@Chris: Fizzer wrote he won't use NLC (accurately he will use NLC without speed picks) but he can use my idea to prevent the luck in picking phase.

@Fizzer: when do you plan the change on the ladder?
I cannot bear the thrills during coinflip very important first turns, seeing 4vs3 captures, leftover banzai (one side maximums other side minimums), etc.

The 1vs1 ladder loses so much value with sr and even cycle move order makes games more static and calculabel.

Fizzer please read this thread carefully before you decide on any changes. The majority wants the 1vs1 ladder to stay as it is.

For the 2vs2 ladder it also gives a clear tendence on 4 picks.

http://strawpoll.me/5187606/r

Most people seem to want 3 picks, but having an odd number of picks is a truly awful idea for 2v2 on a map of this size - heavily distorted towards first pick.

I agree fully with MoD

yes, 3 picks in a 2v2 map like that is a bad idea..odd number.

"Fizzer please read this thread carefully before you decide on any changes. The majority wants the 1vs1 ladder to stay as it is."

I don't know where you get that one, if Fizzer reads the thread carefully as suggested, he will see the majority want it to be 0%SR but to not change the move order.

You also have to consider the many players who don't join the ladder because it has luck involved in it. Take that luck out and it will become truly competitive

Edited 8/22/2015 12:15:20

just went through the thread and it was like 3:1 for keeping the current luck settings

And almost all very strong players (Timinator, MoD, piggy, etc) also want to keep a little bit of luck.

Edited 8/22/2015 13:50:39

Basically, I want luck when we are attacking each other but I don't want it when expanding/attacking neutrals.

I went through here and found that most people want luck to be removed but not across the board and a lot people still want wr. So on the subject of luck, there is a consensus to throw it out.

Edited 8/24/2015 03:52:25

The majority definitely wants it to stay WR.

I think WR vs neutrals and SR vs enemies is something worth considering, although I'm sure that would require coding change and I'm not sure it's worth it.

The majority also wants 4+ picks on 2v2 ladder AND to remove the %16 luck.

Edited 8/24/2015 16:48:29

When will you remove the luck from the strategic templates Fizzer?
Or if you decided won't remove, please communicate it here at least.

Anyway I understand that the risk management is the part of the game, but now about 20% the risk management but 80% is simple luck... And very annoying when this simple luck destroy you... When one coinflip decide a game...

Edit: and my main problem are not the failed attacks (because not very frequent when an unlucky failed attack so important) but the coinflips (first pick, first turn!), this is the big issue, because there are a lot situations when this type of coinflips can decide a game... And most of the times in this situations no way to use any risk management, because the only good solution (must) try to get the first move, and flip a coin is not risk management...

Edited 9/19/2015 05:11:20

Edited 9/19/2015 11:47:27

Why not setting up another ladder? 1 with 0wr and 1 with 0sr?

you already have the algorithm so how hard can it be to create an extra ladder?

As for me, i prefer 0 luck wr for the 1vs1 ladder. Risk calculation is definitely skill too. 2vs2 ladder template is just messed up. doesn't have much to do with the luck settings

I find that when luck is removed from a game type in which the format stays the same in each game, it tends to make every game more a contest of boring calculations than a fun strategy game. Games start being decided by who is willing to run a bunch of stuff through a calculator. One thing that I found Warlight has always been good at is making the same thing feel new. With Wastelands and random starting territory options, the map itself provides some difference in every game, but with 16% luck, it keeps the overall strategy changing from game to game, which makes every game a "fresh experience". Lets be honest, 16% luck is not going to hurt you too much in the long run. If you are a better player than your opponent, you will still win the game 90% of the time. Also, if the luck stays in, I have something to blame for my losses other than the fact that I'm bad :)

^I disagree. A lot of my recent losses with the 1v1 strategic settings have been because of bad luck, not because I played poorly (at least until luck screwed me) or because I got outplayed.

But in the long run, you have to admit that it balances itself out. Unless you believe that the luck setting specifically targets you, then you'll have won some games as well because of luck.
An interesting experiment to try: Go to your last 10 ladder games (small sample size but I don't want to spend time on it) and find the average difference in luck between you and your opponent (Statistics->Graphs->cumulative luck if anyone didn't know how to do it). I'm curious to see what people's averages are over a 10 game span.

Peixoto, I doubt most of your games are being decided by luck. I looked at your game vs Doga that you complained was decided by luck in game chat, and yet there were so many other things you could have done to win the game. If you play a flawless game and end up losing, then you can blame luck. But that game vs Doga, you had numerous chances to win the game; you just didn't take advantage of them.

I think at the very top of the ladder, luck does make a difference, while in lower levels, it makes little to no difference since players have many chances to catch up if they have some bad luck early. I think luck evens out in the long run and does not make a major difference in Strategic 1v1. My biggest problem with Strategic 1v1 is the fact that in two games between top players, it is essentially a guessing game. While not technically luck, it is still annoying and leads to games not being decided by dominant strategy. I personally am fine with the 1v1 ladder staying at 0% WR for the time being, although 0% SR is ok fine in my book.

Idk about you, but I do not play my best when I'm frustrated. I'm sure I could've played a lot better, but in the end, I lost because of luck.
EDIT: @masterpie tbh, I don't want to find out in the long run, however I have to agree with you.

Edited 9/22/2015 02:50:39

0% WR for 1v1 ladder!!!! Keep it the same!

2v2 needs 4 picks and 0%WR or 0%SR but the picks is the important part.

https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=9472583

You didn't lose that because of luck. Let's take a look at Turn 14 (the start). You are up by 2 income and 28 armies, and he has no easy way to break any of your bonuses. Basically, this should be an easy win for you. Whether or not you had bad luck entering this point is irrelevant, because you were winning at this point. Now let's see how you lost.

Turn 14: Hitting Iran allowed Doga to break your bonus. You could have just sat and won the game that turn. I see no luck involved that turn.

Turn 15: You still have a solid shot at winning this game. You hit first order, and LUCKILY manage to take him out of Pakistan. Unfortunately for you, you gave up Scandinavia to hit so hard in Pakistan. Less would have done the job in Pakistan; it was a guessing game at this point.

Turn 16: The game should be over at this point if not for your mistake on Turn 14. Unfortunately, you did not learn from your mistake Turn 14. You make the same mistake, relying on first order, when you could have just sat there and marched towards his bonuses. Even if you got first order, he would still survive in the Middle East. So first order does not make a major impact here.

Turn 17: You unfortunately do not get first order here, which only matters because of your mistake Turn 16.

What I see is a player who had countless chances to win a game, was in a nearly certain-win position, and manages to lose the game. After a large number of errors and mistakes, he misses a 50/50 first order which puts him away. Not to mention the 50/50 first order he had gotten on Turn 15 which kept him in the game. If he had lost that, it'd be over by now. Not to mention that you could have saved your order priority card and used it Turn 17; instead you wasted it in Turn 13.

You did not lose because of luck; you lost because you made many mistakes. If you had not made those mistakes, luck doesn't matter.

Edited 9/22/2015 03:04:06