Conquer Club

xeno wrote:2 player doodle earth = SKILL!!

Sarcasm has no place on the internet.

Snorri1234 wrote:Trolling General Discussion.

But it was I who bumped this 2 year old thread (to the day)
AND YET NOBODY NOTICED!!!!

(till now)

I noticed as soon as I read the comment about double turns allowed Plus with characters like highborn, qeeee and marv being the main contributors you have to realize that something is up. Ah, those were the days.

Robinette wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:Trolling General Discussion.

But it was I who bumped this 2 year old thread (to the day)
AND YET NOBODY NOTICED!!!!

(till now)

trust me.. it was noticed... why? had i done it, i'd be in a time out, without question... yet another double standard running amok!!!-0

Nothing wrong with bumping an old thread to discuss it further. The only time we frown upon bumping threads is when when it's done to excess just to spam. Thanks for bumping, now it can be moved to it's proper place (since strategy subforum didn't exist back then!). Always fun to read the really old stuff.

Although I disagree that Escalating takes the most skill. I think maps have changed SO much, we can't really generalize anymore about which setting is hardest. For example, no cards on classic takes more skill to win than no cards on any AOR map.

wicked wrote:Nothing wrong with bumping an old thread to discuss it further.

thanks for that info! i'm going to save this PM and keep it in reserve for future reference...-0

No problem, just don't forget the second part about spam.

No Cards games take the most skill to win imo, because Flat Rate games are dependent on card colors and Escalating games require being in the right place in the right time. Really, though, having skill can greatly improve your chances of winning all three.

Also, generally speaking, large maps require more skill than small maps, because luck balances out and is less of a factor.

john9blue wrote:Escalating games require being in the right place in the right time

Then perhaps a skill factor is positioning yourself at the right place?

White Moose wrote:

john9blue wrote:Escalating games require being in the right place in the right time

Then perhaps a skill factor is positioning yourself at the right place?

Escalating is really a sensitive topic in the forums... people seem to think that I am invalidating their high rank or something.

Yes, of course, escalating has a skill factor, that is why people are able to win over 50% of the 6-8 player escalating games that they join. I just think that No Cards games require even more skill.

The most skill is required when your opponent is Robinette...

So you're calling yourself a game?

wicked wrote:So you're calling yourself a game?

let's keep the personal asides and jokes to PM's to prevent this 2 year old bumped topic from going off topic. luckily, i pressed that handy little exclamation point thing to alert the mods of an off topic post in this thread. and robinette, i do agree with your healthy attitude. i personally feel the most difficult games to win are the ones people find themselves in against me and my teams. we don't quit, and one way or another, we are going to crack you and find a way to win. if you go in knowing you are going to kick ass, your attitude can carry you through the difficult periods and lulls in the game play! so, well said lady robinette!!! i agree whole heartedly with your boastful claims, for i too feel the same! and if we both feel the same, it has to be a FACT!!-0

wicked wrote:So you're calling yourself a game?

I believe she's calling herself an opponent. A game would be the thing that she would be somebody's opponent in. Just thought I'd clear that up.

john9blue wrote:

White Moose wrote:

john9blue wrote:Escalating games require being in the right place in the right time

Then perhaps a skill factor is positioning yourself at the right place?

Escalating is really a sensitive topic in the forums... people seem to think that I am invalidating their high rank or something.

Yes, of course, escalating has a skill factor, that is why people are able to win over 50% of the 6-8 player escalating games that they join. I just think that No Cards games require even more skill.

I just finished 150 round NO card game where I played the best game all game long only to be suicided on a few times and at the end to come out losing. The other players all teamed up on me seemingly all game as I was in the lead, but not by much. They left the 2nd player alone all game and thus this player won it. No cards are not so much about skill, if this was so I would have won the last 3 I played. It all comes down to who decides to attack you plain and simple..

To answer the original question: All of them.

MeDeFe wrote:To answer the original question: All of them.

I agree.

After some recent games, I would say consistantly winnint Pearl Harbor, 1v1 takes a GREAT deal of skill. I have played several games that I thought were "in the bad" ... only to be trounced!

The fact that so many dismiss these types of games as "pure luck" just shows that the speakers don't really have the TOP skill.

