A person might make an attack like ukraine, with only a 55% chance of success, but when it goes bad, complain they got diced. Sure, averages say they “should” win, but nothing ever always goes as planned. I would rather argue that in this situation, the decision to attack was more responsible for the loss than the bad dice was.
I agree completely.
A player’s individual prospect of winning is determined by three factors:
a - their skill/experience
b - inherent game balance (eg. whether the Allies have an advantage or not based on the setup of the game)
c - luck
P (prospect of victory) = a * b * c (or a + b + c)
Now suppose we rate each of these factors on a scale of 10, and we have players 1 and 2.
Player 1 has scores a1, b1 and c1. Player 2 a2 etc.
And let’s even say that skill, when you have it, is more important than luck, because a skilled player minimizes the role of luck, so we will square the effect of skill
So P = a^2 * b * c
Players 1 and 2 are about equal in skill, one is a 7 and one is a 7.5. We will assume that the second factor, game balance, has been neutralized by the bid - we’ll give both players 5 on that. But Player 1 is lucky today - she gets some good dice early on and as a good player is able to hold that advantage. So player 1 gets an 8 for luck today, while player 2 gets a 4 - just a little worse than average.
P1 = 7^2 * 5 * 8 = 1,960
P2 = 7.5^2 * 5 * 4 = 1,125
Without the luck factor, P1 is 245 and P2 is 281 - much closer. Now you see what a big difference luck makes between closely matched opponents.
But now let’s say that Player 1 is less skilled, only a 3 on the Frood scale
P1 = 3^2 * 5 * 8 = 360
You can see that with skill being given twice the weight of any other factor, luck diminishes in its significance as skill differential increases. The fact that P1 has amazing luck does not save him from the fact that he wouldn’t know the front end of an artillery piece from the back.
Alternatively, if skill is still close and luck is closer:
P1 = 7^2 * 5 * 6 = 1470
P2 = 7.5^2 * 5 * 5.5 = 1547
In that case P2, with slightly worse luck, still comes out ahead because of slightly better skill.
I think you got me wrong - I am not saying the dice are at fault. Skill is more important, and is more constant than luck. But when there is no real skill difference, each player making the same amount of mistakes and exploiting the other’s mistakes with equal skill, luck becomes more of a consideration than between opponents where there is no real contest.
It’s like the expression “Good Luck” - “Thanks, I’ll need it”. I think I would need some amount of luck to beat Switch, assuming we’re in the same league. I would not need luck to beat my 4 year old niece - thus, luck is less important. And if Switch is out of my league, then again luck won’t help me, because he’ll kill me no matter what.