@ Richard Sharpe: I see the difference you are pointing out, but if I were in Fizzer's position I would have thought about this thing. (Of course I 'd forget other things he thought of, as each person has different priorities.) I think that allowing usernames to be repeated is the biggest mistake someone can make in such sites. Now as for the 0% luck game I refused, I 've made it clear that I won't ever play any MP games, no matter the settings. What I 've been saying is that luck influence must be adjustable by non-members. A thing I 've read that has put me even more firmly against MP games is that other players can sneak into the settings and change them, so someone wanting to beat me would change the luck to 100%, as everyone knows that it always favours the player I am either attacking towards or defending against. It has happened many times to me, with the standard 75% luck percentage, to attack with 40 armies and not be able to kill 15, and then see 10 armies of my opponent's taking a territory where I had 100 armies placed. This is a major fault of the game and has to be corrected. And don't tell me about multiple attacks, I 've used them and seen them fail. I am very good at maths, I am not dumb, so I can see that there is a fault that always handicaps me. A reason I don't play MP games is that the AI doesn't boast after winning. I hate it when someone beats me by pure luck and then presents it as skill. And the worst thing is that the others believe him/her instead of me. Luck is not a skill. Luck is luck. I am good at maths because they don't depend on luck. In fact they can describe it, and that's the wise spot about maths. Being good at maths may not make you luckier, but it helps you explain how lucky someone has been somewhere. And this means a lot to me.

Honestly, shut up already. For the love of God you need to stop spamming this board with your juvenile drama trolling shtick. You don't want to play multi-player games? Fine. Nobody gives a rats backside. If you never play mp games then nobody will confuse you with someone else.

How many things can you possibly bitch about? How old are you? Hell, start up an alias with my name. I wouldn't care. I'd find it amusing. Because folks who know me would recognize the difference. You are without question one of the most annoying people this board has seen in some time.

yes.. he has tried robbing you out of your money.. for a game that he had created and ran for what? 7 years? the better portion of it *without any membership costs at all*.. and Creeping Death.. /not/ supporting Indie gamers, will just lead us to stagnating games.. at one point, I might add, many of us were *begging* to be allowed to donate to him for his work, and I am still agitated to be allowed to *only* spend 30$ to help fund the work of a great Indie game.

and Creeping Death.. if the 100% luck is always in the opponents favor.. wouldn't that even out? since the opponent is always someone else...? Fizzer believes in *not* forcing gameplay onto his players.. allowing each individual game to be modified to the players specifications allows for the greatest possible entertainment.. as people are able to play as they want to play, and not under some pre-determined style. Most cheaters prefer to use something a bit more *real* then luck favoritism, like modifying bonuses, or making sneaky card changes

and if you are good at *maths* check up on statistics.. check into many games and see just how more often you are F'd up then your opponents.. it averages out.. you just /notice/ when it happens to you, *because* it happened to you.. in other words.. you're complaining for variances because they are variances..

if you don't want to hear someone boast after winning because of luck for luck's sake, then play 0 luck games, I will personally host any and all 0 luck games you want to play, with anyone you want to play, and post here any *boasting* that goes on, and describe to you /exactly/ why you lost/won, in a mathematical sense.

Dr. Awesome, when you said

"Honestly, shut up already."

I said a silent "Amen" in my heart. Cheers.

@ Dr. Awesome: I became annoying for something that was making me angry, but today it suddenly turned funny. I couldn't exactly expect that, so I am not willing to give you or anyone else any apologies. I 'll just laugh.

@ Perrin3088: The troll turned funny, but now you seem to be trying to make me angry again. Nevermind, I just stated a thought, not a final conclusion. There is a huge difference between these two. Am I supposed to apologise for my thoughts? And as for MP games, I trust nobody enough for that. Thanks, but I 'll stick to SP games, else I am getting out of here.

@ Mercenary: Don't hurry to jump to conclusions.

