myhandisonfire WarLight Member
Game changing luck is not only the simple math of armies clashing, but who gets the first order in the critical moment decides plenty of games by itself.
finally someone who made some sens
luck is a primary factor.
The problem lies with complexity.
Skill vs luck vs experience(in the map/settings) vs mood vs time available.
It has been proven that multi day games show better moves then real time games.
So i bet no disagreement there that time available is a factor.
Mood is also a factor, if one is drunk then it is likely to perform differently then usual when playing, so if he is tired or with a headache.
So i bet no argument there.
Now some may disagree here but it is clear to me that skill and experience in a particular map are 2 different things that do work hand in hand.
You can be the best player of warlight with regards to skill but if u never played a map you wouldn't be able to know every thing there is to know about it.
eg what is the best positioning to be in at turn 20 or so. One can try to guess but in the end you need a couple of games with different scenarios and different players to really grasp the best starting positions of the map in the long run.
Even different settings may trow all your skills out the window and change the game completely.
all these are quite strait forward, the better players has better chances of victory.
when it comes to luck and playing against an average or above average player luck may decide the game.
So looking at stats of players with different skill levels is useless, don't bother asking fizzer to waste his time.
the problem with luck is that luck factors are just too many in this game:
1) loosing your first and getting bad counters
2) missing on neutrals with 16% luck
3) your enemy not missing on neutrals with risky moves thus getting superior expansion rate.
4) first moves decide games
5) last moves decide games
6) unlucky on guessing the enemy tactics(agressive/defensive)(not when done on purpose but just because he was drunk or something), resulting in your not best move.
7) guessing correctly the amount the enemy reinforces is mostly luck.(in equal probability scenarios)
8) in equal probability scenarios of attack/defense on multiple fronts, guessing the right place to defend/attack.
9) bad luck of not having the right card in time could decide the game.(if i had that blockade 1 turn before)
10) luck on having Intel on enemy locations by sheer chance which gives you an edge on the enemy.
11) not loosing your first but loosing other some other vital picks and their counters.
and it goes on like this....
The main point here is that while the other factors have levels(not drastic advantages
), the luck factors are just too effective(very drastic advantages
) in the game and too many.
So if i had to give a ratio of how much all these luck factors effect a game of 2 equally skilled players with equal experience, all i need to do is looking at some of their games and see that most of the time if not all the times, they win or loose because of a luck factor mentioned above.
On very rare occasions one would completely outsmart the other.
this means that luck is the main factor when comparing 2 people of the same skill and experience.
but in warlight we don't have everybody with the same skills and experience, we have a jungle of variety.
so skills and experience, tactics and styles have an effect but they are in now way even close to the size of the luck factor when above average players are playing.
so my ratio would be:
50-60% luck factor which includes all those mentioned and more
20-30% skills, time, mood and styles
20% experience in the map
That is why you see skilled players winning glorious games against pros then later you see them loosing a game to an average player.
This wouldn't happen if the game wasn't around 50-60% luck based.