Does winning reflect the skill of a player?

[teamusa]

In my opinion, if both players are good, winning does not determine who is "better". All it takes is for one of the players to get a few more lucky blocks than the other and... bam!! You just lost/won by 60HP.

I just got out of a game with 3 50HP knights vs 3 50HP knights. When my knights were attacked from the side they only blocked 1 out of 4 attacks. When I attacked the opponents from the side, their knights blocked 3 out of 4. Needless to say, I lost by a 33 HP knight.

I see people getting all upset over losing and stuff. Hey, winning a game is like Las Vegas. It's all about luck. But Las Vegas is also about having fun too. You win some you lose some. It sucks when you lose on bad luck especially when you know you made better moves than your oponent.

[KBHoleN1]

Thank you for restating the obvious.

[teamusa]

If Luck is "obvious" then how do players get ranked so high? (like 1800+) I mean, if two people are good players and luck determines the outcome... does that mean that a player with a much higher ranking is just more lucky than the rest?

[Worker]

Thank you for restating the obvious.oh heaven forbid anyone ask a question.


If Luck is "obvious" then how do players get ranked so high? (like 1800+) I mean, if two people are good players and luck determines the outcome... does that mean that a player with a much higher ranking is just more lucky than the rest?

Better players minimize the potential that luck can have on the outcome of a game.

[steve12]

oh heaven forbid anyone ask a question.




Better players minimize the potential that luck can have on the outcome of a game.

Very true. And this thread wasn't needed man. I think the question should be "Do stats determine the skill of a player?"

Most of the time, nope.

[bludhoundz]

If Luck is "obvious" then how do players get ranked so high? (like 1800+) I mean, if two people are good players and luck determines the outcome... does that mean that a player with a much higher ranking is just more lucky than the rest?

Some players pick and choose their games.

Others get lucky.

There are a few that actually just have surpassed most other "good" players. Even with a bit of bad luck, they can take down the other opponent just because they are a better player. There are just a few of these really high tier players (or rather, sometimes someone goes on a playing streak where they play like one of these players).

[Anarchy_United]

Some players pick and choose their games.

Others get lucky.

There are a few that actually just have surpassed most other "good" players. Even with a bit of bad luck, they can take down the other opponent just because they are a better player. There are just a few of these really high tier players (or rather, sometimes someone goes on a playing streak where they play like one of these players).

On rev I went on a winning streak recently, I went from 1150 to 1305 without losing a game. I was playing the best I have ever played. There is much more to TAO then luck. There is no such thing as to evenly matched opponents, there are so many components going into a game, and skills with different formations.

[Dragonforces]

And another thing, don't depend on luck. That does not show skill and potential, only that you are dependant of luck and it shows that you are not a good player.

[scb]

Depending on luck can be the right thing to do in some cases - specifically, if you're losing. I have pulled out of some bad positions by depending on luck. If you can win without luck, that is far better because you won't get the Las Vegas "win a few, lose a few" situation, but it's always best to give luck the opportunity to benefit you if you can do so without sacrificing something solid.

You have to be prepared for the chance, not just take it out of the picture. I believe that luck decides between nearly equal players - a real skill difference can overcome luck.

[Anarchy_United]

Depending on luck can be the right thing to do in some cases - specifically, if you're losing. I have pulled out of some bad positions by depending on luck. If you can win without luck, that is far better because you won't get the Las Vegas "win a few, lose a few" situation, but it's always best to give luck the opportunity to benefit you if you can do so without sacrificing something solid.

You have to be prepared for the chance, not just take it out of the picture. I believe that luck decides between nearly equal players - a real skill difference can overcome luck.

Las Vegas is, win a few, lose a lot.

[Perfect]

"winning is like winning in los vegas" i beg to differ lol winning does require skill unlike the slot machines etc. :P if your playing a complete noob, winning is like winning in los vegas? :P haha jp wit chu haha i know what you mean

[Perfect]

Some players pick and choose their games.

Others get lucky.

There are a few that actually just have surpassed most other "good" players. Even with a bit of bad luck, they can take down the other opponent just because they are a better player. There are just a few of these really high tier players (or rather, sometimes someone goes on a playing streak where they play like one of these players).

hmm i dont pick and choose my games do you bludz? i mean i win like 90% of my games and i dont pick and choose. obviously im not jumping noobs or playing 1200+ golds but i play ppl at my own skill level. im sure you win much of your games also.

[Ninai]

Even good players make mistakes.

[ducky doodoo]

yea cuz look at m3h winns and m3h skil they are very closely related

[KBHoleN1]

In my opinion, luck is more than blocking. Luck can be found in setups (because every setup has preferred forms it wants to face). You can "get lucky" because you randomly moved your dsm one to the left. Sure, formations are an art, but there's still an element of luck because you're never sure what your opponent will use.