Death, you didn't even read my note, did you? I was offering to immediately resign, thus leaving you to merrily play against the AI's as if it were a single player game.

And why should luck be available for non-members? If every facet of the game were available to non-members, what reason would there be to become a member? Gotta always keep em wanting more.


As for the luck, Perrin nailed it. You only notice when the odds work against you while ignoring the countless times they work for you. As for luck always working for the player, I haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about... I have looked at the luck calculator and it seems to be negative more often than positive.

Sorry, Richard, I didn't get your note at all.

The note in question was the message attached to the multiplayer game. I was generously offering to compose a 0-luck game of your desired settings against the AI at which I would surrender upon territory selection so as not to impact the game play.

Yup, I get your idea, but why am I supposed to let you select a map for a game I will play against AI opposition only? Doesn't sound very normal to me, you know... Though don't take this behaviour of mine personally. I 'd do the same thing with anyone else doing that. Of course there is much more I want to be able to set on my own, so there is much room for error, which I just can't accept. Fizzer made a terrible mistake when he decided that non-members will only create games with 75% luck. I know he can change it, at least put the default value to 0%, but more preferably let non-members choose the percentage as well as members can. I don't mind about the other member-exclusive settings, I only want Fizzer to unlock luck. If this had been done right, I 'd never feel any need to post anything on this forum. And looks like that would be good, as not many people seem happy with my personality. Most people seem to hate strict people and I am not the kind of person to pretend to have a different personality than the one I really have. Other people can do it and bravo to them, but I neither can nor want to do it. I see it as a very cheap way to achieve things, which "accidentally" is most often used in expense of someone else, rather than in favour of the total. Am I not clear enough yet?

Death,
I specifically said it would be a game of your choosing... map, cards, AIs, bonuses, %'s... everything. Would have been the same as if you created the game yourself single player with the exception of having 0-luck.

So in other words, you think a key feature that would spur people to buy membership should be free simply because you say it should? Makes perfect sense. Do you not understand how capitalism and society in general works? Obviously there is value in being able to modify the luck and as such, Fizzer has every right to treat it as such. This is his intellectual property afterall.

I understand how capitalism works, thing is that here we are talking about overdone capitalism. Something that can be done for the sake of the issue is this: Fizzer can let everyone adjust luck, but make the basic number of armies available to members only. Don't underestimate this setting, it really is crucial. The only difference is that luck favours lucky people, while a wise decision about the basic number of armies favours mathematical brains and/or skilled players. All in all, there is a solution to everything, provided that someone wants to find it. Now if you still think I am being unfair on Fizzer, I have nothing more to say. I 'll just refuse to understand you.

Funny bit is that I went out of my way to be nice to you and you dismiss it summarily and turn around and say I am 'too small for you' and that you 'will step on me if we pass in the street'.

That right there is comedy gold! Have fun playing the steady, predictable AI and railing against random luck that magically always works against you.

Thanks for the advice, Richard, but it came a bit late. Sorry. In fact, predictability isn't something I really look into. My defensive tactics can face any player, once the settings allow for an even match. So, no matter where I concede an attack, I 've been prepared for that. The only thing I can't counter in any way is cheating. This is why I don't play MP games, along with the fact that I can't affect luck. Who tells me that I am not playing against someone having access to the game server? I just don't trust people enough to risk to lose due to someone cheating or being just lucky. And if there has been one person here trying to be nice, it's me. I could have behaved much worse, regarding *some* replies I 've received in the past few days. The only reason I am still posting is because I want to solve this argument, basically because this is what my personality tells me to do. Now if you don't appreciate my tries, then I am right to call you a small person. In this case, I might step on you by mistake. I do never step on others on purpose xD

Man, you really are afraid to lose, huh? Thats just sad. I get the feeling that no matter how you lost you would blame it on luck and not ability or skill.

What nationality if I may ask? Completely randomly, my money is on Finnish.

