I agree with Valis, things are not right.

wow i just lost a 6v1!

captainLAGER's turn
rnd_ defended 6v1: 6 to 6 (1,1,1,1,1,1 to 6)

Then do what many of the top players do and only attack if you have a two dice advantage.

I have to admit, I find myself holding back a 6v4 attack a lot more than I used to, since it loses so often. I would never think of holding it back before but my thinking/planning has definately changed I've noticed protecting for those frequent dice advantage losses.

random numbers from a computer are always not random.....

didn't you notice you always win or lose when both rolls are in tens, twenties, and so on? for example, the score is most of the time 14v11, 21v25, 28v28,

you seldom see 40v1, 15v36,......you should see this more often based on probability....

lastmurti defeated 7v5: 25 to 14 (6,5,6,1,2,1,4 to 2,1,5,3,3)
WOOT! defeated 7v3: 26 to 8 (6,1,4,4,5,5,1 to 3,3,2)
WOOT! defeated 6v2: 24 to 6 (6,4,4,4,1,5 to 3,3)WOOT!'s turn
VaScHa9276 defeated 8v7: 25 to 23 (5,2,2,3,3,6,3,1 to 5,5,2,6,2,2,1)
Tremolo defeated 7v5: 25 to 19 (5,3,3,5,1,2,6 to 1,6,5,4,3)WOOT! defeated 6v4: 20 to 9 (6,2,4,1,2,5 to 2,3,2,2)

none of you are talking about the rolls you're winning -.-

The dice did not change, get over it.

What is the basis of the "random" generation for the rolls; the clock?

The dice DID change. They're a lot more random now. They tend towards one end of the spectrum, and thats dumb. They should be closer and closer to 3.5 points a die the more dice you're rolling.

Something was wrong with the rolls before, when the game was first developed, it wouldn't surprise me to see the same problem now. I keep getting trounced by jackasses that don't even know to keep contiguous landmasses.

yea im not sure about this i certainly feal like i lose more rolls then i should statistically if they were truly random dice rolls but am i i have no idea