yep

"Stalling is a consequence of runs. And honestly, who cares that 1 in 20 people stall their way to the top when 10 out of 20 just do an easy run, not play anyone with over 2000 rating and then take #1 with a rating of 2250 or so."

This is nonsense. Most rank 1 runs have stalled. Not 1 in 20.

Who got #1 in the last couple of months?

Motoki didn't stall.
I did a bit, then got fair #1 again after Motoki left
Pana didn't stall on 1v1 ladder
Swisster didn't stall
Awesomeguy didn't stall
Krzychu didn't stall
krunx didn't stall
Nox didn't stall
Widzisz didn't stall
Farah didn't stall
NoMercy I'm pretty sure stalled after he got the trophy.
Pardon didn't stall
Kurdistan didn't stall

What are you talking about Nauz?

(sorry if I forgot someone)

Not relevant again. I suggest making a new thread about who did what. 1/20 is enough to have a serious discussion how to improve the situation.

Sorry, I got sidetracked by clearing up this bit of misunderstanding.


I thought a "Lynx-General" would have been knowledgable enough to realize his own mistakes. Anyway I wont comment on this anymore and hopefully everyone involved learned his lesson, including Coqboy that you shouldnt defend your clanmates if their errors are so easy to prove.


As for the rules, they arent the problem. Enforcement is. I like the new potential ones.
Imo banked time is one of the most underused features on WL, and could also be used against stalling.


Although I agree that stalling isnt the problem, but the system which encourages runs.
A few suggestions against this have been posted here: https://www.warlight.net/Forum/247708-concurrent-1-ranks

I disagree mod. I'm making my point that stalling isn't as frequent/as big of a problem as people make it to be.

Why do we care about stallers when everyone who goes 20-0 is (unvoluntarily) gaming the rating system?

@linberson

If you're not going to comment then don't comment. You're trying to have the last word on that topic and that last word is accusation. Dick move.

Edited 9/27/2017 13:34:12

"I will defend our members if I feel they are getting treated unfairly. I would hope you would do the same for a Turtle's player."

And I'd hope people were more blunt and honest and didn't let clan affiliation stay their voice.

Not that I am saying you shouldn't defend Octane, just defend anyone being treated unfairly, and similarly have the backbone to call out your clanmates when necessary as well.

"Who got #1 in the last couple of months?"

You then go on to list people that hit rank 1 over a year ago and people that hit rank 1 while not even on a "run".

Nice stretch.

Here on Earth months have 30 days, not 300-400.

"Why do we care about stallers when everyone who goes 20-0 is (unvoluntarily) gaming the rating system?"

You do realize intent is the major difference, right? Intent is how most crimes are judged. Or do you like brushing that aside because you're one of the ones who intended to game the system?

Edited 9/27/2017 13:35:43

Ignoring Nauz' posts from now on.

Back on topic:

For a solid player who ranks about 3-4th place it's irrelevant if the 1st got his rating because he stalled or because he beat 20 players rated under 2000 and he happened to get 1st because the system's shit at evaluating perfect scores. Neither deserve that 1st.

THAT is the problem.

THAT is why I'm bringing this up. There are plans to put some artificial, subjective ladder policing system in place, while it will 'solve' at most 5-10% of the problems, it will create new ones. There will be countless disscusions of moderators' decisions like there are now on who deserved that 1st and who didn't. Waste of effort. Could turn out to be worse that what we have now. With all respect to people who were going to moderate it - you will never do a good job because in this case 'good' is still subjective.

"Ignoring Nauz' posts from now on."

Yeah, it's usually the best course of action after I destroy your argument.

Arguing that it's okay for you to stall because it just evened the playing field vs. those that got lucky on their runs is like me saying I just robbed a bank because I didn't win the lottery like other people.

Edited 9/27/2017 14:07:10

There are plans to put some artificial, subjective ladder policing system in place, while it will 'solve' at most 5-10% of the problems, it will create new ones. There will be countless disscusions of moderators' decisions like there are now on who deserved that 1st and who didn't. Waste of effort. Could turn out to be worse that what we have now. With all respect to people who were going to moderate it - you will never do a good job because in this case 'good' is still subjective.

after fizzer have made unity prehaps we will have a new rating system and then it would be nice to have a system in place that could deal whit stalling so that we would not need even more time to make the ladders fair, what ever the % is

Edited 9/27/2017 14:22:56

In my opinion, there is one long term solution only.To change rating system to the one which discourage runs.

