Strategy vs Luck

[DunnJH4]

I see several old threads on a similar idea. Arguing at work. What is the fraction of luck to strategy of Conquer Club/Risk? This is an opinion based argument, so don't take ti too personally if people disagree with your ideas.

[SirSebstar]

strategy helps you win games. If you play strong, you can sometimes make your luck. Obviously, in all cases where you continually loose dice, you will inevitable loose the game. But in all games that take longer then a few attacks, inevitably luck will even out more and strategy will play a greater part.
If you have a solid strategy, you are bound to win more then just randomly attacking neutrals. thats all.

ps i get the feeling you ment to reply to some post. if so, i can probably merge them again..

[anonymus]

why can some people hold a high rank and maintain win% far over average? are they just lucky say 70% of the time? question kind of answers itself..

even 1v1 strategy wins over luck in the long run.. i would say even in a few games like 10 the better player will get atleast 6.. and in a 100 probably 65-75..

i play 1v1 on ww2 poland when bored a infamous map if you are unlucky making your move.. i still win 68% 1v1's on this map so i guess the 4-leaf-clove diet helps

[Woodruff]

I see several old threads on a similar idea. Arguing at work. What is the fraction of luck to strategy of Conquer Club/Risk? This is an opinion based argument, so don't take ti too personally if people disagree with your ideas.

I liken Conquer Club to Poker. As with Poker, in any given game, luck plays about 99% of it. But over the course of 1000 games, the stronger strategies show through as players show they can consistently put themselves into position so that the luck affects them the least, at which point I would put "luck over the course of those 1000 games" at about 15%.

[medgar20]

I tend to view it as similar to poker or some other similar game, ultimately it depends on the number of games (sample size) you're talking about. In any one game luck will always be a far bigger factor than any level of skill/strategy, the best player can lose to the worst player easily if the dice don't fall his or her way. Over 10000 games the better player will almost certainly come out ahead as the effect of variance from dice rolls will have been reduced to a large extent. Over a million games the variance is even less etc.

edit, or what woodruff said. Same minute reply, similar content. Freaky

[MichelSableheart]

It really depends on the settings, IMO. I'm used to playing larger standard multiplayer games, and my experience suggests that those are almost always decided by strategy rather then luck. On the other hand, it's difficult to argue that strategy plays an important role in doodle assassin.

[Iron Butterfly]

why can some people hold a high rank and maintain win% far over average? are they just lucky say 70% of the time? question kind of answers itself..

even 1v1 strategy wins over luck in the long run.. i would say even in a few games like 10 the better player will get atleast 6.. and in a 100 probably 65-75..

i play 1v1 on ww2 poland when bored a infamous map if you are unlucky making your move.. i still win 68% 1v1's on this map so i guess the 4-leaf-clove diet helps

If you look at these folks who hold the top ranks they play team games. I have yet to see anyone in the top ranks who hold it playing solo.

With one vs one more often then not the person who goes first will win...that is they get a good drop. 1 vs 1 is more luck based as the drop dictates the win. Not always of course but if you go first and get blocked into a territory or are surrounded by neutrals its pretty much over.

I like to think solo play dictates player skill. I have learned that the greatest strategist can be made to lookl stupid by the dice and the worst player made to look a genius.

Standard escalating and terminator escalting are my game of choice. I cant tell you how many close games I won or lost because I was dealt two pair vs a turn in for the win.

A well prepared player has a better chance of winning when luck does not go their way.

[nippersean]

mmmmm

[rockfist]

If it were just luck some people would not be consistantly good.

There are teams/players (Phatscotty's Quads team comes to mind) that I know I need to play my absolute best to beat and there are groups of people who I believe I could beat like a rented mule even with sub-optimal luck (pick a quads team of random captains or lower against my usual quads partners).

In two very evenly matched teams its a lot about luck. In most cases it its about reading the board and devising a strategy that works for the board and having the tactical skill to pull it off or the wisdom to adjust your strategy on the fly. Strategy is what separates the above average from the average, tacitcs separtes the good from the above average and adjusting on the fly is what separates the good from the great.

