Conquer Club

What is the skill luck ratio in CC?

Luck can come in the form of
3 red instead of rainbow
Having to wait 5 cards instead of 3 each time
Rotten attacking and defensive dice
Not having the countries that match your cards

Skill takes the form of
troop deployment
when to attack and when to build
When to cash cards

Also let's throw Esc games into the mix do you think they increase the skill element or allow players to get lucky?

Just want to say I resubscribed after a 6 month absence and it's great fun

Discuss....

allow me to quote myself.

Supermarioluigi wrote:CC is 50% luck, 50% skill, and 50% $25.

Supermarioluigi wrote:allow me to quote myself.

Supermarioluigi wrote:CC is 50% luck, 50% skill, and 50% $25.

hahaha, that's good, supermarioluigi.

Supermarioluigi wrote:allow me to quote myself.

Supermarioluigi wrote:CC is 50% luck, 50% skill, and 50% $25.

Thank you, Yogi Berra. <laughing>

i would say that flat rat sequential LARGE maps have the most skill in them them with the least amount of luck and esclating probably mostly skill and luck but then again skill and luck do are about the same on this site

78.2% skill and 21.8% luck

I had a supercomputer calculate that.

targetman377 wrote:i would say that flat rat sequential LARGE maps have the most skill in them them with the least amount of luck and esclating probably mostly skill and luck but then again skill and luck do are about the same on this site

Nope. Wrong. Flate Rate= LUCK, Large Maps=Skill, Escalating=Skill (unless youre playing with 5 or 6 other good players, then LUCK). I HATE FLAT RATE.

I'd say it's about 60% dice, 25% drop, and 15% skill.

I would say the luck factor is about 10%. The amount of skill involved is about double that.

StephenB wrote:I would say the luck factor is about 10%. The amount of skill involved is about double that.

What's the rest of the 70%?

targetman377 wrote:i would say that flat rat sequential LARGE maps have the most skill in them them with the least amount of luck and esclating probably mostly skill and luck but then again skill and luck do are about the same on this site

Haha you said flat rate = skill.

Spoils:

1. Escalating
2. No Spoils
3. Flat Rate

Maps:

1. Large
2. Medium
3. Small

Game Type:

1. 6-8man
2. Team
3. …
4. 1v1

So…

1. 8man esc on large maps

Play Order is too dependent on other things, though I'd gander on sequential for the majority of game types (8man esc is harder w/ fs due to steals, etc.)

the.killing.44 wrote:Spoils:

1. Escalating
2. No Spoils
3. Flat Rate

I definitely agree that Flat Rate is a lot less skill-dependent, but I would consider no-spoils to be more skillful than escalating. I do also agree with you that, in general, the larger the map and the larger number of participants, the more skill required.

If I win 100% skill.

If someone else wins it is 100% luck.

Beckytheblondie wrote:

targetman377 wrote:i would say that flat rat sequential LARGE maps have the most skill in them them with the least amount of luck and esclating probably mostly skill and luck but then again skill and luck do are about the same on this site

Nope. Wrong. Flate Rate= LUCK, Large Maps=Skill, Escalating=Skill (unless youre playing with 5 or 6 other good players, then LUCK). I HATE FLAT RATE.

On what do you base this? Just because you dislike flat rate, and just because a majority agree with you, (if they do), that flat rate is more luck based than escalating, doesn't prove that it is indeed true.

It would not be hard to make an argument that flat rate is more skill based than escalating. I'm not sure how to prove either position however.

It could even be argued that no-spoils is the most luck dependent. Bad start and you'll never even get cards to help even it back out.

Evil Semp wrote:If I win 100% skill.

If someone else wins it is 100% luck.

Codeblue is one of your multi's? <laughing>

JimRocky wrote:

Beckytheblondie wrote:

targetman377 wrote:i would say that flat rat sequential LARGE maps have the most skill in them them with the least amount of luck and esclating probably mostly skill and luck but then again skill and luck do are about the same on this site

Nope. Wrong. Flate Rate= LUCK, Large Maps=Skill, Escalating=Skill (unless youre playing with 5 or 6 other good players, then LUCK). I HATE FLAT RATE.

On what do you base this? Just because you dislike flat rate, and just because a majority agree with you, (if they do), that flat rate is more luck based than escalating, doesn't prove that it is indeed true.

The fact that you never know what you're going to get until you get it makes flat rate the most luck-based. With escalating, you can plan things out - know what's coming. With flat-rate, that's not possible...you're simply stuck with what you get.

