Uhm what about Ruthless Bastard? That dude literally gets top 10 in all of the seasons that he played in, not to mention he won a Season. He also took 1st on 2v2 ladder and I dont have any records of him on rt ladder nor 1v1 ladder. But i think he deserves to be mentioned.
he took 3rd on 1v1 and 4th on rt, and not to forget that dude is also very active! I think with his current rt ladder rating he can take 1st no problem

Edited 9/12/2015 14:46:15

Ekstone, that would not accurately rank the best I think. Top players, in general, tend to be less active than others, and would not want to play a large amount of games that would be required to get an accurate ranking. And with just a couple potential best players sitting out, we can't say the person in first in your system is the best any more than we can say the 1v1 ladder #1 currently is the best.

The strongest opponent I ever faced was Fizzer. He booted me from four games to win a theoretical point. To click in a way that causes someone to lose in a game you aren't even in is the strongest possible 1v1 play.

Boys, always want to know who is the best one.
Think there are at least 10 equal toplayer and another 20 player close behind.

MoD, QB, Odin, Giant Frog are surely 4 from the top 10 who I know a little better :)

Edited 9/12/2015 17:06:33

@ Jack

B-Cool (the widowmaker) [udHp7f9mhN8FNEHBhN=https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=3811333145

]https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=3811333145[/quote][/udHp7f9mhN8FNEHBhN]

Well I didn't see any of the player's games, but his profile doesn't give any info that would make me think he's a top player. Yes, he does have over 70% winrate in 1v1, but I see no ladder records and getting that high of a winrate is not really hard if you don't play in ladders much (sorry, but the 2v2 ladder, only one he seems to have played, doesn't count much and getting 10 doesn't classify you as a top player).

@ [IM]YouMustBeKidding
Yes and no. About us, atleast me, not being able to totally determine who's the best player, even if I saw all the the top player's games, because my understanding of the game is too limited, I agree. But that is why I made it a discussion thread, instead of just saying what I thought as if it was objective. That way we can cumulate the little experience of Warlight each of us has and try to give a better approximation of players' skills. About Warlight's luck factor, this is relatively wrong. First of all I specified that the template had to be strategical (max. luck, read above) and even with 16% WR and situations were top players have no other choice than to toss a coin and hope, as any other probabilistic game, the skills are shown by the long run winning stats and by every action made and it's long run expected value. Also, considering the high amount of games the players have played, from a mathematical point of view, the margin of error about how good they did overall is very slim.


About gnuffone, I believe, tell me if i'm wrong, that he's very good on Europe, but I wasn't sure about including him or not because of the ethical debats and how it could have affected his stats (Did he really get first in ladders or was it only done with alts?).


@ TeddyFSB
Gnuffone himself said he didn't think he was as good as Szeweningen in a streaming few weeks ago. As I said, Idk how good really is Gnuffone (Although I think he's definetly a great player), but I don't believe he plays better than Szeweningen. The very low amount of games you played vs these opponents makes it likely the results are not totally accurate, or you could also just be bad vs Gnuffone's style and handle wonderfully Szeweningen's. Plus it might also be a question of what templates you played on. Like I believe Krzychu won a ton of bucks out of HHH, While you seem to have been + vs Krzychu while you lost vs HHH.
That said your stats vs these players are quite impressive, will try to look at a few of your games, maybe you'll become a new inspiration :p

@little X
Ya, Odin is without any doubt a top player, and I specially thank him for all the great work he did to help others improve their strategic skills, but at my knowledge he doesn't play much recently, wasn't sure if it would be right to consider it active when they are players loging in each hour. If there is any newcommer reading this thread, go get a look at his ''GG warlight strategy guide''---> https://www.warlight.net/Forum/34678-gg-warlight-strategy-guide, it is very well done and I learned a lot reading it.

@Master Atom ◆Elite◆
Ya, you have a point, he really did awsome in seasonal ladders. I also saw a few tournaments where he had great runs against top players.

The players that I don't like playing against because I feel it's very difficult for me to beat them:
Timinator
Ruthless Bastard
TeddyFSB
Odin
Summer
GreenTea (not mentioned before?)
[HL] Ko (not mentioned before?)
Yeon (not mentioned before?)

Players mentioned here that I'm not (that) afraid of (yet):
Piggy
Gnuffone
szeweningen
Latnox
Krzychu
ACL Tears
MoD
Widzisz
timon
QB
HHH / Quicksand
Gui / Qi / any Taiwanese account

Edited 9/12/2015 22:51:37

@MathWolf

you don't like playing against some players, that you are not (that) afraid of (yet).

Same like TeddyFSB. Funny to see how people don't know who they are really playing.

maybe you should get your hand on them, vernita

you don´t know how quickly i could burn my fingers doing that, Timi

Ekstone, that would not accurately rank the best I think.

That? What that? I wrote the community should create a really good competitive system toghether.
Or do you think can't be create a really good system at all?

Top players, in general, tend to be less active than others, and would not want to play a large amount of games that would be required to get an accurate ranking.

I think, this is mostly because they already have reached one or more excellent performances in Warlight thereby they became the member of "community hall of fame" (what is the top of the Warlight now), and unmotivated to reach one more of the present possible Warlight challanges. In other words, present, there is no proper challange for them in Warlight for play more, I think.

But motivation for them can be the coins (for example iterative tourney series with added prizes by Warlight patrons with monthly chess ELO ranking as I wrote earlier).
But I think, can be good motivation a Warlight World Champion title too if that is valid enough in the community!
And this title doesn't mean large amount of games, I think.