Also, luck can have a lot to do with how a game plays out. Let's say I attack with my scout, and retreat to one of two spots, both of which offer the same immediate advantage (i.e. - blocking LOS to cleric, avoiding ranged units that could attack my scout, being in stone range, etc...). But 5 or 6 moves later, a new situation develops (that for the most part was unforeseeable), and by having my scout in one space rather than the other, I am in a better position. I got lucky because I picked the "right" spot when there was no right spot.

I have played many a game where for lack of a better option I move to a random spot, without considering ALL the advantages. But then later it turns out I moved to exactly the right spot, or more often, I was one space from where I needed to be, and being in that space would have won me the game.

Sometimes good moves are nothing more than lucky guesses. The less you guess, the better a player you are. I think that's how these things work out. You eliminate as much luck as you can, and rely on careful planning (and backup plans in case you get "unlucky").

[pils]

Yeah, i try not to rely on luck except in the most dire situations in which luck is the only thing that can save me.
Even then it sucks to win a game from probability/luck over skill.

But like in your situation justin, i would have positioned my knights in a way that i would go for mostly back hits, and make it hard for them to go for my back. While at the same time isolating his knights one or two at a time to smother them with attacks.

From the sounds of it justin that was a luck based game. Because you both, from the sound of it, just kinda duked it out and went for the side shots.
It seems like you were both around the same skill level, and those games are always fun.

If one of you had been just *that* much better than the other you would have positioned your knights in different places and would have won with ease... going for the sure shot hits. And attacking in groups so that you weren't swarmed.

But either way, sounds like it was a great game. And in the end thats all that matters.

[steve12]

In my opinion, luck is more than blocking. Luck can be found in setups (because every setup has preferred forms it wants to face). You can "get lucky" because you randomly moved your dsm one to the left. Sure, formations are an art, but there's still an element of luck because you're never sure what your opponent will use.

Also, luck can have a lot to do with how a game plays out. Let's say I attack with my scout, and retreat to one of two spots, both of which offer the same immediate advantage (i.e. - blocking LOS to cleric, avoiding ranged units that could attack my scout, being in stone range, etc...). But 5 or 6 moves later, a new situation develops (that for the most part was unforeseeable), and by having my scout in one space rather than the other, I am in a better position. I got lucky because I picked the "right" spot when there was no right spot.

I have played many a game where for lack of a better option I move to a random spot, without considering ALL the advantages. But then later it turns out I moved to exactly the right spot, or more often, I was one space from where I needed to be, and being in that space would have won me the game.

Sometimes good moves are nothing more than lucky guesses. The less you guess, the better a player you are. I think that's how these things work out. You eliminate as much luck as you can, and rely on careful planning (and backup plans in case you get "unlucky").

That's why you have to predict what is going to happen, and how you plan to play the game out in later turns. It sounds like you need to plan a little more of your moves. The most experienced players can see something 4-5 turns before the player goes for it.

[Anarchy_United]

In my opinion, if both players are good, winning does not determine who is "better". All it takes is for one of the players to get a few more lucky blocks than the other and... bam!! You just lost/won by 60HP.

I just got out of a game with 3 50HP knights vs 3 50HP knights. When my knights were attacked from the side they only blocked 1 out of 4 attacks. When I attacked the opponents from the side, their knights blocked 3 out of 4. Needless to say, I lost by a 33 HP knight.

I see people getting all upset over losing and stuff. Hey, winning a game is like Las Vegas. It's all about luck. But Las Vegas is also about having fun too. You win some you lose some. It sucks when you lose on bad luck especially when you know you made better moves than your oponent.
Vegas isn't all luck. You can win at BlackJack(if you are smart enough) or poker if you are good enough. Most of the other games are unable to be beat, but they make money from poker by the house take. BlackJack is able to be beaten, and has been beaten.

Also, does losing reflect skill?

[Cuathon]

That's why you have to predict what is going to happen, and how you plan to play the game out in later turns. It sounds like you need to plan a little more of your moves. The most experienced players can see something 4-5 turns before the player goes for it.

no they dont. ive played amny great players and often they have no idea. they guess less, but not by that much. 4-5 moves? rarely.

[bludhoundz]

I don't constantly think 4-5 moves ahead. Once in a while, when I'm in a tight situation and need to see the outcome of one of 2 or 3 possible choices, I'll look several moves ahead. Other times, if I'm way ahead and I'm just planning how to win faster, I'll be up to like 8 moves ahead..

But in a hard game, 4-5 moves ahead is very difficult to keep up, since you might miss something, or a block might go askew, changing your whole gameplan. It's not always best to rely too far ahead, because if you overlook something in between, you have to rethink your whole plan.

And yeah, Cu is right.. not a lot of people think that far ahead.

