! How do find them in terms of practical use e.g. rolling on a gaming table, durability etc.? Thanks for watching :)
Looks like I gotta buy some new dice ha
+Pat James That's what I'm thinking. Still, comparing to the rest of the hobby cost this is minor 😉 Thanks for watching, Firstling :)
leakycheese, if you do a review of Realm of Chaos : The lost and the Damned, don't forget to do and read the parts about the Emperor on pages 174 to 188. I'm getting Realm of Chaos : The lost and the Damned for Christmas on eBay. Its already being shipped to my house as I bought it already. Did you like the book?
+boi boi Oh yes, if I review it I'll re-read it cover to cover and go through the entire thing 😊 It's a brilliant book, up there with 40K RT and Slaves to Darkness.
Did you like the shaman origin in Realm of Chaos : The lost and the Damned? The Emperor born in 8000BCE before recorded human history, living through all of human history including ancient Sumeria and Egypt, implied to be Jesus of Nazareth, Caesar, Merlin, Alexander The Great in disguise, everything thing else?
Typo. Everything else. Writing mistake.
If you roll a dice and the numbers come out at 16.6% the same then the result isnt random.
Yes, it is. As we are talking probability here then the result of throwing a six sided dice is a random event, regardless of how well balanced said dice is. Thanks for watching :)
No it isnt.
What you are saying is that if you roll a dice 1000 times then you will get a 3 166 times. and by extention you will get a 6 166 times.
Thats not random. That means the over all result is predetermined.
As long as the dice isnt loaded. You might roll a dice 100 times and get a 1 every single time, that is random, the odds astronomical but it doesnt mean it isnt random.
16.6% is based on a single roll and only counts for that roll, it doesnt matter if you do it 145,000 times to test a theory that the dice are loaded in so way you only have a 1 in 6 chance of getting a 1 on any one single roll.
I think you need to read up on what the mathematical term random means, like the word similar it has a different meanings to how it gets used in day to day discussion. I'm getting the feeling you are being a troll here.
Not being a troll no, its an interesting discussion I had only the other day, maybe because the person I was talking to also watched this video. We were talking about dice rolls and how people see averages on a dice roll.
For instance we were talking about the frag missles from a cyclone missile launcher being 2D3.
He said on average you are going to get 4 shots because 2 is in the middle. I was saying no on average you are going to get between 2 and 6 shot which isnt 4 shots because each roll resets the randomness of the dice roll.
What is an average roll of a D6? 3, 3½ or 4?
And no Im not trolling you at all. You videos are some of the more interesting videos Ive come across in months. If you dont like opinion that differs from yours then let me know and ill bugger off and leave you to it.
Nah depending on the box set you buy depends on the quality of dice. Like Dark Imperium has nice quality dice, but cheaper box sets have the small d6
ShadowFox178 Cheers, I don't buy many GW boxed games so good to know that they sell them with a variety of dice types. Thanks for watching :)
The probabilities are, even after 10 000 dice throw, probabilities. It is inconsistent by definition. You can have luck for 10k throws and then have bad luck for another 10k who will even out the whole. Or maybe have a bad luck for 100k throws. Otherwise you can say that you will have more 6 halfway through a game where you had more 1. If the amount of mass matters, then you will get more 6 since the 1 side weight a bit more. Or perhaps the paint weight the exact amount of lost weight by drilling a hole ?
Anyway, you can count on reroll 1 from your character's aura in any army nowaday.
Sunshine Starcraft What you say isn't backed up by statistical theory: if you make your sample size big enough you achieve the 95% confidence interval which means you have factored out luck and other short term variables. If you have ever done an experiment to measure the half life of a highly radioactive element or isotope this is a good demonstration of this at work: the decay of a nucleus is a random event with time but get a big enough sample of said material snd measure it's decay and you get a nice smooth exponential curve every time.
I thought the same thing as you about 6 being the most likely result i.e. face with least mass is more likely to occur. Reading through the warseer article linked in the page I have in the description he does answer this question as the outcome appears counterintuitive. He says he spoke with a physicist about it who said he thought the force acting on on the dice is rotational to the centre and the face with the most mass had the greatest momentum and was therefore less likely to come to rest with that facing facing upwards.
I've probably butchered the physics there so I hope you get my meaning!
Thanks for watching :)
I use Koplow square dice for my wargaming needs and it might just be confirmation bias but I think they roll better than my traditional rounded edge chessex ones.
1. I tested individual dice back in the days when I was D&D-ing a lot and found out there are big differences in results statistics between dice coming from one batch. This would suggest this is not about the model but about each item.
However:
2. People don't realize how big random fluctuations are and assume everything will be average. In real life it is very comon for statistics of a test to stabilize only after many thousands of samples.
In one of my jobs I prepared a computer simulation of this phenomenon to our marketing team who overestimated the significance of A/B tests. The company was loosing a lot of money as they jumped to conclusions and dropped big budgets on random fluctuations.
3. In the end I would suggest trusting your lucky dice. Remember one of the 40k axioms: forget the promise of science :-)
Khaiell Shadowspark You are quite right about needing proper testing of dice to determine if the hardware is affecting the outcome. Likewise, humans often misinterpret data according to their own desires and biases; the actual results are often counterintuitive!
As you say, stick to your lucky dice and I always remember the following axiom when gaming: we make our own luck. It doesn't matter how good our dice roll if we have a poorly designed army and play with bad tactics. Control these three as much as you fairly can and then you start every game in the best place to secure a win.
Thanks for watching :)
Nurgle dice anyone??
+gregtdude Avoid them like the plague! Thanks for watching :)
'Like the plague'!!! Just got that, very funny :D
+gregtdude 😉
I was given a set of the newer Ultramarine dice with the U symbol cut heavily into the one and the others roman numerals. They roll an ungodly amount of ones. Also as a side note, how many of you have made the mistake of rolling a one, utilizing a reroll of some sort, picking up the same die and rolling a one again with it? How many bat reps have you watched where this has happened? I broke it down with a friend who is a mathematician. Yup, you guessed it. For whatever reason you have nearly an 80% chance of rerolling a one after you have rolled a one with the same die. Switch your dice after you roll a one. It will save you a lot of heartache.
Watch some bat reps. You'll see what I'm talking about.
Sure, around 20% of the time it won't be a one after a one. But the other 80%...
But you glazed over one important scientific fact. If you use the same dice that has already rolled a one then you increase your chance of rolling another one exponentially. If you grab a fresh die the process is started over and therefore your chances of rolling a one are decreased. In addition if you burn a command point your chances of re-rolling a one after you roll a one nearly quadruple due to the levy of atmospheric disturbance. Look man, it's been mathed to death. Just switch your dice.