Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 15:48:00 |
ChrisCMU
Level 61
Report
|
...if you had two player of equal skill, then of course luck is going to play a larger role in the game. It will still do so in "pure skill" games, since you will have to guess what your opponent will do at some point, or you may lack intel.
If you're playing against a player who is worse than you, you will almost always have an opportunity to make up for bad luck.
In a 20 game run to try to get to #1 on the ladder, how many games do you even play against "good" players, where luck is even relevant? Probably only 10, so you're talking about luck swinging maybe 1 game. That doesn't seem like enough to justify all the luck complaints we get. I disagree with that first part. It is not luck to guess your opponents moves. You guys are confusing variables and luck here. Luck means it is outside your control. If you predict wrong (that happens in chess as well), that means your opponent outplayed you that turn. There is no luck involved in picking the wrong moves. I also disagree on your 2nd point. If the player is significantly worse, sure. But let's say you are are playing someone maybe 200 rating points lower than you. If you get bad luck, they will beat you, even if you predict all moves correctly. As far as the number that are decided by bad luck...I don't know. That is very hard to measure because you have wrong choices in games all the time that factor in as well. You'd have to maybe take a sample of games from the ladder with great players less likely to make bad moves and analyze the moves perhaps. Personally, I would say maybe %5 might be more accurate, but it could be %10, I don't know.
|
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 16:02:56 |
Ragnarok
Level 66
Report
|
1v1 Ladder - Keep the settings, but change the map to Modified Medium Earth. 2v2 Ladder - I like the number of picks, but I'd prefer them in 0% SR.
|
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 17:49:43 |
hedja
Level 61
Report
|
Maybe my analogy is not the best, but I don't see how football/soccer is very much luck based. Outside the foul calls of a ref, how is it luck based? you might say a guy was in the right place at the right time, and that is luck based...but it is not. He chose to be there, whether it was the correct position or not (based on scheme). You might say the ball bounced unlucky off a foot, but it did not. Someone put their foot in that exact manner, and really just misjudged it. I mean unless weather is a factor, or the refs...I don't see luck there.
I will have to think about a better analogy. I guess I just don't like the reasoning for luck that it is a known risk, so it is fine. I would disagree massively with what you just said. Although a lot of where they place themselves in the pitch, when they make runs, how they kick and header the ball etc. is practise and meant to happen, if you just take in account free kicks for instance. A free kick is when the ball is placed on the floor and you get to take your time to kick it without the other team kicking it first (although they can set up a "wall" to block it about 10 yards away). You can see that even in practise, where the ball will go (top corner or not) will change every time they go for it. It isn't like everytime they try something it happens as they meant it, so I would argue that whether or not what they go for comes off or not is luck based (let's say it will come off 50% of the time) whether or not their shots go in is luck based. However we are getting too sidetracked, whether your analogy is good or not shouldn't take away from the discussion which is if we should change strat 1v1 settings.
|
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 18:03:43 |
Алексей
Level 62
Report
|
+1 update auto templates to use pure skill
|
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 18:06:39 |
ChrisCMU
Level 61
Report
|
@Lolo - no, whether someone undeserving gets #1 does not effect my desire to play the ladder. But the opposite is true. The fact that better players don't win as often as they should (on 2v2 ladder) does deter people from playing it. Bad luck always makes games not fun for me. I try hard not to complain about it but no doubt it sours the experience for me. Less luck = more fun IMO. So the template makes the ladder fun/not more than any ranking changes. For example, I find the random bonus ladder fun despite the rankings being a bit odd (no separation). ...if you just take in account free kicks for instance. A free kick is when the ball is placed on the floor and you get to take your time to kick it without the other team kicking it first (although they can set up a "wall" to block it about 10 yards away). You can see that even in practise, where the ball will go (top corner or not) will change every time they go for it. It isn't like everytime they try something it happens as they meant it, so I would argue that whether or not what they go for comes off or not is luck based (let's say it will come off 50% of the time) whether or not their shots go in is luck based. But that is not luck. The fact that the ball goes a different place just means that an exact kick is basically impossible to replicate. You still have %100 control over your body striking the ball. If the ball does not go where you want, it means you did not strike it exactly as you meant to. Luck is something outside your control (a gust of wind, a bad patch in the field causing a trip). Luck does happen, but I think people use that word far too often in sports. At any rate, you are correct...this sidetrack is not needed, let's let it die.
Edited 8/11/2015 18:13:05
|
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 19:39:15 |
Fizzer
Level 64
Warzone Creator
Report
|
Also in the 2v2 there would be an advantage in getting your teammate to take a screen shot of the map and give you, so that you decide on the picks before loading the map. That's actually not true anymore. It was true when NLC first launched, but we since fixed it. Now, in a team game with NLC, the collective speed of your team is determined by the slowest player in that team. I am always for removing luck. But, i also am not a fan of the speed of picking factoring in. You are right -- NLC really was added for coin games, and I don't think it should be added to the ladders. We should just be talking about 0% SR Cyclic. directed to the prospect of adding 4 picks per player: I think this gives people too much coverage on the map. As I play the template more and more the limitation of only having 2 picks per player has been growing on me I agree. I'd like to try and de-emphasize the picking stage, since I think the main moving-armies part of the game is more fun than picking. I like risk management and find it a crucial aspect for high-level games, and not even just WarLight but lots of other games as well. Optimizing your moves and attacks is easy to do compared to risk vs reward and whether the pot odds are favorable enough. 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.
|
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 21:32:33 |
Ragnarok
Level 66
Report
|
Not having any intel is as strategic as having it, and makes the picking stage even more important. The 2v2 ladder template is fine. The only thing that should be changed on it is the luck settings, 0% SR would be a lot better.
|
Post a reply to this thread
Before posting, please proofread to ensure your post uses proper grammar and is free of spelling mistakes or typos.
|
|