yeah that what i thought as well, i don't think it's worth the effort to try to get back those ppl whose main problem with MDL is that they have to learn about 50 different templates, rather try to figure out ways to get new blood

honestly, you don't have to learn all 50 templates.
Just some special ones, that use uncommon settings.
Most templates have pretty standard (maybe +/-2 here and there) settings. If you get the hang of one of these, you can play well on almost all of them.

If you want a high rank and rating with easy wins on a boring template, join the 1vs1 ladder. If you prefer diversity and good competition with a great opportunity to learn, join the mdl.

Agree!

I'll play MDL because I like MOD and MOtD, also you guys made a great work here, congrats!

Achievements would be a fizzer task as well

When I wrote achievements I didn't mean what Fizzer did :P
Can be some those type of achievements too (for the lower level players), but I spoke about the different rankings possibilities :O
I mean, MotD own the database, he can make any of rankings...
Can be constantly updated ranking lists for every templates for example! :O
So perhaps will be a good feeling for somebody who is, for example 15th in the main Rankings, but first in one of the 51 template rankings, and this can be a cause that not quit the ladder and continued to play. I don't know.
But again, MotD's possibilies is infinite because he owned the database and "only" need write some queries :P

In the AWP World Tour Rankings, hard to reach the first position too, but that type of competition consists of invidual single elimination tournaments, and given the chance for anyone to get some limelight to win one of these tournaments, not only the TOP10 ranked players.

+1 tim

Most the templates I've never played, and alot of the time its just MME SR on a different map so its easy enough.

Also if having a bad rating turns you away from playing then thats pretty lame.

To ask a totally unrelated question. does the win rate per template graph shows all games played or only the non expired ones?

Edited 4/8/2017 14:49:37

"Also if having a bad rating turns you away from playing then thats pretty lame" not everyone is a beast like you Buns...If someone loses most of his/her games it is pretty demoralizing.

Edited 4/8/2017 17:39:18

Think about it from a psychological perspective. If someone enters a ladder competition at a baseline of 0 and their rating goes up from that point to 1200, it is generally viewed in a positive light. If their rating starts at 1500 and eventually drops to 1200, they will view their performance far more negatively, even if they had the same number of wins and losses in both scenarios. I believe the entry rating of 1500 discourages many players, and yes, this includes myself.

Also, that's all well and good that most templates are rebranded versions of Strat MME. You know who isn't good enough to recognize anything more than the most superficial of similarities between templates? Everyone who isn't at the top end of the Warlight ability spectrum. Some of us actually need to watch videos for every single template because we are not skilled enough to successfully identify strategies from other templates that would apply to ones we've never played before.

@Ben I would expect most people at the top end of MDL that when they first joined a ladder they lost repeatedly. I know I did and that made me want to carry on playing to beat the players who were repeatedly beating me.

@Dog The 1500 thing is a good point, and that likely is demotivating. Also if people are struggling with recognising similar templates, then maybe its worth someone who knows the majority to make a post grouping templates together (eg MME, Battle Islands and volcano island). Then a quick glance at the list and you know how you need to play it.

- Elitist asshole #1

Except the problem is that even with such knowledge of the similarities, people like me would still not be able to play new templates at anything close to the same level of templates we've played before. Being told they're similar is not the same as understanding why they are similar.

@buns you got a point there. Some competitive persons will not settle for average and keep trying until they get good at something.

MOTD: maybe try a 1 hour livestream to go through dogberry's weekly post and review two or three of the best games and answer random questions? might engage players more, and the livestream notice on the top right or warlight page might get new players to check it out. doing it weekly or once every 2 weeks would do the trick. doesn't even need to be pre-announced and fixed schedule.

regarding the number of templates i think you should drop 5 or 6 of them. 30 is way too many for players learning strategic settings imho.

did the level restriction lower in the last months? I want to play :p

level restrictions is because all features the templates are using needs to be unlocked. MotD cannot change that so the level restriction to play on this ladder will stay the same most likely. If you want to play just participate in a bunch of lottery games and you have the required level within a week

Edited 4/9/2017 02:15:03

My criticism to packs is I find it harder to see how "fair" the ratings are. For example, say Player A is in 1st place, with a rating of 1800. This player only plays on the base packs, and does not bother to even play on the others. now player B is 1780. Player B plays on every single pack. Is player A really considered the "best player"? I am not so sure.

