Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

MarkyMark wrote:
The thread is making me laugh. How many people here have acutally won a big tourny?.

Yup.

To say its luck, its not.

It most certainly is. There's luck involved in the fact that I got to go first in the killpoint game, and second in all the objective games. There's luck involved in the fact that I didn't get paired against the one army that I know could beat mine easily. There's luck in that I got to play a better-than-average player in the first round, netting a minor win instead of a major win, and thereby dodging many of the best players at the event for several other rounds.

Anyone who says there is no luck in winning at a tournament is lying to you.

That said, without the skill to take advantage of those opportunities, you'd still likely lose. Skill won't win you a big tournament alone, but lack of skill will lose you one in short order.

 Redbeard wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:
The thread is making me laugh. How many people here have acutally won a big tourny?.

Yup.

To say its luck, its not.

It most certainly is. There's luck involved in the fact that I got to go first in the killpoint game, and second in all the objective games. There's luck involved in the fact that I didn't get paired against the one army that I know could beat mine easily. There's luck in that I got to play a better-than-average player in the first round, netting a minor win instead of a major win, and thereby dodging many of the best players at the event for several other rounds.

Anyone who says there is no luck in winning at a tournament is lying to you.

That said, without the skill to take advantage of those opportunities, you'd still likely lose. Skill won't win you a big tournament alone, but lack of skill will lose you one in short order.

It is still odds though, 50% going first or second, then factor in seize the intiative. What would be unlucky is having a squishy army, going second, no night fighting, no sieze, and no LOS blocking terrain that would be considered unlucky.

You can play against a good player and still win by a little avoiding the top players or you they could all be top players. That depends on the meta not luck. Depending what the hard counter is its hard to say if its luck or not, if a hard counter is part of the meta then yes its probably luck!

I do agree to a extent though, skill will get you most of the way but luck is always a factor in dice games. I still stand by the proof though, top players usually finish top.

MarkyMark wrote:
I still stand by the proof though, top players usually finish top.

But this is not true.

Look at the results for GTs, and you'll find top players who aren't in the top. They'll get a 1st round matchup against another top player, and one of them has to lose. If it's a win/loss event, that one loss puts them in the losers bracket for the rest of the event. They can't place higher than 50th% in that sort of event.

You're applying the logic the wrong way. If you look at the top-ten for any event, you'll see names you recognize - and that is indicative that there's skill involved in winning these events, because the names you recognize are obviously demonstrating repeat-ability.

But, if you look at the top-tens over a few events, you'll see that it's not all the same recognizable names, and that some of those recognizable names are ending up with non-top finishes. And that's the luck factor. I think we've all had one of those games, where all your opponent's hits are exploding pens, and all your 2+ saves come up 1. All the skill in the world can't fix that.

Biggest factor as far as your list is concerned is making educated, well thought out choices. As our very own Ailaros has proven time and again, knowing what your list does and designing it with that capability in mind wins you games.

For example, if my list doesn't happen to have gobs of anti tank, how do I plan on handling large quantities of each armor value type? In what order should my target priority be organized? Those are the questions one should ask themselves when building lists. That way, you can blitz nids, and then turn around in the next round against mech guard and have a well ordered plan of attack even though it may be your lists hardest foil.

Luck is almost always a mitigatable factor, but I have seen consistently top notch luck win games that tactically should have been losses. Which is why luck should always be something you play too. I.e. should you hide that beat down marine squad knowing it won't do much but die, or say "feth it, BE HEROS!!!!" And perform that last turn charge on that objective? Should I be safe and deep strike where I can't be shot at but can't really be effective? Or do I take that ballsy deep strike that could send my unit off the board, but if I hit, can gut my opponents defensive line? Play to luck. Run that risk analysis and if its worth it, go big or go home!

 PrinceRaven wrote:

 namiel wrote:
Min/maxing lists is neither skill nor luck. Its douchebaggery

This is a WAR GAME, making an effective fighting is part of war, therefore it is part of the game. You wouldn't accuse Patton of min/maxing because he spammed tanks, would you?

Welll...

That was hilarious, you made my day.

I think list building is number one followed my skill and then luck. I have a history of rolling more ones than statistically possible but I almost always beat my friends because I play more often and think more strategically. On top of that I know what units are good and which ones should stay in the shelf. I own large space marine and tyranid armies and win with both so that's the best I have to go on. Honestly though the tyranid list I run feels briefly easy to use compared to Maine armies I've played.

In the end two good players are going to wind up hitting a plateau of skill. At that point is going to come down to kick and list building. Which I believe is what we see demonstrated by tournament results

 FarseerAndyMan wrote:
Just what the title says.

Yes. While luck can ruin a game for you when the dice fail, if you don't have the skill the have the right units in the right place at the right time to do the right job no amount of luck is going to help you unless your opponent is equally as clueless a player. We are all beholden to the dice, but as the saying goes "Luck/Chance favors the prepared man".

Skriker