How much of this game is influenced by chance?

[Sperpurber]

How much of this game would you say is up to chance, compared to skill?

Plenty of both are involved, from what I've seen. I never played that much Risk growing up, and am by no means a master strategist, but I think I can pick up on systems well enough. Skill is merely resource management and timing. Chance is the dice, the starting composition (I don't know if it's possible to start the game with full hold of a zone, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens), and whether your gains draw the attention of the collective opposition.

I'm just trying to gauge how hard I should pat myself on the back when I win.

EDIT: Fixed title for idiots playing on semantics to undermine a valid point.

[redhawk92]

70 skill
30 luck

on some maps more luck

[azezzo]

depends on the map, but i would say 65% skill 35% luck

[bleutofu]

10% Luck, 20% Skill
15% Concentrated power of will....

I'll stop now.

[john9blue]

It depends a lot on the settings. On the right team settings you get people like SkyT who win 80% of the time because they have greatly refined their skill for that particular type of game. But if you play No Cards Doodle Earth Assassin, there is not much skill needed at all.

[niMic]

More skill than luck, by a good margin, or there wouldn't be people who did much better at stuff than other people.

[Artimis]

Q. How much of this game is luck?

A. Most of it.

• You are allocated regions in an even but random way(luck).
• You roll intensity cubes that generate random results(luck).
• You gain spoils of a random colour after you conquer a region in a Flat Rate/Escalating Spoils game(luck, especially in Flat Rate).

[john9blue]

Interestingly, the only replies so far have been from high ranked players. I think players like us are more likely to answer skill over luck, because it reflects well on us. niMic's post is a prime example.

We should hear from some low ranked players who are down on their luck.

[xelabale]

How much of poker is luck? It's a psychological game as much as anything. I agree, 70% skill, 30% luck. A good mix.

[pimpdave]

Luck only exists when people are shooting at one another.

This is a dice game with cards. It's all probabilities, kids. No sense getting upset over the probabilities, just learn them. Then play them. Then figure out how to read what other players have based on how they're playing and their relative level of advanced play (what rank is supposed to designate). Then learn how to feint and flank and take the game to a new level.

But the first step is acknowledging that it isn't luck, the dice aren't rigged, and there really isn't some big conspiracy. It just is what it is.

[Mr Changsha]

Luck only exists when people are shooting at one another.

This is a dice game with cards. It's all probabilities, kids. No sense getting upset over the probabilities, just learn them. Then play them. Then figure out how to read what other players have based on how they're playing and their relative level of advanced play (what rank is supposed to designate). Then learn how to feint and flank and take the game to a new level.

But the first step is acknowledging that it isn't luck, the dice aren't rigged, and there really isn't some big conspiracy. It just is what it is.

Quite right overall.

I have found that early in my games luck can be a fairly large factor (poor drop + bad dice is out of the player's control) but even if a player does have a favourable drop and dice he is quite capable of sodding it up from there.

So early game has a fair slice of luck (70% skill 30% luck)
The rest of the game (90% skill 10% luck) assuming two or three players aren't very evenly matched come the endgame.

[Sperpurber]

Luck only exists when people are shooting at one another.

This is a dice game with cards. It's all probabilities, kids. No sense getting upset over the probabilities, just learn them. Then play them. Then figure out how to read what other players have based on how they're playing and their relative level of advanced play (what rank is supposed to designate). Then learn how to feint and flank and take the game to a new level.

But the first step is acknowledging that it isn't luck, the dice aren't rigged, and there really isn't some big conspiracy. It just is what it is.

I actually posted this as a result of a string of unusually good luck. I don't think the dice are rigged (which would contradict the theory of luck). I just want to know what percentage of the game is beyond your immediate control.

Playing the odds is all well and good, but it doesn't stop exceptional circumstances.

As for dice and cards, are you missing the social aspect? How to butter people up and keep them off your back at a critical moment? Maybe the emphasis is downplayed without the human aspect.

[john9blue]

it isn't luck, the dice aren't rigged

If the dice aren't rigged, then there must be luck.

[a.sub]

10% Luck, 20% Skill
15% Concentrated power of will....

I'll stop now.

5 percent pleasure
50% pain
and 100% reason to remember the name

[Georgerx7di]

In any one game, a lot of it is luck. Let's just say its 50%, maybe its more or less, but its in that vicinity. On the other hand if look at your overall record after 25 games, then I'd say it will closely reflect your skill. We'll say only 10% of that is luck. If you look at your play over a year, how well you did is 98% skill and 2% luck perhaps. I think that this is a more useful answer.

Also, some games are more luck than others. You join and 8 man assasin on doodle earth, and in one game you may have no chance of winning in the first round, and yet some other player wins in 5 seconds. So one game with theses settings might be 80% luck. But if you play many of them your skill will show eventually, although you may never be able to win 50% of them with 8 players like you might by playing 8 man freestyle standard speed on classic art. Well that's my take on things.

[kiddicus maximus]

"I'd rather be lucky than good"

--Lefty Gomez

It would be interesting to have two players join identical games for an entire month and track all the results. Obviously there are many variables, but a lot of them could be eliminated by playing a 10 map range, each map 10 times against the same player(s) - same settings, etc...

[Artimis]

You join and 8 man assasin on doodle earth, and in one game you may have no chance of winning in the first round, and yet some other player wins in 5 seconds. So one game with theses settings might be 80% luck.

