I play this game for years and that led me to make connections with other players . Through those connections i created a clan and i encouraged most of my members to join ladders as a form of bonding and playing together . Personally i play ladder 2vs2 and mostly 3 vs3 for at least 2 years . What i found out is that certain players use even 3 accounts to participate and having a huge advantage over any other team . I think that this is abuse and does not follow the logic or the reason why those games are created . Our team is a top tier team especially after those years of experience yet we loose 95 % of games vs players who use 3 accounts and after some point is unfair . Cause obviously this is not the point .... if win is all that matters then so be it . But both my teammates reached to the point of even quitting the game cause of that as they both feel treated unfairly . That is the reason that i decided to reach out after all these years i play the game. So i hope that you will take into consideration our concerns which i think they do have validity.


I sent the above mail to Fisser the creator of the game cause after 2 years playing ladder 3vs3 it feels deeply unfair to participate with 3 accounts. Ladder should be for players to co-op , to blend in ... not to win at all costs playing solo ! ...

especially after those years of experience yet we loose 95 % of games vs players who use 3 accounts and after some point is unfair

I mean this in the nicest possible way, but this is entirely a skill issue. You're losing to those players not because they have some unfair advantage (of having no one to discuss moves with?) but because typically it's very good players who play by themselves.

@l4v but it kind of does go against what team games are for... cooperation... then again I can see why alts in ladder are allowed, its just super inconvenient to tell ur teammates everything and force them to be online 12h a day adjusting moves and stuff because they haven't learned everything yet... it is somewhat an unfair advantage because there is full, perfect cooperation between "players"

Edited 9/28/2023 23:32:24

Full, perfect cooperation between one player. It's a 1v3. Imagine getting clobbered as a team of 3 by one person who has to figure out the moves for 3 different positions each turn and complaining about the fairness of the situation. You always even have the option to play like them- just agree to have one of your 3 team members make all the decisions for all of you. You have a strict advantage because you can do everything your opponent can, while they can't do many of the things you can.

If you're at a disadvantage in a 1v3, your team needs to work on its communication.

Try to communicate every turn every move in 5 games that you play at the same time ... It is realistically impossible ... so sometimes you let moves happen, simply cause you can not just be online 24/7. Sometimes you also disagree ... yet you HAVE TO RESPECT... your teammate ... those things can not happen with 1 player. In the end ... i played ladder 2+ years , with 2 different teams and i reached ranked 4th or 5th which means i know the ladder very very well ...So when i say playing with 3 accounts is offering advantage IT DOES. There is no question about it . What matters is if this will be allowed in the future or there is a willingness to change that .

I've been on the 3v3 ladder in a team of 3 distinct people. We were able to communicate and movecheck each turn.

Playing 5 games at the same time while being a top 5 team ? Which means you compete always vs the other top teams ?And why is that crucial ? Cause vs truly top teams 1 mistake is all it takes to define who wins . ( 1 time we won simply cause we got 1st move to pass from behind to the player who broke Denmark turn 3 !!! ) ... and then all game went to our favor ... So in high end games what seems like tiny detail makes the huge difference. And that is the edging difference of 1 player vs 3...
P.s the team we won with that move was n1 and undefeated for more than half year... and yes he was ofc 1 player with 3 accounts...

Edited 9/29/2023 01:37:28

@Loup Duk, are you actually complaining about a player using 3 accounts to play, or are you actually canvassing for a longer game turn time? It sounds like you're saying that the advantage is that 3 people teams are disadvantaged because they have insufficient time to discuss moves, not because there's an actual tactical advantage.

As l4v said, if you're losing 95% of your games against 1 player teams, is it possible that your team isn't as strong as you think? or maybe you're strong but not the strongest and just happened to go up against a strong payer?

Either way, I'll agree with the point I think you're actually making, which is that the limitation for "good strat building" shouldn't be whether the team can scramble sufficiently during the insufficient game turn time.

I agree that this isn't reasonable to do in the current time limits for 5 ongoing games simultaneously. The fact that 1 player could even have an advantage here is indicative of the problem itself.

Assign a captain that dictates moves.

In each game we have a strategy planner, A spawn picker etc . After years of participating these are automatically done , yet it is not possible to communicate every turn every move on 5 games with 2 other humans on the given time per turn while 1 individual clearly has the upper hand . Yet this is only one aspect of the issue . If for you or others the issue of playing a team - up ladder with 3 accounts is normal what can i say ? Then why team up at 1st place? Team up maps SHOULD BE FOR TEAMS!!! With that logic i can make a clan have 30 alts play clan war , clan league , ladders everything alone ... I assure you i will be around the top . Is that the point ? Or the point is interaction ??? Blending ? Communicating with ACTUAL humans ??? Cause when you use 3 accounts clearly all you want is to resolve your superiority complexes not to play with others. Sorry but i can not put differently even if it sounds not so polite.
P.s The teammates are not puppets ...some times even if you lead they have opinions which may lead to victory or to defeat ... after all many moves are "gestimations" not certain outcomes. Xman is 2nd or 1vs1 in Europa map ranking. Steven is also top 10 if i remember well and i am top 15 in 1vs1 version ? So it is normal to often have disagreements... or lets do this or that. It is LOGICAL.... What is not logical is multi accounts which btw in most games are even forbiden guess what cause they disrupt the community and the interactions ... which is a huge part of the reason they r even made. If i wanted to play solo i could install a solo online risk .. and here i am ...

well if you think you're at that much of a disadvantage, try having one player make the moves for all 3 of you for a few weeks and see if your win rate goes up

Edited 9/29/2023 02:38:04

Using multiple accounts for a ladder run does not objectively give you a competitive advantage. The game is still fair in the sense that you don't gain anything by using your accounts to coordinate moves, as with a normal team of 2 or 3, you and your teammate(s) would be coordinating moves regardless. It only becomes a problem in FFA games, where normally you and another player wouldn't be actively coordinating.