Strategy and tactics can be learned. Adjusting on the fly is just gut feel. But the more games you play under a certain setting the better your gut feel becomes. I'd still say it can't be learned, you either have it or you don't, but if you have it, you can refine it.

[DunnJH4]

You guys are missing the gist of the question. I'd agree that, like poker, luck is a large factor in one game, but over thousands and thousands of hands skill begins to dictate the flow of money into or out of a players stack. My question was asking your opinion in a ONE GAME situation. 1v1, through how many factors can luck swing a game? The initial positioning, card turn ins (especially with flat rate), dice rolls, what else? I played a game with a coworker, got him down to 1 territory on World 2.1, but with escalating spoils he turned in for 50+ troops ad pushed me way back. My next two turns got my a bad run of spoils, couldn't turn in, and lost the game. I say that's luck playing a heavy hand in the game. Then we played again on City Mogul, and got two insanely lucky rolls (65vs60 and lost about 6 units), and it was over from there. I said I got lucky, and the guy disagreed...

[rockfist]

Well your opponent could lose his internet connection without deploying, I'd chalk that up to luck.

1v1 is going to come down to a lot of luck compared to other game sizes. Trips or Quads is not much about luck.

[john9blue]

I liken Conquer Club to Poker. As with Poker, in any given game, luck plays about 99% of it. But over the course of 1000 games, the stronger strategies show through as players show they can consistently put themselves into position so that the luck affects them the least, at which point I would put "luck over the course of those 1000 games" at about 15%.

This post sums it up nicely.

However, there are more cheap ways to get a higher rank in CC, whereas in Poker luck plays a slightly bigger factor.

[natty dread]

1v1 flat rate is literally a coin toss.

[rockfist]

Its close to a coin toss, but it isn't. It depends on what map you are on, but there is some strategy involved.

[Qwert]

Strategy vs Luck.
I can give you example:
If two player are good -game will decide luck-who first start geting bad dices-and other get good dices-you will get winner by luck.

Many times i had good strategy and manage to be close to victory,but then dices turn mine strategy back,and instead to strategy win a game ,i lost because lucky dices help to mine opponent win a game.
Agains bad dices, your strategy are not going to work.
If you want to win,you must have luck,because without luck,your chance for win its depend on your opponents mistakes,but then again these is some sort of luck.

[rockfist]

The best players put themselves in position to take advantage of their luck.

For instance I played a 2v2 where I did not select my partner and both I and my partner had early sets, I tried to talk my partner into attacking only one of our opponents so that I could take him out on my turn...instead he focused on breaking their bonus and attacked a stack of nine...had good luck and did that and took out a few more of their other territories but instead of one opponent with 7-8 armies on the board in a fairly tight group and one with 30 and a bonus we had one with 12 spread in a shotgun pattern and one with 20 and no bonus. I was not able to take out the opponent with 12 due to the spread and with their sets they coordinated them and were able to take me out later. My partner had good luck, but did not put us in position to use it the best way.

Needless to say I am not teaming up with him again soon.

[Turbowheel]

Luck is important but not very essential ultimately. Yes, there is luck needed in the early parts of a game to capture the first territories, but after that strategy can help reduce that chance of losing. Example is that you can manipulate an opponent to expose a weaker force than you against you, and because of the almost equal 1 for 1 trade save for the last one or two on a territory against you, you win have one a important battle and if you did it right, wouldn't have exposed yourself to a devastating attack. Also, it has been observed by me than numerically superior armies many times gets a majority of usually good luck in their assaults on weaker forces. Other than that luck is a make it or break it in equal size armies and a not very good chance of success for a weaker army to take on a bigger army.

[benga]

I mostly lose when I make bad moves
Also bad luck comes with bad strategy

[Kiron]

If you look at these folks who hold the top ranks they play team games. I have yet to see anyone in the top ranks who hold it playing solo.

I like to think solo play dictates player skill. I have learned that the greatest strategist can be made to lookl stupid by the dice and the worst player made to look a genius.

