Python vs poon squad 8v8

How come that Airlift cards are 'unstrategic' while Emergency Blockades are being played in Clan League? What's the difference?

Creating a strategic and engaging template in a game like Warlight (now called Warzone) involves designing the starting positions, distribution of resources, and other elements in a way that encourages strategic thinking and decision-making. Here are some factors that contribute to the strategic depth of a Warlight template:

Balanced Starting Positions:
Ensure that starting positions are balanced in terms of resources and territory distribution. This prevents one player from having a significant advantage from the beginning.

Resource Placement:
Strategically place bonuses and distribution of resources across the map. This encourages players to plan their expansion carefully and consider the long-term benefits of controlling specific regions.

Varied Terrain:
Introduce diverse terrain types that require different strategies. For example, mountains could slow down troop movement, and cities could provide extra reinforcements. This adds complexity and depth to decision-making.

Strategic Chokepoints:
Include chokepoints or key regions that players must control or contest. This can create focal points for conflict and force players to make strategic decisions about where to concentrate their forces.

Reinforcement Mechanics:
Adjust reinforcement mechanics to promote strategic play. This could involve tweaking the number of reinforcements per turn, the ability to fortify positions, or introducing a card system that rewards strategic planning.

Neutral Territories:
Use neutral territories effectively to add an element of risk and reward. Players may need to conquer neutral territories to gain extra resources, but this also exposes them to potential attacks from opponents.

Visibility and Fog of War:
Implement a fog of war mechanic to limit players' knowledge of the entire map. This adds an element of uncertainty and encourages scouting and intelligence gathering.

Objective-Based Play:
Introduce specific objectives or missions that players can pursue for additional rewards. This can diversify strategies and create dynamic gameplay.

Customization Options:
Provide customization options for players, allowing them to experiment with different settings. This can keep the game fresh and cater to different playstyles.

Community Feedback:
Consider feedback from the Warlight/Warzone community. Players often provide valuable insights into what makes a template enjoyable and strategically interesting.

Creating a strategic template involves a balance between complexity and accessibility, allowing players to develop and execute a variety of strategies while ensuring that the game remains enjoyable for both beginners and experienced players.

hello ChatWL

Edited 11/25/2023 00:03:22

@Rento

Emergency blockade cards have a foreseeable size. An airlift card can kill your stack on random basis anywhere at any time and decide the game that way. You can't do that with an emergency blockade card (if the percentage is not set too high). You also have an idea where it would be played, and it creates a totally different game where better players still win out. You get something in return for the added randomness.

Going by ChatGPT, this template is more strategic that the original it is based off https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=36269006.

Edited 11/25/2023 03:03:04

People still use the term 'strategic' in that context here? I'm so out of the loop. XD

I'm sure many people answered this question better than I will, but strategic settings are basically settings where extra thought has to be put into picks and gameplay. Like for example take my standard RoR template: which is full distribution, 5x5, no cards, no wastelands and 0% luck. You could technically use the same picking strategy for each player (what I like to call a 'build') where each player picks the capitals and then each picks two non-adjacent mega bonuses. This is what myself and my experienced partners do and we win 90% of the time.

Then you have something like random warlords distribution, a couple cards, wastelands and other possible settings like WR, random move order, negative bonuses etc. That is more strategic because the ever changing map means you have to use different picks every game. If you think of my RoR template and compare it to Deadman's Rome that's an example of a non-strategic template vs strategic template. This is also why Deadman's Rome is a template in CL and my template isn't. :D

(I love Deadman's Rome btw)

Edited 11/25/2023 14:39:35

Did you really change your name to Dark Vanille and then to Shadow on the same day? 🤣

Honestly I'm reluctant to take part in this discussion in general, it's just too childish. I remember how 12 years ago people were arguing that light fog can't be strategic. Lots of top ladder players on the old ME WR template were against the changing it to SR, calling it a 'calculator template'. People who achieved the top level in a certain style of play will often argue that their style is the only one that's 'strategic' and it's understandable.

Truth is that anything that isn't pure lotto is strategic.

We could talk about which templates have the highest skill ceiling. But even this discussion is probably meaningless, since elite players tend to veto MME MA LD way more often than let's say Saudi Arabia, and I could bet my balls that MME MA LD has a way higher skill ceiling, but elitists won't agree.

The only way to really know would be to make separate elo ladders for each template and check the elo spread, but we're not gonna have enough data for this to work anyway.

Edited 11/26/2023 11:48:08

since elite players tend to veto MME MA LD way more often than let's say Saudi Arabia

I don't think that has anything to do with template being less strategic, but rather personal taste. The problem with MA games for me on ladder format like MTL is that you generally need to put more effort into them, despite your opponent. In other words, the very nature of MA needs more precision and that is not something that every player wants to invest their time in to not get an upset.

@Rento

Emergency blockade cards have a foreseeable size. An airlift card can kill your stack on random basis anywhere at any time and decide the game that way. You can't do that with an emergency blockade card (if the percentage is not set too high). You also have an idea where it would be played, and it creates a totally different game where better players still win out. You get something in return for the added randomness.

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=10873437 is the best template objectively in involving a airlift card strategically in a game.

Airlift and bomb are bad for the same reasons so I don’t get the argument.

Multi attack is very prediction heavy but some would argue it’s more strategic. Definitely a matter of preference imo.

Shadow is a cool name!

it's not random if you factor it into your strategy

You can't predict where the armies will be airlifted to or the amount of armies what will be airlifted, which encourages being more defensive (to prevent wasting armies by running into a stack). Only defending and not making attacks prevents you from making progress and is suboptimal, which is probably losing.

This topic probably requires deeper strategic understanding than I anticipated. There is a number of topics where everyone beyond a certain skill threshold is in agreement, but completely different opinions exist among people "weaker" than that. Even if you give a step by step explanation, it doesn't stop people from making a general remark against it instead of questioning a specific point made and having it explained, or corrected if necessary. You can't really make progress in a discussion if not all premises are being understood by a party.

It gets increasingly different the more complex the question is. While every good player might agree that setting X reduces the strategic value, it can be much more controversial how much strategic value a specific template has, because there are so many aspects that play a role, requiring not only understanding, but leading to different opinions due to different weighting and judgement.

Edited 11/28/2023 13:53:33

For instance, I'm sure Platinum and Rento will agree that "no army has to stand guard" is a poor setting. But I can't predict if they will agree whether ME or British Raj is the better template. Subjective taste also hits in etc.

I don't want to offend anyone with that. As a point of pure repetition has been passed here, I only want to encourage you to read my explanation and try to understand it if you are honestly interested in improving your opinion. If something about it doesn't make sense to you, I will try my best to explain it. However, I have no chance to help if no reference to what I said has been made, because then I can only guess where the lacking understanding is.

I think in bigger games where micromanagement isn't as important, airlift doesn't remove strategic value.

Well, at least the difference is surely much more difficult to spot. I think Beren got to the ground of the misunderstanding about that one.

Someone said it best (Rufus I think)if you want to prove a setting is strategic, make a template for it. If fogless fighting can make it, I’m sure any template can be considered competitive