I know %0 straight round will never happen, as Fizzer likes 3v2s to fail...I get that. But why do we have to have %16 weighted random? I am SO sick of obscure attacks deciding games. I had that happen in 3 out of my 5 ladder matches at one time. Complete garbage. Why can't we let skill decide? Isn't the ladder supposed to be a measure of skill?

hehe nice try.
We try many times to change it.
Fizzer never reply, or just say he will never change the 1v1 and 2v2 ladders probably.

Ofc, i would agree with the changes.

I dont think SR on 1v1 ladder is good. 0% wr would be perfect

Why can't we let skill decide? Isn't the ladder supposed to be a measure of skill?

if you want the skill to decide, then you are definitely talking about changing it to 0% SR, which I have to disagree because it's not the same when you know EXACTLY whats going to happen when you attack.

now, I agree its annoying when you lose because of luck, but i'm sure it also happens to you that you win by luck.

Well, I don't think we should stop asking even if he never responds.

Brisk - personally I like %0 SR, but I think %0 WR is best on ladder. It gives chance of 3v2 failing, which I can see the importance of.

And yes, in theory luck evens out over a long period of time, that doesn't mean I like it. Plus that assumes that I take the same number of risks my opponents do on attacks, which isn't the case. Otherwise there is no chance for it to even out.

Edited 7/15/2014 20:53:26

But optimizing the level of risk appropriate for the current state of the game is a skill...

Edited 8/9/2014 05:03:17

Edited 7/22/2014 14:55:31

Qi edited away his old comments so now my old comment is meaningless. Peace.

Edited 7/23/2014 11:44:40

Edited 7/22/2014 14:55:58

Changed my mind, I don't even want %0 WR. Just missed 3 out of 4 3v2 attacks in a game. I don't know if I will ever join 1v1 ladder again. So sick of luck deciding games. I lose enough on my own, I don't need to get screwed when I make the right play too. And there is NO WAY luck is evening out either. That is a crock of shit. You can flip a coin 1,000 times and have it come up %75 one way. Just because the odds are 50-50 doesn't mean it will always even out.

I will be interested to see how some of these templates play. And if they do well, I will make CLOT with it. I'd rather play there then on the 1v1 ladder.

EDIT - I also might be a little pissed because I just missed a 5v3 to break a bonus too (WTF is with a 5v3 attack and we both lose 2 armies?). Luckily that game is already won, but come on.

Edited 7/22/2014 14:56:48

i once tried in C# to "flip a coin" 1000 times (for those who understand, i mean with "random") so there is 50% to result "1" and 50% to result "2". then i told him to write how many times the result was 1. it never occurred that the result was 1 more than 550 times, and never less than 450 times. of course, you could say that theoretically it could also occur that the result is 1000 times 1 and 0 times 2. that is unlikely though, because the chances are too low (and same about 750-250 or 250-750). and again, i'm sure that all in all, you have as good as bad (or at least close to). you must have won a few times because your opponent failed 5v3, or 3 out of 4 3v2. haven't you?

Edited 7/22/2014 15:48:15

Chris, the luck will even out over time and managing risk is a key part of the game for me.

Perhaps 1,000 is a bad example. The larger the sample size, the closer to 50-50 it would be.

But in a 15 game ladder sample (since that is amount to get ranked), there is a very good chance you could be on the wrong side of luck %75 of time.

I just looked at my last 15 games and it basically evened out (cumulative luck), but many of those swings don't factor into the game and sometimes the unlucky times are at the absolute worst time possible. It does ebb and flow though. For example I am minus 13 over my last 6 of those games.

The interesting thing is that in all my losses but 1, I am negative luck. In all my wins I am positive luck. Yet in most of my games, it did not feel like they were decided by luck at all. Perhaps you make your own luck most of the time. Yet for some reason it really chaps me when you have a bad streak of luck.

I would love to see a top player do an analysis on their games and determine how luck played a factor (moves where it mattered).

Edited 7/22/2014 16:39:21

Season IV (I think it was that season) pretty much took all the luck out of the game. It was my favorite template from the various seasons, even though I didn't play the season. I found out how much I liked those settings in a couple of tournaments that used them.

Long term the meta-game would get way too tight with 0% SR, but a tournament or limited season (RT Ladder too) is quite nice as a break from the regular ladder.

You cannot change luck on the ladder. Only Fizzer can.
You can however change luck in games you create.
Just tick "customize template" before picking it and go to "armies" tab.
Luck settings are at the very top.

no need to thank me.
I'm always there to help you guys.

I do agree with you that the luck should be change to make 3v2 reliable enough to depend on when 1 of them are required. One thing I like to do is take a bonus with 4 other territories, attack 2 of them using 4 armies usually yielding one stack of 3 and another stack of 2 so I can then use them to do 2 more 4v2s to take the bonus. In this game: http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=6678474 (I am still a little frustrated by this so forgive me)that same strat yielded me 2 stacks of 2, and as I wanted to continue trying to get SA I did a 4v2 attack and a 3v2 attack and then it was game over with a net luck of -1.7 in 3 turns

While this was on the real time ladder, the same concept still applies, luck should not completely determine the winner.

ChristophU, maybe if your 3rd pick was in a bonus you could actaully finish you wouldn't rely on luck :D, and why did you even go for SA infront of your enemy + in worst way possible??? you cant really blame that game on luck

Edited 7/24/2014 18:49:48