Hence I never play 8 man AssDoodle games, those games are just such a lottery. But people keep joining them so I expect they're getting something out of it, even if they don't walk away with the points.

[prismsaber]

Not really any high rankers have responded so far. The answer to the question is that there is both a lot of luck and a lot of skill involved. There is a lot of luck involved in that in any given turn in any given game, some factor beyond your control will affect the outcome of the game. Imagine your 6-2 roll to obtain a crucial bonus was instead a 2-6 roll, and instead of securing a probable win the game is left wide open. Or imagine you had received a mixed set in a flat rate game other than a triple red. In this way even the greatest of strategies can be rendered useless by factors beyond one's control. To execute a flawless plan you still need the dice and the cards to cooperate!

By having a great skill set, however, you put yourself in the best position to take advantage of favorable external circumstances. Likewise, having a great skill set negates SOME of the disadvantage of negative external circumstances. Generally speaking, if some players get bad luck they are completely screwed and have no chance to win because their skills are lacking. Other players can have bad luck and still win games at a consistent rate. Of course, there are exceptions. Sometimes the deck will be so stacked against you that you will have had virtually no chance to win a particular game. That's why game settings are important as well. Stay away from sequential 1v1 .

[Beko the Great]

Conquer club as having dice, cards and random drops is a luck based game.
I would say if you don't know how to play is 100% luck or unluck. The secret to win, in my opinion, is trying to not depend on luck, that is, find the best strategy possible so that luck effects are minimized, and this is a thing that distinguish good players from great players, good players seek luck, great players avoid unluck.

[pimpdave]

it isn't luck, the dice aren't rigged

If the dice aren't rigged, then there must be luck.

Well, I guess it's all in how you define luck.

Playing the odds is all well and good, but it doesn't stop exceptional circumstances.

Right, but exceptional circumstances are accounted for in considering the probabilities. On a long enough timeline, those exceptional circumstances balance out. That's how I reassure myself. I'm not above getting really upset or getting overconfident when there's a streak of bad or good dice, respectively. But with experience comes expectations.

Since I expect there to be those exceptional circumstances, I assume that as often as those streaks work against me, they will work in my favor. So that forces me to have a perspective larger than just individual games.

What it means is that there's really no way to call one player better than another based only on one game. It requires a series. Like baseball, in a way.

So I mean, yeah, I know what you guys mean about luck, and by your definition, sure, I agree, there's a degree of luck to the game as there is in any game where a random generation of data determines strategy and outcome. I just don't think of that as luck. I just think of it as something difficult to predict, and thus a challenging risk to manage.

With that in mind, it's easy to see why some high rankers narrow their focus to only map, or say, the method proven to best boost the rank of someone who doesn't compensate for the lack of predictability with strategy and skill: just block everyone who beats you from joining your games, and host 8-player escalating games on a newbie-trap map, like Circus Maximus, so that around half of them deadbeat out, and the others are easy to bulldoze over. Be sure to write your screenname in all caps, and for that extra splash of "winner" be really condescending and defensive about your scam when everyone calls you out on it.


I could have a higher rank if I really applied myself, but I don't. Also, I keep on not playing team games with great partners, which is really dumb, but at least keeps them from getting mad at me when I accidentally miss a turn.

[GoogleRun]

I compare it to blackjack; with luck in this game similar to the house advantage in blackjack. In blackjack there is a percentage given to the house advantage which is an estimate of how well you can come out (aka how much you will lose). This adv. varies with different sets of rules, but it can be lowered greatly by employing basic strategy, and even brought close to 0% if more elaborate techniques are used. So my point...the amount of luck that is needed varies with your map and settings, and the factor luck plays can be lowered by employing basic strategy( Society of Cooks anyone?), and i believe like in blackjack, luck can be almost eliminated by using advanced strategy and experience (hence its all skill).

I'm pretty new, but that's my take on the skill v. luck question and if you were wondering, yes, i just got back from a casino weekend

[Georgerx7di]

Q. How much of this game is luck?

A. Most of it.

• You are allocated regions in an even but random way(luck).
• You roll intensity cubes that generate random results(luck).
• You gain spoils of a random colour after you conquer a region in a Flat Rate/Escalating Spoils game(luck, especially in Flat Rate).

13.2%

[Hoots]

In my opinion i would put it at around 60% luck and 40% skill.

I have been mostly playing doubles with the same partner. He is a coworker and we spend countless amounts of time in the office planning our attacks and defenses...

More often than not, in a game where every move is discussed before taken, the game comes down to either a horrible roll (10+ losing to a 2 or something) or a awesome roll where someone doesnt lose a troop. This happens both for us and against us.

After that one horrible or awesome roll it seems to tilt the scales in that direction and you spend the rest of the game either fighting against the results or taking advantage of them.

It is one of the things that has made me lose some interest in the game.... All the stratagy in the world wont do anything against one of the .99998% rolls that you lose.

[niMic]

60% luck? Then how does that explain people who consistently maintain a higher rank than other people playing the exact same type of games? There's definitely some luck involved, but that is essentially negated over a long period of many games.

[GENERAL STONEHAM]

60% luck? Then how does that explain people who consistently maintain a higher rank than other people playing the exact same type of games? There's definitely some luck involved, but that is essentially negated over a long period of many games.

That's not true. Some players like KLOBBER and King Herpes stick to one or two maps and farm for points from inexperience players in those games. Then we have over-ranked players who team up with each other to take advantage of the same inexperience players.