I understand whining about 3 vs 3 ladder, but 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2 ladder change into pure skill was just time question. it was required to find more people, who would play coins games. Coin games are only one thing, who can let survive this game. Grow up, kids :(

On what Earth is ice-cold calculation and counting pure skill? Some risk-management requires much more skill than just counting 1,2,3,4,5,...

Edited 9/26/2015 14:19:47

I actually used to hate luck on the Ladder because I was very poor in calculating risk-taking. Of course, that was back when it was 16% Luck, and certain attacks like 7v4 didn't have a 100% chance of succeeding.

However, with the introduction of 0% Luck, the template actually started to become fun for me. Luck is part of strategy, as people have already mentioned.

And the coin games are so dull - people always pick the same spots (East US, East Russia), so strategy is static and therefore boring.

I'm sure this will make tomorrow's AMA much more interesting...

+1 HHH.

3v3 Europe :)
Straight Round on 3v3 Europe :)
Straight Round on 1v1 Ladder :)))
Straight Round on 2v2 Ladder :)
New Map on 1v1 Ladder :))))))))))))))))

Fizzer (from the blog)

" I just tallied up the first two pages of that thread, and I count more people in favor of 0% SR than against."

that thread= https://www.warlight.net/Forum/103738-time-remove-luck-strategic-templates

Edited 9/26/2015 19:29:53

I just tallied up the first two pages of that thread

So you ask players to vote for something. You get 8 pages of responses and then only use the first 2? Thats just BS.


Also just had a look at that thread. On the first page "change" has 5 supporters and "no chance" has 7 (This is people who have been clear in their choice, not people who suggested something)
The second page has 3 in camp "Change" and 5 in camp "no change".

For the first two pages that Fizzer looked at that gives the following results:
People in favour of changing the 1v1 ladder: 8 supporters
People in favour of keeping the 1v1 ladder as it is: 12 supporters.

Edited 9/26/2015 19:58:58

So you ask players to vote for something. You get 8 pages of responses and then only use the first 2? Thats just BS.

The claim was that 90-95% of players were against 0% SR. I only had to read through two pages to refute the claim.

I didn`t know it was about that claim. Yeah, that claim is not correct. But still there was a majority of players that were against it. (See my edit in the previous post)

^^^My bad for not putting the quote in properly context. And the resulting confusion. (I intended the quote at those who made claims that an overwhelming majority (<75%) supported keeping the 1v1, while the actual numbers seems to be much closer.)

SR is and always will be the farest way to fight any battle luck means one of the parties or teams has an advantage on first turn

@Fizzer - That claim is definitely invalid. But if say Donald Trump gets 33 votes and Hillary Clinton gets 10, who wins?

Donald Trump = 0%WR on 1v1 ladder
Hillary = 0% SR on 1v1 ladder

FOR
Master Bjarke: So in sum; I think it would be sweet with 0% SR
Ps: if it was up to me i'd have everything 0% SR.
Gnuffone: For those reason i believe every ladder should have 0% SR no luck cycle.
Mister Aqua: please make it 0% SR
Master Ryiro: i like the idea of using 0-16 luck straight round in ladders
Idibob: Take that luck out and it will become truly competitive
Windows 10: However, I would still prefer 0% SR.

AGAINST
Master of desaster: Me personally, i like the 1vs1 ladder as it is.
Anna: i personally would prefer the 1v1 ladder stay as it is.
Benjamin628: I think the 1v1 ladder should stay 0% WR.
Hades: Yeah I think keep the 1v1 ladder as is
AWESOMEGUY: However, I prefer the 1v1 ladder to stay as it is.
USA biches: I prefer the 0% WR for the 1v1 ladder.
Almosttricky: As far as the 16% luck, I am leaning to keeping it, but I don't have a strong opinion.
Hedja: Please keep strategic 1v1 as it is.
Beren Erchamion: The 1v1 ladder is perfect as it is.
Perrin3088: I felt the original strat 1v1 settings put the variables of war quite nicely into a strategic simulation.
Knyte: I like the 1v1 Ladder the way it is
Widzisz: I like WR more I think
Tenshi: Also 0% WR should be a better choice of luck here imo.
Peixoto: 1v1 Ladder - Keep the settings, but change the map to Modified Medium Earth.
Dead piggy: Luck makes the games rich and complex.
Master of the Dead :"""Luck makes the games rich and complex. Its not fair, and that doesnt matter, 1v1 ladder is about beauty not who is #1. Dont sacrifice the most regal and storied ladder on the altar of equality.""" - dead piggy
"""Me personally, i like the 1vs1 ladder as it is. Risk management should stay a part of a ladder imo. """ - MoD
+1 to both.
Verzehrer: 0% wr is totally good.
Master Atom: I like ladder the way it is,
Smileyleg: Count me in support for no changes to the 1v1 ladder.
Des: And that, with making it 0% luck is gonna make it not fun.
Veelvraat: I'm another one of those in favour of keeping the current 1v1 ladder.
Good Kid: 0% straight round makes things like this happen:
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=9245384
It makes picking way less interesting.
FlyingDutchMan: As for me, i prefer 0 luck wr for the 1vs1 ladder.
Master Turtle: 0% WR for 1v1 ladder!!!! Keep it the same!
Pushover: Please don't change the 1v1 template.
Inquisitor: I prefer cyclic move order while keeping weighted random (WR).
Dr. Walter Ego: I write about only change the move order settings from Random to Cyclic! 0% WR and random pick order would be remained.

7 to 27 against SR by my count. I only took into account those who specifically stated their position, so I'm not included on here, even though I'm against SR.

Edited 9/26/2015 22:15:40

""So you ask players to vote for something. You get 8 pages of responses and then only use the first 2? Thats just BS.

The claim was that 90-95% of players were against 0% SR. I only had to read through two pages to refute the claim.""


Yes I was being dramatic. Others have done the math and you now have the exact count from that thread.
it's 7-27 or 10-33 or whatever. The point is still valid though. A significant number wanted it to stay the same.


So if you've made this decision because you think this is the best way forward for Warlight, then ok. But if the point of that thread was to see what the community thinks, I don't think the opinion is being considered.

but not the whole community commented on the thread so your %'s aren't accurate

Nor is the whole community active on the forums, neither on the ladders. The whole community doesn`t even 100% know what SR is, or WR or the fact that ladders even excist.

I didn`t post either, I`m against this update though. Ofcourse there are also people who didn`t post and are in favor of this update, but as the most active players (and quite some good players as well) posted there I think it is safe to say the majority of the community would want to keep it.

I never changed from SR to WR. I just said i get why some want it and I would be fine if it goes that way. Personally, i applaud all these changes, though I have not looked at the 3v3 ladder (i heard maybe that template was messed up?), so dont hold me to it there. Still think we need a 3rd and probably 4th pick on 2v2 ladder though.

Edited 9/26/2015 21:17:07

@Chris Fizz fixed the template.

so what we need is a pole based on active ladder players .... that would be fair no?

I don't think that would be fair. One of the reasons for changing it was so new ladder players could easily become acclimated to it. If it were possible, in order to come up with an accurate estimate, you would need to poll all members and everyone lvl 40+ imo.

Nobody cares about fairness. Fizzer wants to make coin games more popular so he changes the 1vs1 ladder to a similar version of the coin game earth.