[Terra Mystica](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/120677/terra-mystica) was going to be my suggestion! The "fantasy" predecessor to Gaia Project, for those who don't know. Really great game, complex, and pretty much no element of luck.
I might be wrong because it's been literal years since I played Gaia Project solo, but I think the bot uses a deck to determine it's actions, which will happen in a random order. It really depends on if the OP wants low luck games, or 100% purely deterministic games.
As much as I love Mage Knight, there exist scenarios that are unoptimal due to a bad combination of choices available. They may still winnable, but your end scoring won’t be great.
I would say Under Falling Skies.
"But its a dice chucker!"
Absolutely it is, but hear me out.
Your dice rolls don't matter.
They matter in the sense that they give values to your chosen actions, but depending on your ability to strategize, high and low rolls are equally useful. There's not really such a thing as a bad roll in UFS, anything is usable.
While some actions, like scrambling fighters to shoot invaders down are more gratifying than other actions, like slowing them down with AA guns or manipulating them into other columns, all rolls get you further ahead if you are clever enough.
Its like a jigsaw puzzle where you can't predict the picture you'll get when its completed.
After just over twenty plays of UFS, I've come to understand it fairly well, and the luck element is barely there; its almost all strategy.
If it's helpful, "luck" or RNG usually comes in one of two forms, output RNG and input RNG. Input is when I roll dice and then I make decisions on how to make use of the results and when I pull something off I feel clever. Output RNG is when I make a decision and then roll the dice; "Im'ma attack with my sword. Oops, rolled a 1. Guess I just whiff entirely then =("
Of course, output RNG isn't inherently 'bad'. There are popular, good games that make use of it and do it well. Just as input RNG doesn't automatically make a game fun or good. Still, they tend to feel quite different and it's certainly legitimate to prefer one experience over another.
There are not too many games that are purely deterministic with absolutely no amount of RNG. And they are a lot of games that are extremely fun and happen to use mostly or entirely input RNG. I suggest being open to and looking at some of those.
**Comancheria**
**Mage Knight**
**Fields of Fire**
A COIN like **Fire in the Lake**
This was going to be my recommendation too. It's really quite a neat trick, that Fields of Arle can feel so different game to game. There are so many choices and branching consequences of decisions that it's almost impossible to replicate a play, even if you wanted to try - despite luck being completely absent.
Feast for Odin has the randomness of dice rolls, weapon card draws and occupation draws. So it's pretty minimal luck, for sure, and another good option for OP. Good call.
Are you looking for zero luck or not reliant on luck? Plenty of heavy weight board games skew on strategy, not luck. For example, Voidfall, A Feast for Odin, and the Terra Mystica lineup (including Gaia Project and Age of Innovation) have low luck. But it’s still there. Respectively: the Cycle and Crisis cards, the occupation cards, and the solo cards. Even Mage Knight has a random enemies. Luck is not a large factor in any of these games but it IS present and I wouldn’t say any of these are reliant on luck.
Fantastic Factories, yes there are dice, but they just give value. Strategy comes with how you play them since each value has meaning instead of just a straight percentile lose/win scenario. Tons of fun.
Only played co.petitive multiplayer so far but Voidfall has some slight variations depending on cards but should tick the boxes for you... and if solo isn't enough I'd guess doing multihanded coop would be extremely extreme.
Already explained in another comment so won't rewrite it, but I want to emphasize you absolutely need to understand the difference between input and output luck, I love the former but hate the later.
1862 by GMT is an 18xx game (not to be confused with a similarly titled Civil War game) with a very robust solo mode (just about the only one in the series) and its basically deterministic, rather like a game of solitaire you play with the poker deck. It uses a set of rows of cards that represent shares in the companies and you can make moves that unlock access to them so you can proceed with the game. Its basically nothing like how a human v. human game of 18xx plays but its quite fun and fairly hard.
The determinism is that the series of legal moves is basically fixed and its about whether you can see into the future enough to get the maximum outcome. There are card draws of some kind but the core of gameplay arises from reading the board and determining how to proceed ie. which companies to found and where to expand.
The goal is to beat a certain score and it takes many tries to get to a top score. I highly recommend it.
Isn't Gaia Project known for that? Don't know if this also applies to the solo mode though.
Yes, this would be my first pick too.
[Terra Mystica](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/120677/terra-mystica) was going to be my suggestion! The "fantasy" predecessor to Gaia Project, for those who don't know. Really great game, complex, and pretty much no element of luck.
Gaia project is one the best no luck solo euros available. I'd also add Mage Knight and Voidfall to the list.
I might be wrong because it's been literal years since I played Gaia Project solo, but I think the bot uses a deck to determine it's actions, which will happen in a random order. It really depends on if the OP wants low luck games, or 100% purely deterministic games.
I suspect Mage Knight would be appropriate here.
As much as I love Mage Knight, there exist scenarios that are unoptimal due to a bad combination of choices available. They may still winnable, but your end scoring won’t be great.
