What about implementing Sri lanka template?
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer/Tournament?ID=21949

Edited 1/25/2017 18:47:57

@motd Is it possible for you to find out and share the top 5 most vetoed templates?

I was wondering about that too. I'd like to see more stats overall, like TeamGuns suggested some time ago:

A template page with stats would be fun and informative to give good intel on templates:

- Average turn count at surrender
- Average turn time
- Avg. Income gap between players at surrender
- Avg. Army gap between players at surrender
- Average income advantage fliping per game (aka how many times in a game the player behind in income managed to get ahead)
- How many players vetoed it
- % of vetoing ammoung active players
- Ranking of players in a template by wins minus defeats

But I can understand if it doesn't have high priority.

Edited 1/26/2017 13:53:11

What about implementing Sri lanka template?

Yeah. I've been eyeing that along with a few others as potential templates to include. It'll come at some point :)

@motd Is it possible for you to find out and share the top 5 most vetoed templates?

39 - Snowy Mountains MA
39 - MA Battle Islands V
30 - Macedonia no split
28 - Georgia Army Cap
18 - Elitist Africa

While I'll admit that I have three of these on my veto list as well, I wouldn't remove templates from the ladder because they are being heavily vetoed. Most of these templates are either loved or hated and there is no middle ground :P

I'd like to see more stats overall, like TeamGuns suggested some time ago

ps has promised to work on them at some point. So I'll leave that to him as I'm focusing on some other features atm.

If we removed these templates, we would have a much more standardized ladder :P basically every template that uses different settings

No love for MA.

I don't think removing any templates is a way to go. If anything, increasing the number of vetoes seems objectively better in every way than removing less popular settings.

No love for MA.

No love for LD, really. I don't see a single LD template on this ladder. Even if it disliked, there should be at least one or two LD templates on this ladder. (at least turkey, if not turkey and france)

No LD :( Games would drag for a couple months

Turkey LD games aren't that long

Agreed, even France LD games don't take that long to finish.
If some LD games last forever, it's often because a player doesn't realize he's already lost. It's a problem on the RT-ladder, where some players are not familiar with LD, but I don't think it would be a problem on the MD-ladder, where the level is higher and people know how to play LD.

Even if some games don't take forever, both those templates are pick lotteries so what's the point of including them when you can get the same effect with the duel map?

I like the idea of diversity on the mdl ladder. As Rento said, we could maybe give even more vetos to players if we include other settings like LD or even commanders (ok maybe not commanders) that some people like while others don't.

I would be fine seeing Beren's Commanders template on the ladder. It's better than the one on the rt ladder, tbh. (even if I don't like it much personally).

Don't think of this in terms of your personal likes and dislikes, guys. Think of this in terms of whether ideas support/ do not support what you feel the spirit of the mdl is.

Edited 1/27/2017 05:11:56

I am pretty sure ld would be vetoed by like 90% of the participants. I'd veto it for sure

Add turkey LD!

if you want a commander template (same for bomb btw) the mdl would have to be member only (api restrictions afaik). do you guys want that? ;)

Berens Commander template was alright , Its playable and I personally liked it a little.

Turkey LD would be fine for me if you want to have the LD variety there.. But I want more vetoes :(

I would prefer 7 card hold em Europe template by Qi much more then Sri Lanka.

if you want a commander template (same for bomb btw) the mdl would have to be member only (api restrictions afaik). do you guys want that? ;)

Unless MotD can program the clot so that it auto-vetoes any templates that the player doesn't have the required specs for, in this case membership.

if you want a commander template (same for bomb btw) the mdl would have to be member only (api restrictions afaik). do you guys want that? ;)

Unless MotD can program the clot so that it auto-vetoes any templates that the player doesn't have the required specs for, in this case membership.

That would basically mean that you have to choose if you want a membership or not with the account you are using in this ladder.
If you don't have you have some auto-vetoes which could actually give you an advantage over others since you know you don't have to prepare for those specific template while members have a change to play those templates against each other and get a small disadvantage of having a larger pool of templates they need to learn.

An option to work around it would be to give members then more vetoes which they can use on whichever template they prefer to use it on. When adding new templates for only members to the list you automaticly will also need to increase the number of vetoes for members as well and finding a balance on how much vetoes you get for a certain amount of member only templates might be hard to find as well

I assumed any (auto)veto would count against the veto limit, which wouldn't give an advantage to non-members. Members can always choose to veto the template as well, or veto another template instead. So I don't think there is an advantage for anyone in this system really as long as the number of auto-vetoed (non-member) templates is low of course.