Is it better to be a good general, or a lucky general?

Got something to talk about? Be it video games, other tabletop or card games, even random stuff - this is the place to post!

Moderator: The Dread Knights

Better to be good or lucky?

Good
28
58%
Lucky
20
42%
 
Total votes: 48

User avatar
Kelthahir
Corsair
Posts: 80
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 8:57 pm
Location: Vienna

Post by Kelthahir »

Good general...because, when you win, you have something to be proud of. When you win just out of Luck...well ;)
User avatar
Lethalis
Loremaster
Posts: 4327
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:30 pm
Location: wow, who says I have a location?

Post by Lethalis »

I prefer to be good enough to notice my mistakes, rather than have them covered up by luck so that I'll make the same mistakes again next time when the dice are less nice.
User avatar
Dreadlord taylindril
Dark Rider
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 12:23 pm
Contact:

Post by Dreadlord taylindril »

Both would be nice.
But as we can not relly on luck all the time; I would have to say skill.
it is time for us to make war on the Asur; shed blood in khaine's name.
hail king malekith

dreadlord taylindril of hag graef
User avatar
Nagathi
The Exiled One
Posts: 8067
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by Nagathi »

I'd say luck. As I see it, it is more important to roll well than to have a solid plan. With luck, even a bad plan will work. Without luck, even the best of tactical geniouses will lose.

~ Naggie
User avatar
Faerthurir
Corsair
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 12:24 pm
Location: Ireland

Post by Faerthurir »

aww, come on. seriously?

relying on luck is a severe weakness, even if you're the most severely unlucky person on the planet you can still make a damn good account of yourself if you know what you're doing. especially nowadays that the game is more objective based.
"There was a baby's nappy in that stagnant water, and some of it got in my mouth. And that STILL wasn't the mankiest thing that's happened to me all weekend."
User avatar
Nagathi
The Exiled One
Posts: 8067
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by Nagathi »

I didn't say that you should rely on it. Mainly because you can't rely on something like luck. But as the question is asked, I feel luck is more important and will get you further.

And I doubt your second statement. If a guy rolls constant 1s for all his attacks and saves, and constant 6s for tests, he's screwed whatever he does.

~ Naggie
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Post by Arquinsiel »

Have you considered the possibility that a good general will be able to avoid combats almost entirely if he feels the need?
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Nagathi
The Exiled One
Posts: 8067
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by Nagathi »

He can avoid combats (give or take, depending on what army and what composition), but he can't avoid taking casualties. And without causing any casualties to the enemy while taking some himself, it's pretty much impossible to win.

And if you intend to reply with "objectivities makes casualties less important", I can retort by saying that to be able to claim objectives, one reduces his/her abailities to avoid combat.

~ Naggie
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Post by Arquinsiel »

I believe Faerthurir was thinking in 40k points there, but given that this game has static combat resolution, it is possible to lose huge numbers of troops and still win combat via sheer numbers and enthusiastic flag waving. And given that your example of "bad luck" is the absolute extreme of the possibility spectrum... it doesn't really account for luck minimising effects such as hatred. And yes, this does depend on what kind of an army you have picked, but picking the right army is the first step towards being a good general.
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Faerthurir
Corsair
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 12:24 pm
Location: Ireland

Post by Faerthurir »

i resent that, and know many people who are able to engineer combats so that even if they fail to cause a single would, still win combat and auto-break their opponents. it's not that hard.

i'm not saying luck doesn't help, but i've won more than my fair share of battles where the dice have been against me.also, army composition falls under, in my opinion, being a good general.
"There was a baby's nappy in that stagnant water, and some of it got in my mouth. And that STILL wasn't the mankiest thing that's happened to me all weekend."
Post Reply