Here are the ground rules:

1) The player on the wrong side of the dice must be the victor.

2) Only 1v1 games because that is where bad luck is the opponents greatest benefit.  So, it makes the comparisons between different games more applicable.

3) Because some 1v1 games can be fought around neutrals, and some are without, the dice advantage will be defined by "differential", this being the loser's positive dice minus the victor's negative dice to show the complete difference between the two.

4) Two points of reference should be given a) the peak differential when the dice are furthest apart even if the victor had better dice as the game went on and b) the end of game differential.  For some games these might be one and the same?

What have you got?

I would be curious to know what the luck stats were on this game. 

http://www.wargear.net/games/player/417465

Just saw the 1v1 part, oops. Still curious though because my bad luck started when eliminating player 3 and it was a 1v1 from there on out.

Abishai wrote:

I would be curious to know what the luck stats were on this game. 

http://www.wargear.net/games/player/417465

The "peak" was about a 26 point differential against you, but, by the end it was about a 6 point differential in your favour.

Oh wow, I remember thinking how I should've been able to eliminate both in one easy swoop but afterwards I was lucky to have still won the game.

I know you probably have a more impressive game to show case with all your experience. 

Just saw your ranking history. Very impressive!  I don't think anyone is going to be topping you on battle of bladensburg for a long time.

Abishai wrote:

Oh wow, I remember thinking how I should've been able to eliminate both in one easy swoop but afterwards I was lucky to have still won the game.

I know you probably have a more impressive game to show case with all your experience. 

I had one recently that got me thinking if it was commonplace, and hence the thread.

I'm surprised on the very few posts.  No glorious victories in the face of intense opposition from the dice? No bad beats when you know you should have won with all that dice support...

I guess maybe it's not commonplace...

When I've received good dice, I don't lose, lol. It just happens so damn infrequently. ;)

Thingol wrote: When I've received good dice, I don't lose, lol. It just happens so damn infrequently. ;)

I also win when I've received good dice!  Imagine that! ;-)  But, how about winning despite your dice being absolutely atrocious?  Got any of those ones under your belt?

Yes, but they were against folks making the most fundamental errors repeatedly (ie - the other player not breaking up bonuses when they could, not taking bonuses for themselves when they easily could have, attacking neutrals needlessly, not attacking with the T or A buttons in limited-attack games, not leaving a trail of countries in limited-attack, fortify-to-connected, etc).  I've got plenty of those, but you'll forgive me for not being too proud of them.  Now, if you've got some great victories against some top-ranked players where the dice has been overwhelming against - let me see THOSE links.  

Yeah, I have some multiplayer victories with atrocious dice and some 1v1s in the -15 luck range - but I don't know if they're anything to be proud of.

eg. http://www.wargear.net/games/player/378501

I'm not asking for a game to be "proud" of, hehe... I'm asking for the biggest discrepancy that might have happened to you.

A curiosity of what it can reach, so to speak...

So, yes please Thingol, show me what you have in those games against players who may or may not have made repeated mistakes - as high a discrepancy as you managed to overcome!

I'm sure many of us have been in games against such players that we had no business losing, but lost anyways because of the dice.  And, to get a really high discrepancy but still pull off a win, the dice have to be so bad that they keep that player in the game for much longer then they normally would, yes?  So, it's a combination of many things... Maybe, instead of pride, you can just be happy that you didn't get embarrassed losing to a player who made so many mistakes! ;-)

Anyway...  I have games against good players that I overcame despite bad dice reaching some substantial differentials (40-60 point range??? - maybe?)... Though, against good players it usually hits a peak bad point then comes back a little or all the way in the victory.  I'll dig those up for you if you like, but, for this thread I am looking for maximum differential irregardless of opposition quality.

Thanks Andernut, 32 peak, 30 end!  And, more impressively, it was a constant run of bad dice with no wavering along the way and no comeback luck to finish it!

By all means dig up your 1v1's, there's no search by luck factor alas :P

Thingol wrote:

Now, if you've got some great victories against some top-ranked players where the dice has been overwhelming against - let me see THOSE links.  

Andernut wrote:

By all means dig up your 1v1's, there's no search by luck factor alas :P

Against “top-ranked” players… Not what I was asking for in this thread, but since you two have put me to task…

I classified a “top-ranked” player as any player who is on the first page (30 players) of the CP/GR/tourney rankings pages…

There were an additional ten games I found that had peak differentials in the 15-25 range against some additional top ranked players, but, I decided I would keep this to games where the peak was a > 25 point peak differential…

If the end differential is negative then the dice came to my side by the end.

Ordered from least to greatest peak differential.

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/238608

Steadily climbed to peak one, then dipped and then back up to peak two of roughly the same.  Came down a bit to end.

Peak: 27.56

End: 18.6

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/439078

A close dice game till exploding in my opponents favour half way through the game.

Peak: 27.64

End: 22

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/247036

Steadily went in my opponents favour till peak, then came back towards even.

Peak: 32.11

End: 12.79

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/434854

Small peak, medium peak, large peak going to evens in between the peaks.

Peak: 34.48

End: 5.6

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/438011

Dice exploded in my opponents favour at the half way point and then remained roughly at that level till the end.

Peak: 35.4

End: 35.4

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/438696

The dice went in my opponents favour, then swung to mine, then swung back even greater to his before heading back towards even again.

Peak: 43.62

End: 14.66

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/427344

Medium peak, medium peak, huge peak, then back to evens with a medium peak blip and then in my favour by the end.

Peak: 47.1

End: -12.32

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/425744

A third of the way through the game the dice slowly but steadily diverged till peak and then stayed roughly there.

Peak: 47.15

End: 41.21

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/439077

The dice steadily raced away from me till reaching the peak then slowly headed back towards even again.

Peak: 52.72

End: 12.36

Now show me your biggest differentials against any player!

The last one vs timmy was probably the best of the bunch as the dice were steadily against you for much of the game.  In a 1v1 game, overcoming terrible initial dice is much more difficult than overcoming bad dice later.  In the latter, you have a chance to get your hooks in and develop the game.

Thingol wrote:

The last one vs timmy was probably the best of the bunch as the dice were steadily against you for much of the game.  In a 1v1 game, overcoming terrible initial dice is much more difficult than overcoming bad dice later.  In the latter, you have a chance to get your hooks in and develop the game.

That game was very challenging and there were many moments when I thought I was on the verge of losing it.  I was hanging on by a thread and it was the oddest I've ever played on that board as it seemed the troops had just run out at some point and where to find some from was difficult!

Cool, good to see I am a "top player" according to berickf's definition :)

Or maybe you meant top 30 of all those ratings, in which case I definitely don't make the cut! :o

Chele Nica wrote:

Or maybe you meant top 30 of all those ratings, in which case I definitely don't make the cut! :o

I was taking it to be top 30 in any one of the three rank areas to give me a sizable pool of players to find games from to satisfy Thingol's and Andernut's challenge.  If a player had to be top 30 in all three then I'd only have had 7 players that qualified and only two whom I had played a very limited number of 1v1's against.  6 and 3 respectively.

According to that criteria, I'd not even be a top ranked player because I don't care about CP all that much...

Also, if I was to try and determine a "top rank" cumulatively like that (not for the purposes of the 1v1 overcoming bad dice challenge, but just in general), I'd add on team rank and team-tourney rank at which point (I haven't looked this far) but there would probably only be one or two players that qualified in every category.

That said, I would love the site to have an aggregate rank like that, but, with each rank weighted and then added together so that you don't have to top them all but you could still see who the best all-around players are.

So yes, according to my criteria, you were one of my "top ranked" ;-)