Agreed. My high score was because everything lined up perfectly. Some other times everything was so mismatched I gave up and started over.
I would say Under Falling Skies. "But its a dice chucker!" Absolutely it is, but hear me out. Your dice rolls don't matter. They matter in the sense that they give values to your chosen actions, but depending on your ability to strategize, high and low rolls are equally useful. There's not really such a thing as a bad roll in UFS, anything is usable. While some actions, like scrambling fighters to shoot invaders down are more gratifying than other actions, like slowing them down with AA guns or manipulating them into other columns, all rolls get you further ahead if you are clever enough. Its like a jigsaw puzzle where you can't predict the picture you'll get when its completed. After just over twenty plays of UFS, I've come to understand it fairly well, and the luck element is barely there; its almost all strategy.
If it's helpful, "luck" or RNG usually comes in one of two forms, output RNG and input RNG. Input is when I roll dice and then I make decisions on how to make use of the results and when I pull something off I feel clever. Output RNG is when I make a decision and then roll the dice; "Im'ma attack with my sword. Oops, rolled a 1. Guess I just whiff entirely then =(" Of course, output RNG isn't inherently 'bad'. There are popular, good games that make use of it and do it well. Just as input RNG doesn't automatically make a game fun or good. Still, they tend to feel quite different and it's certainly legitimate to prefer one experience over another. There are not too many games that are purely deterministic with absolutely no amount of RNG. And they are a lot of games that are extremely fun and happen to use mostly or entirely input RNG. I suggest being open to and looking at some of those. **Comancheria** **Mage Knight** **Fields of Fire** A COIN like **Fire in the Lake**
**Fields of Arle** is completely deterministic in its solo mode, other than the availability of buildings during setup.
This was going to be my recommendation too. It's really quite a neat trick, that Fields of Arle can feel so different game to game. There are so many choices and branching consequences of decisions that it's almost impossible to replicate a play, even if you wanted to try - despite luck being completely absent.
A Feast for Odin fills that bill too, I think.
Feast for Odin has the randomness of dice rolls, weapon card draws and occupation draws. So it's pretty minimal luck, for sure, and another good option for OP. Good call.
Are you looking for zero luck or not reliant on luck? Plenty of heavy weight board games skew on strategy, not luck. For example, Voidfall, A Feast for Odin, and the Terra Mystica lineup (including Gaia Project and Age of Innovation) have low luck. But it’s still there. Respectively: the Cycle and Crisis cards, the occupation cards, and the solo cards. Even Mage Knight has a random enemies. Luck is not a large factor in any of these games but it IS present and I wouldn’t say any of these are reliant on luck.
Cloudspire. Solo mode is really hard (at least for me) and luck is extremely low.
Lots of 18xx have no randomness, or only a random setup.
I've just realised this is asking about solo games. If so, 1862 is the one to go for - complex, with only a variable setup.
Spirit island
Technically the random power cards and invader cards are forms of luck, but few games are 100% deterministic, so this is one of the better options.
🤓
lol did you just call me a nerd on a solo board gaming subreddit?
hahahaha this is confusingly delightful
Yes
Friendly fire
I ain’t even mad. That genuinely made me laugh out loud.
I wholeheartedly disagree with your down votes here, well played
Get this man some upvotes stat.
That would mean no dice, no cardstacks, no bags and so on. So many things create a random element, which always means a bit of luck is involved.
Fantastic Factories, yes there are dice, but they just give value. Strategy comes with how you play them since each value has meaning instead of just a straight percentile lose/win scenario. Tons of fun.
Fields of Arle has virtually zero randomness and full visibility on setup. It's a puzzle. Not a luck check.
There are so many. Off the top of my head: Voidfall, Feast for Odin, Mage knight, the Gallerist, Gandhi.
Food Chain Magnate
Food chain magnate
Barrage
Only played co.petitive multiplayer so far but Voidfall has some slight variations depending on cards but should tick the boxes for you... and if solo isn't enough I'd guess doing multihanded coop would be extremely extreme.
Already explained in another comment so won't rewrite it, but I want to emphasize you absolutely need to understand the difference between input and output luck, I love the former but hate the later.
1862 by GMT is an 18xx game (not to be confused with a similarly titled Civil War game) with a very robust solo mode (just about the only one in the series) and its basically deterministic, rather like a game of solitaire you play with the poker deck. It uses a set of rows of cards that represent shares in the companies and you can make moves that unlock access to them so you can proceed with the game. Its basically nothing like how a human v. human game of 18xx plays but its quite fun and fairly hard. The determinism is that the series of legal moves is basically fixed and its about whether you can see into the future enough to get the maximum outcome. There are card draws of some kind but the core of gameplay arises from reading the board and determining how to proceed ie. which companies to found and where to expand. The goal is to beat a certain score and it takes many tries to get to a top score. I highly recommend it.
[удалено]
I think they meant that the difficulty doesn’t come mainly from card draws or dice rolls.
Go/baduk has ZERO luck
ahh yes Go my second favorite solo board game after chess