To ban alts is impractical, as many people will play unfair just because it is possible. Those new rules look nice, but they are nothing but minor tweak of rules which exist already but people either don't know or completely ignore them.

I personally don't like "shitposting", but in current situation, the only really effective way to stop people messing with ladders is to call them out publicly. Fizzer don't really care on those things, because more accounts=more ladder runs=more games=more ad displays=more revenue.

So he can publicly state rules, to play the fair guy role he have to play, but in fact, the only people who really care are those from strategic community. Partly because we all feel that fair play is the best way to determine who is better and who is worse. Partly because we are driven by our competitiveness and recognition by others matter more than actual skill, so we tend to circumvent rules and use holes in rating system to gain that recognition we all desire ;)

Edited 9/27/2017 14:34:20

stalling is gonna be a problem no matter what, we need a solution...... the rating system is another problem that we cant fix right now. that does not mean that we should not fix one of the problems even if we cant fix the other one right now.

Edited 9/27/2017 14:39:59

stalling:
stalling is "natural" - since you have 3 days time to move
my solution proposal:
A. "Double" the multiday ladders:
1. Thinking Ladders/ 3 days time ladder --- for people who need the time; stalling is possible
Games expires in 5 month. Ladder runs possible.
2. Quick Ladders - 1 day + 10 hours --- for people which play every day; no/ lower stalling problem. Games expires in 2 month. Ladder runs possible.

i have to add sth to the topic "ladder runs":
everyone can make a ladder run. Also players with just one account - just let the games expire.
Or just beat 20 players in a row.
No matter how - you still have to beat the opponents to reach good rank. if neal in real-time ladder would be a very bad player he wouldn't have reached 1st place. the alt account don't make him a better player. jealousy shouldn't be the reason to change the ranking system.

Ladder runs are good - since everyone can reach 1st place if he/her improve - even if it is for few days. this is motivating many players.

if you would prefer "long-term-players" in the ladder in the future. new players wouldn't be able to reach the top 20 - even after years. this would destroy warlight in my eyes - no possibility to reach a good rank for new players = no motivation = warlight is dead

...

I am not here to judge if anyone is a bad guy, or single anyone out. I just think it is ALREADY against the rules to operate more than one account on a ladder at a time. The TOS states that already, there is no debate.

IF you are playing games on a ladder with TWO different accounts at the SAME TIME, then you are violating this rule, PERIOD. I don't give two shits if your team is active or not, you ARE operating two different teams on the ladder actively. You have TWO different teams that effect the ratings on the ladder AT THE SAME TIME. How do you people not get this?

These are not hypothetical proposed rules. These are CURRENT rules. Stop whining and start abiding by them. Just because Fizzer doesn't do anything about it doesn't mean you should abuse the shit out of it in all of our faces. Man up and show some damn morals. Take ownership in your actions and stop waiting for him to police it.

I don't think any of the people doing it (that I know well) are bad people, but that doesn't excuse the actions. Someone said it pages ago, but all they need to do is say "hey, I didn't realize it was against the rules (I read it differently), I wasn't trying to game the system. Sorry and I won't do it again". If they did that, all would be forgiven and we could move on. But constantly make excuses is BS. Just stop doing it and move on.

Enough with the derailment. The issue is already resolved.

Since we are all so strongly - dislike- stalling, let's try a practical real example.

What punishment do you think is appropriate for someone who does this:
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=13967352

Keep in mind that the players on the stalling team is quite well-know and due to the stalling problems the ladders have, it is worth considering making them an example.

It should be plenty safe to furthermore assume they know that stalling is considered -bad-.

Please be specific, on topic and respectful. I don't want to throw hate, but to fix the ladders. I think we all feel the same way.

Edited 10/7/2017 03:00:41

Draw and quarter them.

I would give only smileyleg a warning for that. Bjarke and almosttricky were playing at a reasonable, rather fast speed. Of course they didn't force smiley to surrender which they should, but they didn't really stall themselves and just continued until smileyleg got eliminated.
If it would happen again after he got warned, i'd give him a 2 or 3 months ladder break.

Player popup says that Bjarke never surrendered himself.