Conquer Club

Ok we all know it...
i was recently having an argument in live chat and someone said the number of games u play against one person reduces the luck which is prolly true to a degree my argument is if 2 people come up against each other 1v1 both understand 1v1 tactics and play, both understanding the map then the game comes entirely down to luck? agree...thought comments

Who goes first, drop, dice play a big role in 1v1. Especially if you go second on a map with 12, 15, 18 territories, etc. You can still come back from it, but you are already down on your first go. I think there is a lot of luck involved. On some maps, it is skill, i.e. Feudal with fog.

If you played freestyle with fog, it evens it out more I suppose - luck and skill.

I do like 1v1.

Huh? I think is what you are saying is the drop is most important if the players both understand the map? And then after that the dice are most dependant? I think there is always some skill or "risk management" that does come into play.

No, depends almost entirely on drop...

jbrettlip wrote:Huh? I think is what you are saying is the drop is most important if the players both understand the map? And then after that the dice are most dependant? I think there is always some skill or "risk management" that does come into play.

yer thats what im saying....if both players understand this concept and know how to play the game well then wat does the game come down to luck of the drop, luck of the dice?

I think the "auto attack" button could play a big role. I have been playing some games, where attacking never occurs. Or if it does, it is very limited. Playing the odds and stats is a key component. So yes, if skills are equal, and knowledge is equal, it comes down to luck. Seems to be a basic conclusion. Same could be said for any game.

lord voldemort wrote:

jbrettlip wrote:Huh? I think is what you are saying is the drop is most important if the players both understand the map? And then after that the dice are most dependant? I think there is always some skill or "risk management" that does come into play.

yer thats what im saying....if both players understand this concept and know how to play the game well then wat does the game come down to luck of the drop, luck of the dice?

oh...luck of the drop.

If the skill of all players in any game were completely equal, it would always come down to luck. The thing is, COMPLETELY equal is pretty hard to find. However, 1v1 definitely increases the luck factor.

Depends on the map. But a lot of it is luck. No cards on 1v1 is the best way to go so the only thing left up to luck is the dice, instead of the dice and the cards/who goes first, etc.

1v1 freestyle FTW

InsomniaRed wrote:Depends on the map. But a lot of it is luck. No cards on 1v1 is the best way to go so the only thing left up to luck is the dice, instead of the dice and the cards/who goes first, etc.

There's still the drop, which plays a pretty substantial role (not as much as the dice, but perhaps more than the cards, should cards be a factor).

Incandenza wrote:

InsomniaRed wrote:Depends on the map. But a lot of it is luck. No cards on 1v1 is the best way to go so the only thing left up to luck is the dice, instead of the dice and the cards/who goes first, etc.

There's still the drop, which plays a pretty substantial role (not as much as the dice, but perhaps more than the cards, should cards be a factor).

I think freestyle neutralizes the drop somewhat. Although I used to think the game was luck based until I did a map rank on my 1 vs 1s. Considering how much I've lost in the game type- I certainly think there's more skill involved than I'd like to admit.

After playing a bunch of 1v1,winning depends on:

40% drop
30% who goes first
20% skill
10% dice

there's no getting around this in the current format, yet it's still fun to play...but DON'T expect to make many points in 1v1...

MajorRT wrote:After playing a bunch of 1v1,winning depends on:

40% drop
30% who goes first
20% skill
10% dice

there's no getting around this in the current format, yet it's still fun to play...but DON'T expect to make many points in 1v1...

lol how did u come up with those numbers

lord voldemort wrote:

MajorRT wrote:After playing a bunch of 1v1,winning depends on:

40% drop
30% who goes first
20% skill
10% dice

there's no getting around this in the current format, yet it's still fun to play...but DON'T expect to make many points in 1v1...

lol how did u come up with those numbers

How- eerm because the total comes to 100% ?

Unless one person is a total retard, 1 vs. 1 is mostly luck.

Simon Viavant wrote:Unless one person is a total retard, 1 vs. 1 is mostly luck.

And you base this opinion on the five 1v1 games you've played?

1v1 is not completely based on luck...

for example... you play 1v1 on classic, seq, flat/esc, sunny/fog

both players start with 14 territs. player 1 decides a)i need to get a card and/or b)i need to take s. america/australia and/or c) if i get good dice i can take him down to 11 so he only gets 3 armies

player 1 could conceivably do all 3, but lets say his rolls aren't so good, he takes out 2 countries, and gets another down to 2 with 3 countries of his own surrounding him.

if he's dumb, he keeps attacking til he gets it, weakening himself

lets say he doesn't even take 1 country going 7v3 (which is what most people attack w/ if they don't really care about what else is going on on the board) and ends up 2v2 or something... he could continue attacking hoping for a card

or he might keep going for a continent.

then player 2 kicks his ass.

but if player 1 is smart, he'll press attack instead of auto-attack, see what's up, and decide whether or not the card is worth it.

i used to be stupid player 1. i'm still pretty much stupid player 1.

but i know whats up most of the time, so i can win a couple games here and there.

there's a lot more to it than luck

Scott-Land wrote:

lord voldemort wrote:

MajorRT wrote:After playing a bunch of 1v1,winning depends on:

40% drop
30% who goes first
20% skill
10% dice

there's no getting around this in the current format, yet it's still fun to play...but DON'T expect to make many points in 1v1...

lol how did u come up with those numbers

How- eerm because the total comes to 100% ?

What about the other things that come into play?...
25% premium membership bias on dice rolls
20% higher rank bias on rolls
45% if you mention the word 'dice' in game chat, no matter what the context, you get worse rolls
15% whether or not you use auto-attack
10% how quickly you click the attack button
3% whether you have contributed to the ongoing wicked threads
28% if you are a multi
13% if your score is a prime number no less than 875

e_i_pi wrote:

Scott-Land wrote:

lord voldemort wrote:

MajorRT wrote:After playing a bunch of 1v1,winning depends on:

40% drop
30% who goes first
20% skill
10% dice

there's no getting around this in the current format, yet it's still fun to play...but DON'T expect to make many points in 1v1...

lol how did u come up with those numbers

How- eerm because the total comes to 100% ?

What about the other things that come into play?...
25% premium membership bias on dice rolls
20% higher rank bias on rolls
45% if you mention the word 'dice' in game chat, no matter what the context, you get worse rolls
15% whether or not you use auto-attack
10% how quickly you click the attack button
3% whether you have contributed to the ongoing wicked threads
28% if you are a multi
13% if your score is a prime number no less than 875

That gave me a good laugh!

I'd say it comes down to 70-30 skill- luck.
However, that argument the OP made isn't really valid-- I'm yet to find two people that are completely equal-- skill-wise... in the end, it really comes down who makes the smarter move at THE moment. Of course, dice aside.
Even if people are equally skilled- doesn't mean their respective skills even each other out so it comes down to luck.

It was me you were having that argument with in live chat. You're just trying to claim that the one game you won against me was skill and not luck.

if 2 players are strategically equal in evrey way, the game will have to be decided by luck

lozzini wrote:if 2 players are strategically equal in evrey way, the game will have to be decided by luck

Pfft- name two people you know of that are strategically equal in every way.

precisely, which is why the question is pointless, one player has to be better than the other, and this effect how much of the result is down to luck