"My defensive tactics can face any player, once the settings allow for an even match. So, no matter where I concede an attack, I 've been prepared for that."

tell me a template in which case your defensive tactics will be honed to perfectly, I will create it, you can verify it, then I can best you, and I am far from the best player, of the non-cheating players, but purely the mathematical players..

most players consider anything they don't *understand* as cheating, which appears to be the case with you.


If you will not prove your worth by providing said template, please do not respond, I don't have time for people that can talk, but fail to back up those words.

Don't bother Perrin. She speaks constantly of her desire for a 0-luck game... I offered her that very thing, going so far as to offer the exact setup of her choice and my immediate surrender to allow for an AI-only game. No dice.

She wants to complain, thats all there is to it.

@ Richard Sharpe and Perrin: You both think that everyone on here is very stupid. You only put yourselves outside that "rule". In an angelic world, I 'd most probably have not complained about anything. I am not afraid to lose, provided that this loss is in an even game. I am afraid to lose to cheaters and/or lucky people. And yes, I do not understand why I attack with 40 armies and can't kill 15, but that's not a cheat. It's just the too high luck factor. Now as for your guess for my nationality, Richard, you missed. Is anyone else willing to guess? (To be honest, I really hope everyone misses. You 've turned me into a very bad person with all that hate. Fuck you, suckers.)

by my own words I put myself below many players on here.
I don't think everyone on here is stupid.. I'm not sure entirely how you came to that conclusion.. at best I think *you* are stupid

40*.6=24 avg armies killed
24-(24*0.75)= 6, minimum armies killed on standard luck
24+(16*0.75)= 36, maximum armies killed on standard luck

that means that 40 can attack as low as 7 and not kill them all.. which might not be entirely accurate all the time.. although the spartans have proven that it *is* realistically feasible.

"I am not afraid to lose, provided that this loss is in an even game."

provide me with the details of what you deem to be an even game, and then we will play, me as a self acclaimed mediocore player.. you as the best on the site, and see how you actually stack up..
Your stout refusal time and again to play in an *even* game, just shouts your fear and ineptitude.

I'll even post the game here as soon as it's started, so w/l/d, everyone here can vouch for whether or not there was any cheating done.

As a general rule, I don't hate anyone. Ever. I'm just amused by all the garbage and hatred you are spewing (yes, saying 'FUCK the USA' qualifies as hate...)

Perrin, you misunderstood me once again. When I said I am the best member of this community, I meant the best in terms of character. Sure I easily get angry and, being strict, I look bad, but behave well to me and I 'll never ever pick on you. I was very good with you until you started picking on me for no obvious reason. I know about the ancient Spartans, but when I came to Warlight I never expected a simulation of that thing always working against me. Are you sure you want to know the settings I like? OK then, look at these two examples: Attack kill rate 2%, defence kill rate 98%. Keep in mind that I just gave you two examples. I wonder how each of us will stack up in such a slow-paced game... You will get bored and surrender, or at least vote to end. But I am not the kind of person to enjoy frustrating others, unlike what you seem to be. If you hadn't picked on me first, we 'd be friends now. Same goes with Richard. He picked on me at about the same time you did, without me having done something wrong with any of you or anyone else. I suppose that my only real mistake is that I made Vostro feel special, and this was just because I couldn't be sure about the right way to avoid that. Then Vostro created that duplicate account (well, 99,6% of the odds are his, to be exact) and all this fuss started. I 've tried to end it during the past two days, but neither of you is helping. In fact you are both still picking on me. This is not my idea of a good person, so no matter if you win, draw or lose that fucked even game, Mr. Perrin, you are a person of lower quality than me and can't claim the opposite. I have no other solution than to give up. Facts have spoken, you didn't listen to them, who tells me that you 'll listen now? Nobody. And yes, Richard, I do hate the USA and have many serious reasons for that. I don't hate just to hate. But you definitely are not interested in these reasons, so I can say goodbye from now. Don't expect anything more from me, I am done over here and, strangely, am glad to say that.