Your bump is bad and you should feel bad..

http://warlight.net/Forum/Thread.aspx?ThreadID=1333

that thread is older

Lol, this thread is ALIVEEEE again :P

it shouldnt be....

just temporarily reviving it for fun, and i already knew that there were older, this is one of the oldest left regardless

the only problem with this thread is that the subject is invalid at this point :P

You know I quite like the idea of this. The only edits are that we need the best player in Warlight right now (whoever that may be) and we have 'Best player on Warlight right now vs. The world'.

Lets do it vs hhh

Ryan, if there is a better player than HHH then we could possibly do it. I'm not saying HHH is a bad player, however I was hoping The Impaller would return again;/
Undoubtedly there are many people on Warlight who consider themselves the best player on WL, however that is not technically correct.

Who's the best though? Heyheuhei, Zoso, Niko, szeweningen, lobstrosity, [20]Bishesupinerr, Chris, The Impaller, Salah al Din, Widzisz, Dunga, fatih sultan mehmed, unkownsoldier? That's 13 players that are top players and you could make a case for each of them I think. And hard telling how many others there are that just aren't as well known as these guys.

jsa there are a ton of good players on WL but it ultimately comes down to who is willing to do it.

Make it a Europe 3v3 (no cards, cities or warlords) and the number of active top players is reduced to about five or six, since most of the best 1v1 players don't understand macro-strategy (balance, cooperation, teamwork, creating advantages, exploiting advantages, etc.) or cooperative picking for team games. The only problem: such a game would lead to an inevitable result. If three of the top five or six Europe 3v3 players team up, they will not lose, unless the other two or three top players dictate The World's moves. It would be like the UN Security Council vs Everyone Else.

With respect to the 1v1 ladder game, there have been three major changes since Impaller's reign of terror (and the playing of Imp vs the World):

(1) Starting armies went from 5 to 4, which has led to more combo picking.
(2) More players have learned how to play the 1v1 game at an elite level (eg, Szewen, myhand, Lobster, unknown, WindowCleaner, myself, et al).
(3) There has been an influx of new players and new members as well as more teaching and study of the 1v1 game, which has increased the overall level of play.

For comparison, Impaller's records before and after the reduction of starting armies from 5 to 4, which is more or less when the three above changes began to take place (not counting games he was booted from and had not already lost):

Before Oct 3rd: 124-28 (82%)
After Oct 3rd: 36-12 (75%)

Sure, Impaller has said he hasn't been watching his opponents' games as much as before. But I think that with starting armies at 4 now, the need to watch an opponent's games is less necessary than before, since the game is less of a psychological war than it was before. I think the 7% drop in his winning percentage probably rightly reflects these changes.

lets do it with mal

Awesome Guy, The Impaller did come back.

The problem with doing a player X vs. the world now is that The world would inevitably win. The sheer amount of decent to amazing 1v1 players combined together would over rule even the most skilled 1v1 player. At least on Medium Earth.

If the map was changed to something different, like Battle Islands, The single player would have a much better chance as a much smaller percentage of players are skilled at that map.

Who the hell revived this thread?

Me

u mad?

How about we let this thread turn back to the earliest thread not deleted. Who's with me?

ya that was what im going for :P

so i guess im with u