No, the issue is not ignorance. The issue is consistently and intentionally abusing a bailout system meant to act for boot reduction as a simultaneous measure to disincentivize locking actions and to create information asymmetry on exactly who or what an opponent is playing against. It’s fucking outrageous

Re: having to recreate

Absolutely not

A. Only applies to team templates. The primary issue comes in setting with ai replace and this piece of shit, where the options are between “ai or player” instead of “boot or no boot”

B. In that, no one else in my three team templates has intentionally held off on locking and being online with intent to abuse this system as a means to create information asymmetry and to avoid actually making a decision with the commit button. Show me another player or team who has abused this system in the same way and I’ll support a remake there.

This is functionally more offensive than trolling cl with choosing to use the member ability to lock ai actions, because at least you made an active decision

Two of the things I get the most enjoyment from in warzone are the element of prediction, and the element of the timer forcing a choice by a given deadline. This abuse shits all over both of these things

“But lolvacations” shut the fuck up I served my time and now you’re stuck with me for the rest of the year

We're not remaking any games already in progress. Clan league is already behind as is, not too mention the countless games that people will request remakes of if this happens

We will not ban this feature in the future either.
I would suggest taking any complaints to fizzer instead of us.

I don't see the issue. In any game against a member they could choose to use autopilot and have the AI make their moves. How is this different?

I think Smoove's point is as follows:

In Warlight, you try to make the best moves. The best set of moves is not determined only by the board and the state of the game. It is also determined by the level of your opponent. And whether you're playing an AI or not. Therefore, if you think you're playing an AI, you potentially make different moves. An AI will not counter you in a bonus you're completing if it can expand; it works semi-predictable. So when you play an AI, you adjust your moveset.
Of course you can't blindly expect to play an AI if someone is close to booting. You need to estimate those chances. If i'm in a game where ACL Tears or Timinator is at 2d23h50m and they're online, i expect them to commit before boot and they won't turn into an AI. If i'm playing Nauz and he hasn't been seen for a week and it's 2d23h50m, i expect him to boot. I will change my orders to deal with the AI in that case.
When you use the autocommit feature, you take away this estimation the opponent can make. They reasonably expect a boot, but there wasn't one because of said feature. You can now never go better than 50/50 in your estimation, given that your opponent has been online in the past duration of the turn.
This implies to me that you should now always expect your opponent to have made moves instead of them turning into an AI.

As for the other point; Warlight is fun when you have a time constraint to actually commit something. In competitive team games, you might have an idea, put the orders in, and sleep on it a night. Then come back and change something. When you press the commit button, it means you have confidence in those orders, or at least think they're the best for this situation. The commit button loses some value when it doesn't serve that purpose anymore.

All in all, i can see the point being made, but would not be in favour of remakes, simply because the information about this feature was available and it would set a weird precedent for the league as a whole.

sounds like a problem that would be solved with RT games

-shoots finger guns in air-

pew pew pew pew

Share the information from the WG Discord if you really want there to be a remake. Without the information, I'm guessing you expected to play an AI but it was actually a human and you got out-tricked in this way?

Or you expected to play a Human but instead it was an AI that weirdly kicked your ass?

@Kenny RT CL isn't realistic :P

Looking at the game...it just looks like math wolf is using the feature that commits what you have in for you. It doesn’t look in the history like anyone has booted. Math wolf has been doing this in our 3v3 EU game too. Knowing that the feature is there I assume he’s put in his orders and it’s gonna roll. If I guess he’s gonna boot and try to take an advantage and he doesn’t, then I only have myself to blame. If I guess he doesn’t boot and he does the AI probably screws him up anyway!

re: Beren

an important distinction and an aside:

Distinction: Autopilot feature still requires a human being to both lock in the decision to autopilot, and the human decision to actually keep the autopilot orders locked in after seeing what they are. This is completely distinct from the world of playing against a human being versus a black box. So even though both actions use the AI, only the autoboot AI actions are functionally a different player.

(to preempt a response, "but autopilot could advance the game without you knowing what those actions are and so it could be the same" is functionally never true in a team game setting where a teammate can unlock to allow for a check on the autopilot actions)

Aside: I don't think autopilot actions should be allowed in a CL setting as they're using an outside source to give advice. If farah's going to be banned for using another player as a sounding board for games in a CL, I don't see how both the intentional use (via autopilot) or intentional threat (via not locking) of actions aren't fundamentally the same offense, outside of the preconceived "but motd is good and the ai is bad"

farah mostly summed up my thoughts on why this is a terrible feature although there's more nuance and force to the second point than just devaluing commit

on the more idealistic side of the "what warlight ought be" debate, the anxiety and pressure of making sure you get things right with a ticking clock and pressing the commit button is IMPORTANT. the feeling when you succeed because YOU decided that this was the course of action to take and settled yourself into that move and COMMIT is incredibly rewarding, and those building moments leading up to it knowing all too well how bad a terrible turn can feel and avoiding that is an important part of the game, especially with the threat of either an autoloss or a complete lack of control over your turn as consequences for inaction. Taking that pressure valve out and turning the game into "i'll hover these actions that i feel ok about and i'll change them all the way through deadline" takes out all of the urgency and agency of such a decision and makes the game more bland

and on the more functional side, it provides zero motivation for any player to EVER lock actions, because a player could always find time later to reevaluate. why take away options AND why give away additional information to an opponent (both that you are THAT confident in your actions that you don't need to abuse this function, and it communicates that you're actually the one that made the moves)

cowboy i know how much of a fan you are of how long this cl's going so i'm glad you support abusing this feature

good work

Edited 7/12/2019 22:48:44

I think most people found your 70 day vacation more annoying than autocommit. :P

>“But lolvacations” shut the fuck up I served my time and now you’re stuck with me for the rest of the year

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

I don't particularly expect a remake because I expect even if I get people to agree that abusing this feature in this way is bad, there would then be the question of proving malicious intent on the part of Math Wolf/[ARM]Belson, which I know I can't do outside of knowing through outside sources that Math Wolf has used this feature with regularity in the past and that he interestingly only chose to let it go to boot this turn where it likely would matter, after having an awful turn 2 and needing to abuse systemic bullshitery to try to turn the game around. At best all I have are those pieces of circumstance. I happen to think they're strong and relevant pieces of circumstance, but they're pieces of circumstance.

I just want this aired out so that people know how bullshit abusing a system meant for boot reduction has turned into a system to disincentivize ever advancing a game before timer and for creating mind games on who is actually going to play a turn.

The fact that people are ok with this is sickening.

Edited 7/12/2019 23:04:29

"cowboy i know how much of a fan you are of how long this cl's going so i'm glad you support abusing this feature"

Im just attacking ad hominem with ad hominem.

it isn't ad hominem if the person being attacked isn't making an argument

realizing i should have handled the elements accusing mw of cheating privately

i don't apologize for the concerns with the feature but apologize for how I handled this.

I sincerely hate that this feature can be used in ways outside of simply boot reduction, as I really dislike even the innocuous use of hovering planned actions for the reasons brought up above, but there wasn't any reason to name names in a public forum like this.

Sorry.

Even if I'm right and especially if i'm wrong.

want to note that most of my points above were intentionally not focused on the element of X player cheating, and on the fact that such a feature enables problematic elements, but that doesn't discount that accusing x player were still present.

Edited 7/13/2019 00:48:48

Fair. You'll have to forgive me of not knowing what the fallacy is, but essentially you equate the fact I like this feature to me liking the prolonging of the league.