You could make the same argument with vetoes, however, I find vetoes okay, as each player does have their templates that get their ire and annoy the heck out of them, representing a disparity in their true skill. But in reality, packs can effectively act as a system of 10 main templates and 41 "vetoes". To me, this might encourage players to stick to the base if they want to make it to the top- It is certainly easier to keep track of 10 templates than 51.

An alternative might be to do an "entry curve" sort of idea. What I mean by this is when a player first joins, if they choose to, they can have their first 10 games could be only on, say 5 templates, with 1 veto. After every 10 games, the ladder adds 5 more templates to the mix, until the player decides to access all templates or all templates have been added (the last iteration being 6 templates). This would take 100 games, which is a lot, however, a player would have to remain unranked until they decided to take on all templates, and play at least 10 games with all templates. Deviations could be modified to be kept relatively high until all templates are added, so that they would not have an inflated rating when they did become ranked. Players already joined, or already have access to all templates, would not have this option. In addition, to further balance, vetoes would not be allowed throughout this period. Its crude, but I do believe it could be worked into something.

^I like the idea, maybe more depending on ranking than number of games and even consider no veto at all for top ranked players ? That may also let lower level players join with meeting pre requisite for entry templates.

Regarding level and competition topic, and lack of lower skilled / level players, couldn't the league be separated into divisions with promotion/relegation somehow, and not with seasons, but as soon as your rank beats a rank in a division above ? Then everybody would fight for a while against player of its level and only those who managed to improve will make it to the division above. Divisions would be a first time in a ladder and everybody would have its own and reachable challenge to top its division.

i dont really like the packs idea, think it would just fragment the player base further.

I agree with PS

I like the packs idea personally. i don't think it fragments the player pool, since they're all still playing on the same ladder and each player is no more or less likely to get matched against another player than they are at the moment.

It's also nice in that you can perhaps have a lower level pack in addition to a members-only pack, so that lower level players can join the ladder (perhaps not too low to discourage alts) as well as enable member only features like bomb and commanders on templates that have those and merit inclusion.

My criticism to packs is I find it harder to see how "fair" the ratings are. For example, say Player A is in 1st place, with a rating of 1800. This player only plays on the base packs, and does not bother to even play on the others. now player B is 1780. Player B plays on every single pack. Is player A really considered the "best player"? I am not so sure.

MotD said that you'd get some bonus points every time you play a game on a non-base-pack template so i don't think that would be an issue. If you want to get 1st, you would probably need to use all packs, but the huge number of templates needn't turn off the average player who just wants good strategic games.

If these low level players join the ladder they start with 1500 elo points and play against players, which are way better than them. This can be really frustrating.

On other WL ladders you start from the bottom, not the middle, which really makes more sense for a "ladder". It also helps discourage runs, since you need to play more games to get the games against top players quickly. I think this would be a good feature for the majority of players, though maybe less ideal for the elite. However, the problem isn't really a lack of elite players - more a lack of average strategic players.

"However, the problem isn't really a lack of elite players - more a lack of average strategic players".

Totally agree. I think the opinion amongst the non-elite clans of WL is that MDL is too hard to play on because there is a lot of top/elite/very good players against who it is hard to win games and few average/decent strat players against who it is not easy to win games but more possible. If there was a way to have more average or decent strategic players, I think it would make MDL ladder much better imo. I do not know how we could attract more average/decent strategic players, but it would add depth to this ladder in the short, middle and long term.

Some guys are like what Buns said he was, they do not care losing because it drives them to get better to eventually become an awesome player (like Buns). That being said, that kind of attitude does not, in my opinion, describe most of the players on WL. I think most people need a balance between very hard games that are super hard to win and games that are not easy to win but much more possible to win.

Some guys on this ladder are I think quite good and struggle to get 1500 or a bit better, which again can be discouraging. Having more average players could potentially maybe give those players more wins and hence, give a more decent rating which could be quite motivating.

I also think that Knyte's project he is working on right now, making an easier way for anyone to run their own league with a CLOT of some sort, might also satisfy more the members of decent strategic clans that aren't elite and might pull them off this ladder.

Edited 4/11/2017 02:47:50