So I've read waaaay too much about "luck" so there's gotta be something that can be done! So here's a thread for people to post ideas to take out as much as we can!

My idea: Have an actual coin toss the first time it would occur, then switch between the 2 players after the first toss
Thoughts on this? Thoughts on other ways?

I think dojadoug's idea that the faster unit wins cointosses by default should be easier to apply, though it won't solve many of them (including the one's bothering hmpf, since those were infs of the same speed).

Yes, I vote for Bubbles suggestion as I posted the exact idea too. I hate luck based games in general.

Anyway, it's a valid suggestion and shouldn't be too hard to implement. It does give certainty as to how the next contest will end up.

Personally I don't have a problem with coin tosses, because they are necessary to some extent. I still think that a default winner in some situations (faster unit wins movement coin-toss, faster shooting unit wins shooting coin-toss) would at least remove some coin toss situations and would make the game appear to work better.

Let's say that it did alternate, like a possession arrow in college basketball, I would still want some coin tosses to be automatically decided based on unit movement or shooting speed, before we ever get to the point of using the possession arrow.

Yep, just had another few events that are counter-intuitive - like a lt firing 3 out of 4 shots without an art firing any (it's possible, like ticks 1, 21, 41 vs art at 50, but counter-intuitive).

Or a speed buffed fighter not being able to block an heavy on road, or a lt not being able to do the same.

It would solve situations where you are going with same speed infantries on both side of map and one of players gets both resources. This way each of them would get one. Problem will be if there will be more toin cosses and then it can happen anyway .

I agree that I don't like luck in a game like this. However, I think it is funny to hear this called a luck based game. Luck plays a role in so a small percentage of the games. Look at that records of the top players. Look at their records when they really try in tournaments. It is ironic because the main complaint we get from publisher we have shopped the game to is that there is too much skill and not enough luck. A bad player can never win. This is almost true by the way. A below average player will never beat hmpf, ever. However, an above average player, with good luck and hmpf bad luck could win 1 in 5 games where he gets luck or something like that.
When two top players play, obviously, luck could make a difference, but I feel it rarely does (not inlcuded luck in getting sealed deck cards). If Witcher and Justice or HMPF and Geral played 100 games, I bet in only 1 or 2 would loss of repeated coin flips make a difference.

That being said, I think we have two good suggestions on coin flips:

1. For movement and firing, the unit that moves faster or fires more often always wins. This would not be a coinflip scenario but a rule. So, Figther and Heavy both move on tick 33, Fighter always moves first. Heavy and Art both fire on tick 50, Heavy always fires first.

2. In coin flip situations, the server would keep track of the coin flip like a possession arrow in college basketball (for the americans out there or others that watch american college basketball). There really is only 1 flip. After that, the winniner of a tie situation rotates back and forth between the players. So hmpf could only complain about losing one flip (the first one), since that would be the only flip in the game.

I like both of these solutions a lot. Have I missed anything. What are people's thoughts on these solutions.

I agree with Chrism. As I said in my previous post in this thread, I don't care about coin tosses that much. My suggestion with regards to faster moving/shooting units winning default coin tosses is more about making the game appear to work properly to the users eye.

I also think Chrism makes a great point that this game is much more about skill than luck. If there were no luck whatsoever, why would any newer player join a tournament where Witcher, Geral, or hmpf were entered?

The players who consistently play BattleDex are getting good enough where we actually can compete with the likes of the top beta players. I personally don't think the three players I mentioned above can get much better, and while I know Witcher never complains about luck and losing, all the other top players better start getting used to being beat. The field is catching up and there is nothing you can do to outpace it. You know about as much as there is to know, and now its just a matter of the rest of us learning the same things you already know. Get used to it.

Chrism, I'm into it.

Good solutions for an ever-improving game.