Community   Maps   Forum   Mail   Ladders   Clans   Recent Games
Sign In | Sign Up
<< Back to Ladder Forum   

Posts 1 - 30 of 60   1  2  Next >>   
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 00:29:27

Level 57

WarLight Creator

That’s as close as it gets! When votes are this close, I lean towards keeping things as they are. So the map will stay on Medium Earth.

Most people want to keep it on random, so on random it will stay.

Increased to 20 it is!

The luck modifier will be reduced to 0%!

Rounding mode will stay on weighted random.

Blockade card will stay at 351%.

This one is close, but the majority want the matchmaking range reduced. I agree it should be reduced. The original 30% value was set when the ladder was much smaller, and back then games were created much more slowly due to the more limited number of opponents. I say let’s try 20% and see how it goes.

The game expiration time shall be increased! I think it makes sense to move it to 5 months to line up with the 2v2 ladder.

Four roughly equal quadrants -- you guys can’t agree on anything! The 2v2 ladder expiration time will stay where it is.

This is an interesting one! For a long time I’ve wanted to see a new map for the 2v2 ladder. Final Earth edges out the other contenders, and I agree it’s a great map.

2v2 blockade card will stay at 500%.

Most people like the idea of requiring games to be consecutive. However…

Most people also like the idea of switching from Bayeselo to TrueSkill. I generally like the idea of switching the 1v1 and 2v2 ladders to TrueSkill, however it also involves a lot of code-changes so it won’t happen as fast as the other changes in this poll.

TrueSkill is an even better improvement than the change to require consecutive games. For one thing, requiring consecutive games only fixes one specific part of the way people try to exploit the ladder – there are still other ways that would be left unaffected. TrueSkill has other benefits as well, such as giving you your rating updates as soon as each game finishes, and getting rid of the steep game expiration cutoff. This is backed up by the numbers as well -- of the voters that didn’t select the “don’t care” option, a higher percentage of voters wanted TrueSkill than the consecutive games change.

Here are the results of the seasonal ladder feature polls. 1 indicates a dislike, and 5 indicates a like.

Real-time ladder:

Most people favor using banking boot times. Sounds good to me -- we’ll try it as an experiment and see how it goes.

Voters overwhelmingly favor hiding who is online. I agree with the sentiment, but this has some technical problems in implementing it perfectly. It’s easy to remove the list from the main real-time ladder page, and also remove the online status from the individual player’s ladder page. However, someone could still look at the list of recently finished games, and then compare that to their list of games that person is in to see who recently became available on the ladder. If the total count of players was shown, this could be combined with the previous list to give a pretty accurate picture of who is online.
Perhaps this could be countered by hiding real-time games until a few hours after they’re done. This just feels like a bad solution though. Even if that was done, there will always be some ways of figuring out who might be playing that can’t be stopped, such as people that play at predictable schedules or if someone always joins the RT ladder when they’re online.
When I originally developed the real-time ladder, I was hoping it would draw bigger numbers. If there were more people online all the time, I feel that hiding the list would be less important since, if there’s a large list of people online, you have less control over what opponent you’ll get. Certainly there’s a lot that can be done to increase the draw of the real-time ladder – the items in this poll is a start, and the process for joining a game can be streamlined to avoid making players refresh their list manually while waiting for a game to get created.
This one will stay on the backburner for now since I’m not sure how to best implement it. I’d like to open it up for discussion though – please post your ideas or thoughts!

Half of the voters voted for more templates, and the rest were split between keeping it at 10 and reducing it. The biggest problem with adding more templates is that it makes the ladder less approachable for new players, since most competitive players would want to learn all of the templates before joining. Players who don’t take the time to learn the templates before joining will likely get frustrated with losses and stop playing the ladder.
There’s also an element of this poll that needs to be considered. The players voting in this poll tend to be the most hard-core and active WarLight players. In some cases, this can skew the results away from what the average player wants, and I wonder if this is one of those cases. One of my core overarching philosophies for WarLight is to keep it simple and approachable for new players, and increasing the number of templates beyond 10 really stands out as something that’s counter to this philosophy.
What do you think? Please post your thoughts!

Real-time templates to remove: 5 means keep it, 1 means remove it.

