I checked the posts to see how many people wanted SR or were against it. Posted here will be the name of every player who spoke for or against SR, and a quote from them showing what they said. I didn't include people who didn't express a definite opinion one way or the other, so I am not included on this list even though I would be against SR.

FOR
Master Bjarke: So in sum; I think it would be sweet with 0% SR
Ps: if it was up to me i'd have everything 0% SR.
ChrisCMU: Can we have no luck minus picking? (Chris later advocated for 0%WR)
Gnuffone: For those reason i believe every ladder should have 0% SR no luck cycle.
Mister Aqua: please make it 0% SR
Master Ryiro: i like the idea of using 0-16 luck straight round in ladders
Idibob: Take that luck out and it will become truly competitive
Windows 10: However, I would still prefer 0% SR.

AGAINST
Master of desaster: Me personally, i like the 1vs1 ladder as it is.
Anna: i personally would prefer the 1v1 ladder stay as it is.
Benjamin628: I think the 1v1 ladder should stay 0% WR.
Hades: Yeah I think keep the 1v1 ladder as is
AWESOMEGUY: However, I prefer the 1v1 ladder to stay as it is.
USA biches: I prefer the 0% WR for the 1v1 ladder.
Almosttricky: As far as the 16% luck, I am leaning to keeping it, but I don't have a strong opinion.
Hedja: Please keep strategic 1v1 as it is.
Beren Erchamion: The 1v1 ladder is perfect as it is.
Perrin3088: I felt the original strat 1v1 settings put the variables of war quite nicely into a strategic simulation.
Knyte: I like the 1v1 Ladder the way it is
Widzisz: I like WR more I think
Tenshi: Also 0% WR should be a better choice of luck here imo.
Peixoto: 1v1 Ladder - Keep the settings, but change the map to Modified Medium Earth.
Dead piggy: Luck makes the games rich and complex.
Master of the Dead :"""Luck makes the games rich and complex. Its not fair, and that doesnt matter, 1v1 ladder is about beauty not who is #1. Dont sacrifice the most regal and storied ladder on the altar of equality.""" - dead piggy
"""Me personally, i like the 1vs1 ladder as it is. Risk management should stay a part of a ladder imo. """ - MoD
+1 to both.
Verzehrer: 0% wr is totally good.
Master Atom: I like ladder the way it is,
Smileyleg: Count me in support for no changes to the 1v1 ladder.
Des: And that, with making it 0% luck is gonna make it not fun.
Veelvraat: I'm another one of those in favour of keeping the current 1v1 ladder.
Good Kid: 0% straight round makes things like this happen:
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=9245384
It makes picking way less interesting.
FlyingDutchMan: As for me, i prefer 0 luck wr for the 1vs1 ladder.
Master Turtle: 0% WR for 1v1 ladder!!!! Keep it the same!
Pushover: Please don't change the 1v1 template.
Inquisitor: I prefer cyclic move order while keeping weighted random (WR).
Dr. Walter Ego: I write about only change the move order settings from Random to Cyclic! 0% WR and random pick order would be remained.

Conclusion
8 (7 not counting Chris) for SR, 27 against SR. People are against SR in overwhelming numbers.
Also, 15 people said specifically that they are against ANY changes to the 1v1 ladder. Twice as many people are for no changes than are for SR.

EDIT: IF I MISREPRESENTED YOUR OPINION IN THIS POST, PM ME, I'LL CHANGE THE POST.

Edited 9/26/2015 20:27:28

Okay, I made it through about 2.4 pages before giving up. 2-1 people are in favor of keeping luck where it is.

^^Funny how you found 8 for, while Sabali found 10 for 0%SR. (He also found more against change too.) Really hard to count this thread to be honest most people, including me in my post, don't state a clear opinion.
Anyway, I support 0%SR, not because it is 'better' or 'worse' but I like my games to have the same luck settings, and then this seems like the most viable option.

Edited 9/26/2015 20:36:53

Like I said, I was only counting people who came straight out and advocated for or against SR. Sabali may have been counting people who implied very heavily that they did or didn't want SR. I just wanted to be sure that there were no errors due to my assumptions. Also, sorry, but I'm not going to be adding any new names to that list. This is for two reasons. One, everyone on that list said what they did before the change was implemented, and Two, I don't want to have to spend time revising my post every time a new person posts here.

I wouldn't mind the change if he said, this is what I'm doing and why.

However, opening a discussion weeks ago, getting overwhelming NO CHANGE TO LUCK response, making the change, and then (here's the kicker) citing this forum thread as the reason to why he changed it....

I guess I don't have any skin in the game not being a 1v1 Ladder player.

His first post clearly states why Fizzer wanted (and did make) the change. When citing the thread he is kinda citing himself.

...while discounting the whole community that disagreed.

Fizzer, I completely respect the change and I think this update is a step in the right direction, but can we please, please, please have a poll for this? I will never question any change you make to this game, as long as the community wants it to be so.

make sure the community know about the poll and not just those who frequent the forum

Those who don`t frequent the forum probably don`t know what it is about (or at least haven`t seen the discussions)

what the heck! Changed map, When was that on the cards?

This isn't Randy Ficker..... The guy making a game for his friends..... This is Fizzer trying to make money and losing all respect the community had for him!

Yeah the 100 people who are active on the forums should have a say in all changes for the site!!

This is what Fizzer said in post #1 on here:

I think it is time to bring these two templates up to date with the rest of the site and make them pure skill. However, doing this would change the auto games and ladders, so I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on the subject.

He asked for community opinion, but he never stated how that would be used (whether it would sway him)

Then said this a couple pages in:

I agree, I like the risk management aspect too. Deciding whether to attack a 2 with 3 or 4 adds strategy to the game and is fun. But at the same time, WarLight has been moving towards no-luck settings as a whole, and the risk management that comes from randomness might have to be a casualty of that (at least, as far as the ladders go.)

There is still risk management even in 0% SR, it's just a different kind of risk management.

Edited 9/28/2015 23:54:45

OK, I just went through all 9 pages and re-counted (since I don't trust the math of some people on here and some comments are yes to some things and not others):

On the question SR vs WR on 1v1 ladder ONLY:

YES - 11
NO - 27
Maybe - 9

So of those with a definite YES or NO, %71 want so keep WR, %29 want SR.



I did not tally the 2v2 ladder questions, but almost EVERYONE wants more picks and wants %16 luck gone (majority wanted SR also).

Again, Fizzer never made any promises, so it is hard to know what his threshold on NO was to keep him from making the change to SR.

Edited 9/29/2015 00:13:58