My theory is a lower star card vs a higher star card. Lets say the player with the lower star card has enough pills to do more damage, but not enough for a sure shot. Is it better to put all of those pills, or to put the same amount of pills since usually lower star cards win with same amount of pills?
First, to properly analyze your game I would need to know what rooms you are playing in to get an idea of the opponents you face and make sure you are not sticking to any pill patterns.
Getting accustom to the thought process of playing with the random factor leads to calculations that stunt the learning process of reading an opponent when required to do so in forms of play that require much more strategy. The most prominent move I see most intermediate players make in random is one based on uncertainty. If you think you know how many pills your opponent will use but are not sure you may throw a couple of pills on an adequate card in response which will keep the atk's out of a sure shot range thus letting random take the reins. If you are a skillful player this can only be detrimental in the long run. It may also account for your ELO ranking and your win/loss record. (Don't take that the wrong way)
So if you have the potential to do well in ELO, you must master reading your opponent and beat their cards with ideally the exact amount of pills you need. ELO requires perfection. You also need to master bluffing which is pointless if 75% of the people you face are playing 3-3-3-3 0-4-4-4, etc.
Once again random does not favor low level cards. Your thoughts and strategy will progress with experience and I think your opinion on random will change. Good luck.
Ah. I never actually thought people went 3-3-3-3 or 0-4-4-4-4, etc with pills. Also it does account for my elo score somewhat, also being I don't have proper cards to elo well with. But i see what you're saying, and yes I mitigate sure shot with a few more pills, given the 'guess'. Hmm, thanks. Guess I should reorder my deck to elo and try a harder..