JimRocky wrote:It would not be hard to make an argument that flat rate is more skill based than escalating. I'm not sure how to prove either position however.

I would love to hear that argument, because I can't see it.

JimRocky wrote:It could even be argued that no-spoils is the most luck dependent. Bad start and you'll never even get cards to help even it back out.

I disagree...no-spoils is probably the easiest to recover from a bad drop (unless the drop is just horrendous where one of your opponents has multiple bonuses or something like that). Of course, I'm not speaking of 1-vs-1, as that is largely luck-based in and of itself.

Woodruff wrote:

JimRocky wrote:

Beckytheblondie wrote:

targetman377 wrote:i would say that flat rat sequential LARGE maps have the most skill in them them with the least amount of luck and esclating probably mostly skill and luck but then again skill and luck do are about the same on this site

Nope. Wrong. Flate Rate= LUCK, Large Maps=Skill, Escalating=Skill (unless youre playing with 5 or 6 other good players, then LUCK). I HATE FLAT RATE.

On what do you base this? Just because you dislike flat rate, and just because a majority agree with you, (if they do), that flat rate is more luck based than escalating, doesn't prove that it is indeed true.

The fact that you never know what you're going to get until you get it makes flat rate the most luck-based. With escalating, you can plan things out - know what's coming. With flat-rate, that's not possible...you're simply stuck with what you get.

JimRocky wrote:It would not be hard to make an argument that flat rate is more skill based than escalating. I'm not sure how to prove either position however.

I would love to hear that argument, because I can't see it.

JimRocky wrote:It could even be argued that no-spoils is the most luck dependent. Bad start and you'll never even get cards to help even it back out.

I disagree...no-spoils is probably the easiest to recover from a bad drop (unless the drop is just horrendous where one of your opponents has multiple bonuses or something like that). Of course, I'm not speaking of 1-vs-1, as that is largely luck-based in and of itself.

How about this. With flat rate, while it is true you won't know exactly the cards you will receive to cash in, you do know they will range from 4 to 10. You also know that your opponents cards will range from 4 to 10 in value. So there are no huge piles of armies waiting to be collected, just 10 at the most.

With escalating though, often games progress where the next turn in will reap a huge benefit. So who gets the lucky 3 card set and who was unlucky to have to draw out to five cards before being able to collect? Or who is wiped out because they didn't get that lucky card when they needed it? Just one card, one turn, pure luck, they are finished.

With flat rate you have to use more territory and bonus holding strategy, rather than hoping for lucky piles of armies at just the right time. A player can get lucky cards in flat rate, but still be defeated by a person who uses good strategy. In escalating, if you get attacked by someone attempting to take your cards, or your attempt to eliminate another fails, you are left open and usually without a viable strategy except to hope for another lucky quick card set to turn in.

Depends on the perspective.

If you ask a good player, it's all skill.

If you ask a bad player, it's all luck.

and if you ask a good player they will still tell you luck has a large factor....

if you have shit dice you dont win.... (majoritively)

check me... my dice are the worst i have ever seen them and i was at 2800 last week....

luck plays a larger factor than skill....


ps. this depends on game type

I was going to quote myself too, but I didn't feel like diggiging up the last thread that asked this question.


1 game, probably 60% luck. 10 games, maybe25% luck. You record over 1,000 games, probably 1% luck. So you can beat a better player in one game, but if he is truly better, and you play a large number of games against him, he will win more games almost always.

Now, as for the one game, how much luck will depend on map and settings. 1 game on doodle, 1v1 lets say, with flat rate spoils, 98% luck. 1 game on AOM with no spoils, maybe 40% luck.

1 game on france, no spoils 0% luck, 100% skill Joking, its my favorite map.

StephenB wrote:I would say the luck factor is about 10%. The amount of skill involved is about double that.

10% luck
20% skill
15% concentrated power and will
5% pleasure
50% pain
and 100 % reason to remember the name

Good song


Thought I really want to know what StephenB thinks the other 70% of CC is composed of, if 10% is luck, and 20% is skill... maybe 70% $25?

Commander62890 wrote:Good song


Thought I really want to know what StephenB thinks the other 70% of CC is composed of, if 10% is luck, and 20% is skill... maybe 70% $25?

The video your avatar's from is a good one too. Highly amusing. As for your question... ljex either read my mind or he thinks exactly the same as me.

ljex wrote:

StephenB wrote:I would say the luck factor is about 10%. The amount of skill involved is about double that.

10% luck
20% skill
15% concentrated power and will
5% pleasure
50% pain
and 100 % reason to remember the name