Standard escalating and terminator escalting are my game of choice. I cant tell you how many close games I won or lost because I was dealt two pair vs a turn in for the win.

A well prepared player has a better chance of winning when luck does not go their way.

There are plenty of players who can make top ranks by going solo. Luck's impact depends ALOT on the setting. In escalation, luck has a huge impact because of number of cards to get a set. While in flatrate, not as much. though, luck has a HUGE impact in the first 4 rounds because that can dicate whether or not u have a solid base to claim ur own or straggling alone a few armies hoping to survive. Though in my experience, usually after the first cash-in in flatrate games, luck slowly goes away as diplomacy usually takes over where players start vying for board advantage.

[Arama86n]

If you look at these folks who hold the top ranks they play team games. I have yet to see anyone in the top ranks who hold it playing solo.

haha, go to scoreboard, look up Kiron, Xiangwang, both around 10th...
One could prolly give a long list of people in top 250.

I find it quite amusing to see that in this thread, those that blatantly suggest luck is 99% are all PFC, where as the captains and majors word their posts a little more diplomatically suggesting luck is ofc important, but that the strategically more competent player will take home the most games end of the day. (I agree)

Firstly, what separates the colonels from the cooks is game selection. No one gets to General by blindfolding them self and randomly joining 50 games in the "join a game" function, few would even get to Major that way.

The skilled player makes sure the odds are firmly stacked in his favour before the game even begins, by combining map & settings to minimise the luck factor, and maximise the complexity of the situation and thus the confusion of the enemy.

Luck? If luck is 99% of CC how can HA join pretty much any tourney, any maps any settings, and be so successful?

Luck? if luck is 99% of CC how has thebest712 have won the last 28 games in a row. Go play him 1v1 on his map and his settings, hell go play him 20 times, bring a few friends. What will you accomplish? You'll prove my point, and see him sitting as conqueror by the end of the day.

For those of us not interested in playing freestyle speed, luck is a bigger factor. but by understanding the mechanics of the dice, by choosing maps and settings to minimise the luck factor, in the long run, there are those that will be successful, and then there are the rest of you. Keep blaming each loss on the dice, what would the t2000 do without you?

[stahrgazer]

No player can win if he has consistently unlucky dice at the wrong time in a game. If thebest rolled all 1's and his opponent rolled all 6's, thebest could never win. Period.

That said.. strategy does come into play, to position yourself properly in case the dice do turn your way. But they still have to roll your way to win and that's L.U.C.K.

[wisemanpsemc]

I tend to agree with many of the higher ranked players. I almost never say gl in game chat but rather have fun because while the luck can impact a game it is mostly strategy that will win it for you. Part of strategy is knowing when to stop, something I sometimes fail at. When the dice are "unlucky" stop and try again next turn. Don't lose the game because you are too stubborn to concede to that fact that you may not get a certain goal met in that turn. Luck goes away when you are patient with what you are given for that game.

Generally, CC comes down to what map are you comfortable on, what settings are you comfortable with and who you are playing. Anyone can come into a game and ruin the best strategy. In this case are you able to shift your plan and recovery. The "good" players will be able to and thus strategy will win the game.

[Woltato]

It's a combination of luck and skill. You can't win every game no matter how good you are as sometimes things such as dice, drop, noob suicidal attacks, spoils, can all go against you and there's nothing you can do about it.

However over many games good and bad luck evens out and eveyone gets their fair share of both. CC is similar to poker in a lot of ways, the key is to try and understand the odds in each situation and go for moves that give you favourable odds, that is take your chances where the reward outweighs the risk. Good players do this and in the long run will win more games than not so good players.

[tkr4lf]

I think it is a combination of the two. Maybe 60% luck and 40% strategy. Without a good strategy, there is no way to win unless the dice consistently go your way. Without luck, there is no way to win as the dice would consistently not go your way. So, I think both are important. And I agree that the best players will put themselves into a position to take advantage of the luck when it shows up.

[Obrens]

In a standard 4-player escalating game luck:strategy=70:30.
That's just my opinion.