The first Warlight World Championship could be a small invitational (only for the present hall of fame legends) knockout tourney with best of X system.
That means X*Y games only! (where 2 to the power of Y equal the number of participiants, so 8 participiant mean Y=3, 16 Y=4, etc.).
So for example with 8 participiant with a best of 9 system would mean maximum (!) 3*9=27 games for the winner, I think that is not too much at all.

After this we will have a World Champion, then (but better if meanwhile) we can create a good cyclic world championship system, with multilevel qualifiers, what means the better (already acknowledged) players have to play much less games in a cycle than the new, "young titans".

But this is only two fast/short idea from me.
I am sure there are a lot more idea in the community, and I think we can create a very very good competitive system if we try.

And with just a couple potential best players sitting out, we can't say the person in first in your system is the best any more than we can say the 1v1 ladder #1 currently is the best.

I do not agree with you, I think we can say the winner is the best, even not every "best" player participate in the system, because who won't play can't be the best player and no matter what reason (frightened, think there is no chance for win, unmotivated, etc.). The best warlight player will participate in the system, I am sure!

Of course for this, need that the most of the "best" players accept the system and play.

So first of all, we should collect as many "best" players who want a good competitive system as we can, then we/they can create the system together.
And yes, if we cannot collect enough, no sense to continue :(

So who think it is a good idea that the community make a really good competitive system for themselves?

@MathWolf

you don't like playing against some players, that you are not (that) afraid of (yet).

Same like TeddyFSB. Funny to see how people don't know who they are really playing.

Very likely this is the case and logical as well I'd think? That's where the "yet" part comes in. I simply do not have enough games against these people to tell how good they really are, but in the games we played, they didn't scare me that much. I'm pretty sure it's the same for TeddyFSB.

So we could now all get annoyed that (the presence of) alts are ruining this discussion, as usual. But honnestly, if people just want to spend their time making a dozen of alts to hide their identity and playing style, so be it. Maybe I even like it better so I can imagine I have a chance when playing an alt while if I would know the real identity, I'd realise I'm wasting my time.

On the other hand, people (like you) keep claiming some people are alts which are not (or identifying a wrong main account), so I'm not taking it all too serious either.

Ekstone a single elimination tournament is by no way the best way to show who is the best player in warlight. Some players playstyles counter others - so if you happen to be able to beat all 2^Y - 2 players but you come up against the 1 player you can't beat in the first round you get knocked out and goodbye to you. The fairest way would be best ofs in a round robin format - but that would take way too much time if you wished to include everyone who may be able to win. Also which templates will be used? Some have been talking about being the best with variety of different templates, whereas some have been talking about the best at strategic 1v1. There are too many different variables and because the game also has a certain degree of luck (even with pure skill the same player won't win 100% of the time, so you cannot say 1 player is better than the other) and reading the other opponent, so even though even I might be able to beat some people at a best of X that would never mean I'm better than them

@sangfroid/GUI I read that thread, still thinking you're in the right amazes me.

You can't really determine the best 1v1 player. That's why we're in this thread speculating. There's too many variables. The only way for someone to be the best 1v1 player is to be the best at every category we mentioned, but as we notice here each player kinda has their own niche. Szew's is calculation and picking. Timi's is predicting people. Latnox's is having an insanely good streak. Gnuffles' is that he can counter people's strategies well. Gui's is that he can incorporate multiple play styles without ever developing his own. Piggy's is that he can focus really hard on 1 template and learn almost all the nuances in that template. etc. etc. could go on but you get the point.

So until someone comes around that can really top all those categories we're not going to be naming anyone as 100% the best player in 1v1. I think Timi is the closest because he's in the top 3 of every category I mentioned. That's my opinion though.

https://youtu.be/APx2yFA0-B4

https://youtu.be/q6OYQSSKWDI

Edited 9/13/2015 17:23:54

# mod = god ! ;-)
You all know it.

@Hedja
I agree with you, the perfect format would be the round robin or would be better higher X in the best of X format for the more accurate result. But because the time factor we must find a good compromise (not too many games but enough for more accurate results). What about double elimination format then? But this is only one (not thought deeply enough) proposal from me, I write again, the community can find the best system if them want...

About the templates. When I proposed the best of X format, I thought that the first 8 games would be on choosen templates. I mean we should construct a valid strategic template pools, where from the players can choose templates in the best of X games. I mean first game player A choose a template then player B then again player A, etc. And if the result is 4-4 after 8 games, the last one would be on strat 1v1 template. Or players can choose 5 template for his 4 games in the beggining, and the opponent can veto one of them, etc. But these are only proposals from one people (me), I am sure the community can find better solutions!

About the luck factor. I thought we should use the no luck cyclic setting, and when player A choose the template, player B should let him to choose first pick. Of course the next game first pick will belong to player B (on his tamplate). So no any lucks on the games in this way. But again, it is only one proposal, community can do better.

@Lolowut
Sorry but I totally do not agree with you.
It is same if you write there is no way to decide who is the best chess player in the world, because one of them the best in the oppenings, other is the best in combinations, other in the position game, other in the psychology parts, etc. Maybe the system is not 1000% accuracy but 90%+ already a very good result I think.

https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=7117253396 || Kasse84 || 96% win rate in more than 10k game

That's ridiculous. How can he maintain such a high win rate for so long

kasse84 is the best.