Dice

[Notch226]

I always find both sides of this debate to be equally obtuse. Some folks need excuses why they lost, others need to feel that they did everything to win. In a game like this, both sides are wrong.

[Semprini72]

That is so bull. you choose the gear with the best odds of getting into the corner and you throw some really low number and end up super slow. meanwhile the guy behind gambles hard hits a long shot and passes you, hits the corner perfectly. The dice decide this.

[Silene]

That is so bull. you choose the gear with the best odds of getting into the corner and you throw some really low number and end up super slow. meanwhile the guy behind gambles hard hits a long shot and passes you, hits the corner perfectly. The dice decide this.

when you take big risks, you often lose and sometimes win. ultimately the result of the dice decide about whether you win or lose, so much is true. is that "so bull"? i would call that playing a game that has luck influence. it's normal. if you don't like it, there's a ton of nice abstract games with 0 luck on BGA.

[FrankJones]

That is so bull. you choose the gear with the best odds of getting into the corner and you throw some really low number and end up super slow. meanwhile the guy behind gambles hard hits a long shot and passes you, hits the corner perfectly. The dice decide this.

Agreed. This is total BS. Obviously, the game should be programmed to guarantee that the player behind always gets an unhelpful roll.

[Semprini72]

That is so bull. you choose the gear with the best odds of getting into the corner and you throw some really low number and end up super slow. meanwhile the guy behind gambles hard hits a long shot and passes you, hits the corner perfectly. The dice decide this.

when you take big risks, you often lose and sometimes win. ultimately the result of the dice decide about whether you win or lose, so much is true. is that "so bull"? i would call that playing a game that has luck influence. it's normal. if you don't like it, there's a ton of nice abstract games with 0 luck on BGA.

I did not say that luck of dice was bull. I said that THIS was bull. Just the quote feature did not take.

I strongly and totally disagree.
Luck is a minor component of the game.

Luck is a LARGE factor in the game. As far as I can tell it is the biggest factor. I'm hardly the only one who feels this way. My brother plays board games all the time, he has over 100 in his case. I told him, "Oh look there's a racing game called Formula D," and he said, "Don't bother, it's pretty much dice luck. It has a reputation." So I tried it and he was right.

Also the culture in this game is rude and arrogant. If you play HEAT, people are helpful, they tell jokes in the chat. You make friends and invite for races. If you play Hegemony, it is complicated, people help you. If you play Hold'em sometimes there are rude players but often there are friendly players. The Formula D crowd is just "You're just bad at the game! You suck!" That's why I tried it out a couple of times, realized that it was a poorly designed game played primarily by rude dice nerds, and stopped playing it. A bunch of guys like Arnold Rimmer who think that they are king conqueror of the world because they rolled double-sixes to get into Irkutsk. No fun.

[FrankJones]

That is so bull. you choose the gear with the best odds of getting into the corner and you throw some really low number and end up super slow. meanwhile the guy behind gambles hard hits a long shot and passes you, hits the corner perfectly. The dice decide this.

when you take big risks, you often lose and sometimes win. ultimately the result of the dice decide about whether you win or lose, so much is true. is that "so bull"? i would call that playing a game that has luck influence. it's normal. if you don't like it, there's a ton of nice abstract games with 0 luck on BGA.

I did not say that luck of dice was bull. I said that THIS was bull. Just the quote feature did not take.

I strongly and totally disagree.
Luck is a minor component of the game.

Luck is a LARGE factor in the game. As far as I can tell it is the biggest factor. I'm hardly the only one who feels this way. My brother plays board games all the time, he has over 100 in his case. I told him, "Oh look there's a racing game called Formula D," and he said, "Don't bother, it's pretty much dice luck. It has a reputation." So I tried it and he was right.

Also the culture in this game is rude and arrogant. If you play HEAT, people are helpful, they tell jokes in the chat. You make friends and invite for races. If you play Hegemony, it is complicated, people help you. If you play Hold'em sometimes there are rude players but often there are friendly players. The Formula D crowd is just "You're just bad at the game! You suck!" That's why I tried it out a couple of times, realized that it was a poorly designed game played primarily by rude dice nerds, and stopped playing it. A bunch of guys like Arnold Rimmer who think that they are king conqueror of the world because they rolled double-sixes to get into Irkutsk. No fun.

So, what is your point exactly?

You seem to have segued from "The dice are rigged to favor the behind player"
to "Formula D players are inherently rude."

[Semprini72]

So, what is your point exactly?

You seem to have segued from "The dice are rigged to favor the behind player"
to "Formula D players are inherently rude."

This is my point.

The luck factor is MASSIVE in this game. There is not much learning curve. The dice determine probably 80% of the outcome. You can make the mathematically correct decision and there is a high chance that your dice roll will still screw you. Then on the next turn you can gamble hard and hit your dice and kick butt. It's just a poorly designed game. If this frustrates you, play a (much) better designed game like HEAT.

The game is not rigged, it's just designed so that luck is the biggest factor.

Any segue is just countering other people's assertions to back up the truth. The reason that the lovers of this game roll their eyes and hurl insults (the comments in this thread match the game chat exactly) is because they don't want anyone spoiling their fantasy that they are successful in this game largely on skill. If one is successful in this game it is mostly luck, and folks get rude with you when they hear someone spoiling their fantasy that they can roll some dice, get lucky and feel good about themselves, to the point where they look down on others (to feel good about themselves). It's a toxic culture.

If you want to have fun tossing some dice around, great. Skill in this game gives a small edge. Over the long run skill will win a bit more than it will lose and one is totally free to enjoy that and I have no problem with that whatsoever. Yahtzee is the same. People make terrible mathematical decisions, hit their longshot gamble dice and kick butt all the time, but no one there says, "You play badly. You suck!" The culture is very friendly and everyone knows that luck is the big factor. Here, it's ALWAYS "You play badly. You suck!" which translates to, "I am freaking awesome at this game and this makes me cool, therefore the game design is perfect. If you dis the game, you dis my skills. I take it personal, so I troll the crap out of you." No one will admit that luck is a massive factor.

Pardon me if I don't want to hang out with this crowd that isn't into having friendly fun. But that's besides the point, sure. But it does perfectly destruct the stance that the 'skill' crowd in this thread cling to. They don't use any reasoning or any arguments or any game facts into their stance. It's just, "You;'e wrong, skill matters, you suck!" The stance is super easy to pick apart. They have nothing.

[FrankJones]

In games that involve luck, the players who win the most in the long run are the players who most skillfully manage the non-luck aspects of the game.

I can understand why people might not enjoy playing high-luck games. Generally speaking, I do not enjoy such games. So, I rarely play them.

Easy problem, easy solution.