[steve12]

Let me say that again. 2-3 moves ahead*. And yes, they will have to have backup plans just in case the luck doesn't work in their favor. But generally, one of two spots willbe better in the long run despite what hits.

[powza]

Also, luck can have a lot to do with how a game plays out. Let's say I attack with my scout, and retreat to one of two spots, both of which offer the same immediate advantage (i.e. - blocking LOS to cleric, avoiding ranged units that could attack my scout, being in stone range, etc...). But 5 or 6 moves later, a new situation develops (that for the most part was unforeseeable), and by having my scout in one space rather than the other, I am in a better position. I got lucky because I picked the "right" spot when there was no right spot.


Couldnt of said it better myself...That is SOOOO true

[pils]

Let me say that again. 2-3 moves ahead*. And yes, they will have to have backup plans just in case the luck doesn't work in their favor. But generally, one of two spots willbe better in the long run despite what hits.

that makes more sense...
I do that.

4-5... thats going to far.
Its best to look at your options and then see what the outcome of it would be.
Sometimes i will spend the entire length of my turn figuring out what my best move will be. It usually works out.

I see Mith's tourny consiting of long games. At least for me.

[Match Strike]

I'm not sure how else one would determine who is better other than looking at the winner of a given game...

[imagination]

i actually only look 1-2 move ahead in most situations. i ahve a gameplan but specific moves, no. alot of times i catch myself getting farther and farther ahead and thats when i start losing because i am playing my game, not the game that is happening.

[teamusa]

I'm not sure how else one would determine who is better other than looking at the winner of a given game...

Match, in many cases, the winner of a given game is not the "best" player. As already mentioned earlier in this thread, luck plays a big factor especially when both players are near the same skill level.

I would say to determine the better player you would need to mitigate luck as much as possible. So a 5 or 7 games series with the same opponent would help to mitigate the luck. Just one game with a single opponent would hardly provide enough support that one is better than the other.

[Dragonforces]

But you should have an alternative move which is a lot more safer than depending on luck. You should be brave and take a risk and hope for the best, however one should not be dependant on lucky hits. You can get luck in different formation types, however Opp Side Turt Games are the hardest type of style and there is no need to depend on luck in this style. You play your best, show some skill, do some good moves and as a result, you will WIN.

[Hoolwath]

Excuses, excuses.

There are those top notch players who win 14/15 games. Not because of luck or choosing an opponent, but because of simply outplaying him.

I remember carlos22, or the guy who played on the account, he got top 5 on all FPS servers. He just went from server to server pasting the sentence: **"Any 1300+ golds Turtle game, no GA, no DSM?*** And when someone said yes in one window he won the game and continued. And he outplayed me many many times. I won the 8th game, I guess. And that was when I knew how to play the game.

He got up there without luck and without choosing opponents.

[teamusa]

Excuses, excuses.

There are those top notch players who win 14/15 games. Not because of luck or choosing an opponent, but because of simply outplaying him.

I remember carlos22, or the guy who played on the account, he got top 5 on all FPS servers. He just went from server to server pasting the sentence: **"Any 1300+ golds Turtle game, no GA, no DSM?*** And when someone said yes in one window he won the game and continued. And he outplayed me many many times. I won the 8th game, I guess. And that was when I knew how to play the game.

He got up there without luck and without choosing opponents.


Sure, for opp side turt I may agree. But with freestyle ALOT of it is luck.

[bludhoundz]

Gladiator was one of the better freestylers I knew.. I only beat him at it once, and I got incredibly lucky.

He wasn't a fluke.

[Teacher]

It is my personal opinion that the idea of luck happens in many things that we do. I would not go so far as to say, that a game is won mostly by luck. There is indeed quite a bit of skill involved (hence the reason I lose most of the time). However, I also believe that when a game comes down to only two pieces with similar HP, someone probably made a mistake at some point during the game.

The only time luck is involved is when someone either takes a chance with his/her piece or when they've made a mistake to allow their opponent the opportunity to attack it.

[Dragonforces]

^^ Thats what I call luck, where you are risking your move in hope to achieve a hit or something. However, those people in the top 100 most have not depended on this, and they must play Ubercool and outstand them with skill.

[teamusa]

Gladiator was one of the better freestylers I knew.. I only beat him at it once, and I got incredibly lucky.

He wasn't a fluke.

LMAO, I love the banner you made for Mag... especially the little hat on the "M"

[The Coder]

No. I mean, I win all the time.


Anyway, a lot of my opponents win because of misclicks. (In grey)
In gold, its a miracle if I win.

[Dragonforces]

Well a suggestion is to get a better mouse or take your time in clicking :P And practice with your gold, dont care about the stats, because once you conquere a skill, you can get winning streaks and get easy stats like that.