"You're a very helpful asset to the WL community, despite what Norman and (to a lesser extent) Plat think."

Do you ever stop harassing me with your bullshit Ox..

Hello OxTheArtist

@Ben, Don't pay attention to the trolls ._. This guide was very helpful, and I'm going to re-read it when I pay more attention to the 1v1 ladder. Thanks for making it. You're a very helpful asset to the WL community, despite what Norman and (to a lesser extent) Plat think.

This is quite a strange comment. Benjamins performance was to use those single player scenarios to explain strategic aspects of WarLight and making kinda a tutorial out of it. However if you believe that I'm Norman then it's kinda obvious that I'm not 100% happy about someone taking my stuff, repackaging it a bit and then selling it as his own.

I'm tired of arguing about the obvious on the Internet, just gona post the links:
- Benjamins tutorial is linked in the first post
- Normans guide: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NyhCpIQKShAbWGXicO_ph9whV_UyMS-3a7_re0C7R8Y/edit?pli=1#heading=h.g1s8mzy7wor0
- Odins guide: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B024HXqzvoGCejhhajNFa1ZOVlE/edit?pref=2&pli=1

@wct:

https://www.warlight.net/Play?TemplateID=756454

"This template uses some settings you haven't unlocked yet. You can still use the template, but the settings listed below will be reverted to their defaults:

Overridden bonus values"

Hmm, that sucks. Maybe that setting is not really necessary for demonstrating that point. Could just use other bonuses like Greenland vs. Scandinavia.

BTW, Ben, I also think that providing credit where it is due is important. It's the intellectually honest thing to do, and provides people with more value (referring them to original sources and authors) as a bonus.

@Norman, that one part is something I learned from your guide. But you do NOT own claim to strategies that people can learn on warlight. I have given you and Odin credit, whether or not you helped me at all besides that one bit, is irrelevant.

"As I said just a random example appropriately representing the whole guide. Would have been nice if the guides (mainly Normans and Odins) where he took stuff from had been referenced appropriately. Here you see them nicely listed: https://www.warlight.net/Forum/109508-tutorialguidestrategymastery-skill"

Looking at one example I gave to represent the entire guide that I wrote is like Fizzer using like the first response on the SR vs WR thread to decide what the whole community wants.

Edited 1/24/2016 05:21:08

As a noob / advanced noob,
I would much prefer to be taught how to be a decently-skilled player from a player who is not yet an expert,

than to be taught how to be a well-skilled player from a player who is already an expert... and has forgotten much of the journey of growing up from being a noob. :)



That having been said, there is also much to learn from the feedback here,

although some of it lacks the discretion and diplomacy that private messages can provide much more easily than forum replies.

Private Mail is your friend.

Cheers and thanks for listening. :)

Make more because it is interesting.

Looks good and easy to understand.

I like the intention, but this guides lacks many important thing in my opinion. It focuses on examples without explaining the general mechanics before hand. You start the guide by telling people to always attack 2s with 3s, without giving the information necessary and the mechanics behind the strategy, so people learning this will learn it "blindly" and won't be able to adapt it whenever confronted with a different scenario.

Here is how a 1v1 guide should be structured in my opinion:

0) Introduction, generalities, goals

1) Game mechanics and settings
Explains the basic and most important game mechanics:
- Attack&Defence modifier, Luck modifier, WR&SR rounding modes, and how it relates to the "analyze tool"
- Cards mechanics: Order Delay, Order Priority, and Blockade (how they work and in which scenario are they mostly used)

2) Picking Phase
----
You'd be surprised at how many people don't know that they need 6 picks in strat 1v1
- Explains how many picks one need depending on th number of player/number of starting territories, in order to avoid getting a random pick
- Explain how the picks are assigned (random First Pick, ABBAABBAABBA)
- What you can learn from it (where you opponent is if you have the information, and how you can guess where he is if you don't have the information)
----
Basic picking strategies
- income/territories ratios
- Combos, FTB, triple picks strategies
- Map coverage and expansion potential
- Calculating 2-3 turns ahead your income based on picks and expanding possibilities
- counterpicks strategies (wich you can't explain without explaining first how picks are assigned)

3) Expansion and micro management
- Identification of the different expansion paths, evaluating the risk/reward based on opponent's potential location
- Optimal expected income strategy when expanding with WR settings
- micro-management

4) Offense and Defense strategies
- card tricks
- breaking a bonus strategies
- Map awareness, positional advantage, keystone territories
- Guessing opponent's income, calculation of the number of armies needed to take an opponent territory
- risk/reward analysis when confronted with multiple passive vs aggressive choices, stalemate situations
- mind games and history

5) Advanced tips&tricks
- attack only/transfer only, attack by %
- delaying tricks
- Determining what cards your opponen holds
- etc

Edited 1/24/2016 16:26:45

I agree Hitchslap, I will restructure my guide, keeping most information the same.

I would say, having examples does help though, as otherwise it becomes purely abstract.

This is a great project Ben! :D

Doesn't matter if you are (or aren't) one of the top players, you just have to be able to communicate the basics on a relatable level to the readers. I agree with some of the others, if you can, add in a bit of detail, or if there is something else that explains the concept well already, consider linking that in. For instance, order delays are important, but only when the defender kills higher ratios than the attacker.

Speaking of order delays, there's something I've always wondered: if I have a small stack (4-ish) that's in the middle of my territories, when is it better to split it up into 1's for order delay, as opposed to transferring it towards the opponent? If it's right next to the opponent I imagine it would be better to move it to help defend, but what if it's 2 or 3 turns away?

closer to opponent (like 1 territory) -> stay in a stack.

depends on how bad you need the delay and how much % these leftover armies represent to comparing your defensive/offensive stack. If the leftover armies represent less that 10% of you total stack, and delaying them makes you attack after your opponent runs into your stack, then the attack/defense modifier gap makes these armies worth delaying rather than defending. But in practice this rarely happens.

Edited 1/25/2016 22:58:08

+1 to most of wct's comments.

In particular:

1) On level 3, https://www.warlight.net/SinglePlayer?TemplateID=760632 the challenge reads, "At first, the enemy will have more income than you", which is not true. Just dont give Switzerland to the player, and it all works


2) "The double-border scenario (https://www.warlight.net/SinglePlayer?TemplateID=760638) is perhaps a bit hard for a beginner player to win (at least, to win it quickly), if they don't know how to use stacks, or how to beat the AI on equal income. So, maybe you could include sections about these skills earlier than this scenario."

To stress the double-border vs. equal income play, maybe give the player +2 or +3 income elsewhere (+2 is likely enough), which is not enough to win but that will boost players play once the bonuses are broken.


3) Probably more has to be said about paying attention to move order/priority and e.g. using first move to move a large stack into a territory enemy is likely to attack so that the enemy runs into it and losses a lot, etc. Will help with equal income battle, like the one in unmodified double-border scenario


4) +1 about AI not attacking until large advantage, need to lower player income/raise AI income in those scenarios


5) +1 to making examples more obvious, like the teal vs. green on the greek map. The bonuses seem non-standard, and it is not clear if green has the north or not. One can think that if not breaking the 4 bonus makes more sense etc.