Four-player escalating games are the best. With more than four, there is too much waiting. There, there, little Belgium.

john9blue wrote:Yes, of course, escalating has a skill factor, that is why people are able to win over 50% of the 6-8 player escalating games that they join. I just think that No Cards games require even more skill.

well i'd sure like to take some private lessons from those people...
I can only muster up 27% on 6p esc, and i HAD thought i was doing pretty good

maybe i'm playing opponents with too high of a skill level

It sort of depends on if you consider "most skill" to mean "the least likely to win just by luck" OR if you mean the "hardest to win". ...

The thing is that the more open-ended, more skill -based a game is, the easier it is for someone to figure out the strategy and win. On the other hand, it takes a LOT of skill to win some games because they can be so very heavily weighted by luck. ONLY those with a LOT of skill can win those games and sometimes not even then!

In that category, I put Pearl Harbor. It is difficult to win with any consistancy, particularly in 1v1. It takes skill! Most people just let the drop more or less decide.

As far as the ones where luck has the littlest effect, I think you have a kind of not quite "bell curve". With 1v1 luck plays a big part .... (but as noted, a highly skilled player can often overcome that "bad luck"). However, once you start getting a lot of players, then you have the opposite luck effect. In 7 and 8 player games, it is common for one person to be eliminated even before they can play. So, luck is again a big factor. I would say the "peak" for skill is around 5 players. Fewer than that and luck of the drop is a big factor. More than that and you start out so weak that any one player can be eliminated too readily.


Cards are another factor. I think flate rate cards are actually harder than "no cards" for similar reasons. Though they can go on forever if the dice are even, if you happen to get a bad streak early on, it is almost impossible to overcome in most games. So, while skill is important, luck is a big also. In exacalating, timing says everything. In any but the Realms games (which are usually won long before cards come into play much), you can "manipulate" your sets a little, but once past the initial turn or so, turn order and the way the cards fall really can dictate who wins more than any other tactics.

In fixed rate cards, you have a combination ... you can use ALL the factors together. Luck definitely plays a part, but you always have to worry some about cards. Paying attention to ALL the factors makes it more interesting, in my mind, and means that you have more than one way to win.... more ways to employ skill. You can get a good start with nice rolls, only to be "thwarted" by tactics ... same with cards. The trick is to know what to use when and how to maximize it all to your advantage. That is skill!

SO, depending on how you define "takes the most skill"

-- if you mean the hardest to win by skill ... I vote for Pearl Harbor.

-- if you mean skill is most often the deciding factor, I would say 5 person, flat rate on almost any map. (except Pearl Harbor or the Realms maps)

PLAYER57832 wrote:-- if you mean the hardest to win by skill ... I vote for Pearl Harbor.

In a 1v1 if you are starting in PH, then you cant lose.

Flat rate require the LEAST luck amongst all the settings when compared with nocards/flatrate/escalating.

Flat rate often gives the player who gets a mixed set after 3 cards an early advantage.
No cards you have no other variable.
Escalating is knowing when to cash (take advantage of hte early armies in the game at the sacrifice of getting less armies, etc.), at how many cards to cash, etc.

Flat Rate if you get a mixed set it's almost never beneficial not to cash it.

FabledIntegral wrote:Flat rate require the LEAST luck amongst all the settings when compared with nocards/flatrate/escalating.

Flat rate often gives the player who gets a mixed set after 3 cards an early advantage.
No cards you have no other variable.
Escalating is knowing when to cash (take advantage of hte early armies in the game at the sacrifice of getting less armies, etc.), at how many cards to cash, etc.

Flat Rate if you get a mixed set it's almost never beneficial not to cash it.

It seems like you just contradicted yourself....flat rate requires the MOST luck.
You said someone who gets a mixed set after 3 cards gets an early advantage (something that was certainly not brought about by any skill of their own, unless they're hacking). For the others who don't get a set until 5 cards, and then it turns out to be only reds, they're getting the shaft from flat rate.
Escalating cards takes more skill, but personally I believe no cards takes more skill. Of course, it is difficult to generalize with so many different maps, but for the most part I have found no card games, as long as there is a fairly even drop, to be the least-luck oriented (as much as the dice allow).

All right, I changed my mind, No Cards games are baloney, too much depends on the drop. I just got screwed in two World 2.1 games because of that. I say Escalating takes the most skill, then No Cards, then Flat Rate (still in last). The difference between the three is quite small however.

As far as game type I think Standard and Terminator take the most skill, followed by team games, followed by Assassin.

Freestyle takes more skill than Sequential, since Freestyle makes you choose when to take your turns. The more choices one has to make, the more skill involved.

[/thread]