they rated luck as 4, strategy as 2
Should be more like strategy 5, luck 2, or 3 at most
I don't think that Elo of the highest rated player is a good measure, especially for short games with a lot of luck. There is just a lot of cheating going on or at least some way to abuse the system is often applied. More often than not you will find the highest rated player conducting some "strategy" in boosting Elo. But ok, let's assume that there is no cheating - even then the highest rated player will often have had a large streak of luck and it is highly unlikely that the high rating can be sustained when playing regularly.
I would say that many abstract games fall into this category of low complexity and high strategy. Take Go for example. But of course it depends on how you define complexity.