With that logic i can make a clan have 30 alts play clan war , clan league , ladders everything alone ...

@Loup, not sure I'm following the logic, are you saying that if you had 30 alts, you could win CW , CL & ladders? I'm confused as to how having alts magically makes you able to beat the best WZ players ...? Ladders sure maybe you get a bit of a bonus if you use alts to rig games in your own favour (this is illegal btw but for the sake of this discussion let's ignore that) but sooner or later, you're going to have to beat the best players, and it comes down to whether you have enough skill to do so. I guess it gives more attempts to try? For CL ... one of the benefits of multiple players in CL is that players who specialize in different templates can play them instead of 1 player playing them all including ones he's not good at. CW ... not a chance, this means you use your 30 (or even 40) alts to someone beat MB, OP, Python, Hawks consistently?

If i play 20 tournaments me myself and i and 20 with 2 other teammates what final ranking i will have by myself and how many playing with others ? I ASSURE YOU that if i play alone my final ranking (semifinals -quarterfinals or wins ) will be significantly more. Not because i consider myself better than having teammates but simply because i will play those matches with certain logic and certain goal . to explain it as much as i can ... Europa map ---> 2vs2 tourney ---> 1 in center 1 in Russia 2 players ALWAYS AIM FOR INCOME .... when u have 2 accounts you do not care... all you care is map control and how run to choke points ... where to build lifts, where to focus were to direct income ALL those things are simplified ... cause you play alone !!! i played countless tournaments... and it is INEVITABLE that eventually even with your best friend in the game you will have DIFFERENT OPINION!!! Especially in Europa map where our clan is SUPER specialized and sorry but we r by far the best clan we know that playing with 2 accounts is RIGGED ... And that is not my opinion is our opinion ... Why Giussepe wins 90 % of tourneys he plays with his alt ?? is he top player ? ofc ... but that high win rate ?? Why he does not win so much when teams up with others??? Cause playing while using multiple accounts MATTERS! iDK ABOUT OTHER MAPS ... but about Europa map i am certain . and i can ask 6 of the top ten (which btw are in our clan to confirm this ). Ladder 3vs3 is not the same as ladder 2vs2 . Different map ... I know in 2vs2 also many use 2 accounts yet it is not the same !!! . In 3vs3 it does create a huge advantage .

At the risk of repeat opinions already voiced here, it's those different opinions/viewpoints that's supposed to make having 3 players a stronger team

A "good team" will have a method for rectifying ideas that don't mesh together well and be more cohesive because of it

A "bad team" will use multiple conflicting strategies in a single game and be at detriment for having teamed up

Skill issue.
In case of team tournaments, usually you'll get a player unwilling to cooperate or play alone. So here's your main point there.
But if you both understand how game works you are at advantage, provided you will work together.
As for manager/solo player for team games you have to manage more things like move order, enemy behaviour, income supposed picks, card pieces and so on. Amount of information grows exponentially with team size. It is time consuming and draining. Only good thing about it is constant skill.
Playing as team allows you to send important informations and chat to save each others time and discuss future moves

Edited 9/29/2023 05:11:47

Isn't that great that you come across teams (or alts) that you can't beat? Watch their play and learn what they do better, that's the best advice that I can give it to you. Anything else shouldn't matter.

Yeah as others have stated 1 player playing all three of the accounts on one side of a 3v3 is not an unfair advantage. The only advantage for that player is they will never have a teammate that disagrees with their orders ruining their game, but that shouldn't happen on any well run team anyways.

I do see an issue with the new rating system, and think the rules should be amended to prevent this in current ladder play. To be clear no players currently playing full teams, should be punished, since this is currently accepted practice. However, there is a rating exploit where player could constantly sub in bottom rated alts to decrease the strength of their "team", and thus get more rating for wins.

Some other games using Elo systems prevent pairing up if the ratings of you and your teammate are too far apart

I don’t think this is a major problem at the moment and it is an admittedly clumsy implementation but this would help get ahead of this problem

Loup Duk, in CL div A I don’t think there has ever been a team that has won a 3v3 tournament with 1 player puppeting the other 2. At least not in the ones I’ve participated in for sure. Typically 1 player puppeting the others results in quick burn out and sloppy mistakes. Teams usually have a pick lead and a move lead for 3v3s, but the best teams I’ve been a part of are those that all 3 communicate on every phase. My team atm on the ladder tends to communicate on every turn until the turning point of the game, then we relax.

I see a lot of warluses here doing some mental contortions to justify playing ladder with alts on your team, saying three top 10 players are better than one when this is clearly not the level op was talking about.

How hard is it to admit that team ladders should have teams and not one guy and two alts?