In a recent question, a link was posted to a BGG member that attempted to objectively measure whether skill exists in the game Fluxx. This wasn't published in a peer reviewed journal, but was just a small project by a dedicated Fluxx fan. This got me thinking about the methodology used to determine if Fluxx should be considered a game of luck.
- 200 games were played, resulting in a 71%-29% split. Is this significant? (What would a statistical analysis tell us the Confidence Interval (CI) was for 200 games, Chi^2 analysis, etc.)
- This game was played only 2-players. Would a 3-player+ game result in similar two times more likely for a thinking player to win?
- This Basic Player still made random plays, unless taking those actions would immediately win them the game (example if the standard rules, Draw 1 and Play 1, a basic player would not play one of the cards Keeper:Dog, Keeper:Tree, and the Goal:Walk the Dog even if all of them were in their hand, because they wouldn't win immediately.) Are the results of this experiment similar to the results you would have from a game with no luck, but similar 2-card win goals?
To expand on the last point, imagine a game where each player had access to all of the cards in the Fluxx, and was allowed to "draw" the card of their choosing. Would a Basic Player in this game of no luck have a similar win percentage?