Real time templates to add: 5 means add it, 1 means don’t add it:

Close race! China 1v1 has the most positive votes (4s and 5s). Treasure Map and Turkey are tied for the second most positive votes, but Treasure Map has more 5s and fewer negative votes, so it edges it out. Season XI and Season II were the lowest-voted templates on the to-remove list, so those two will be replaced with Treasure Map and China.
There will be a blog post soon announcing all of the changes coming in the first wave. Thanks to everyone who voted!
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 00:42:44

Level 59
Very nice changes; I like the idea of the vote, even if I am unhappy with a couple of the results :)

Big thanks to Fizzer!

Also, is a 3v3 Europe ladder forseeable in the near future?
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 00:53:36

Beren • apex 
Level 62
I'll echo JSA's sentiments.

Also, I did vote to increase the number of templates on the real-time ladder, but I suspect you are right that the voters skew towards the more intense players. The main problem with the real-time ladder is simply the lack of participation, so I guess it does make sense not to increase it if that might increase its attractiveness.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 00:55:13

Level 58
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 00:58:54

{rp} GeneralGror
Level 58
Missed the voting! Hurgh. Looks good. Power to the people!
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 01:28:28

Ace Windu 
Level 56
With regard to the number of templates on the RT ladder, maybe changing a few of the templates regularly would work better than just adding new templates. The ladder would be as approachable at any one time but wouldn't become stale.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 02:56:27

Master Miyagi • apex 
Level 59
I dont understand why people are so against MultiAttack
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 03:03:34

Level 59
Because it's something most people haven't played more than a couple times. Many warlight players are scared to experiment on new templates.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 03:38:21

Level 59
The real lesson here: only a 3 point rating scale is required. :P "Definitely want," "Maybe want," and "Do not want"
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 04:23:12

Master ARC 
Level 57
Big thanks to Fizzer for putting this all together. It's really interesting to see a) how the ladders will be changed and that b) how the community's opinions compare to my own opinions.

One other question that I have: Will Local Deployments be being used in the future? That was one question with very close results, and I'd like to know what Fizzer's executive opinion is on the subject.

Edited 9/11/2014 04:23:22
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 05:57:42

Level 60
mad props for doing all this.

I agree with you Fizzer on RT hide. If more people played it would be unneeded. I love the idea of RT ladder, I just hate hour long games. I just spent the last 2 hours playing starcraft rather than RT ladder because I got 5 games in on SC2, would have gotten 2-3 here. If the pace gets better with the banking boot, that might solve the volume problem.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 06:15:36

[WM] Gnuffone 
Level 60
i get really surprised about some result:
-straight round lose. I thought was easier SR win than 0% luck win.
-the X consecutive game for archieve a rank. In my opinion is now useless when we switch to trueskill, as you will need 40/50 games for a good rating, otherwise variation will be too high.
-about range of 20%, remember to do it based on true skill meant, not based of rating, otherwise variation, that is very high at the start, will prevent you to play good players for long time.
-87 vote for randomize bonus are a lot, i thought this was going to win, but with minor vote.ù
-i would like to see who vote for auto-distrubiotn teplate (41 !!!!)
- reduce the boot time to 3 minute will increae boot. in some template, like LD and heavyearth, i think was the case to increse time, at least for pick. And i want see, when you have +20 income in ME, to commit in 3 minute....
-i'd rather don't comment about hide who is online. But at this point, as low rating make you lose point even if you win, add a range of matchmaking....
-i really get surprised, that season 2 got a lot of 1 star. With light fog, was enoguh just count and approach the expansion knowing you can £stall" opponent for 2 turns with diplo.
-i still don't understand, how turkey LD do better than MME LD. If you understand what strategic template mean, i can't really think you voted for a paper rock scissor template, based on pick lottery and 1st moves.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 06:22:59

Level 56
LD must go.

that 3 neutral must go too.

Edited 9/11/2014 06:34:02
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 06:24:46

[WM] Gnuffone 
Level 60
Also, is a 3v3 Europe ladder forseeable in the near future?

same here :)
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 06:42:01

master of desaster 
Level 64
I like most changes a lot! I was a bit surprised that 1vs1 ladder didn't change to MME.
I would be glad if we could change two RTL templates all 1-2 months.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 06:51:16

{rp} GeneralGror
Level 58
bring back the FFA ;)
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 06:53:58

his balls. 
Level 60
Someone made a good point up there about only having 3 options when deinding whether you want to have a map. The five star system just confuses things and slightly obscures the data. I second that.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 07:14:29

Level 65
RT ladder should be advartised in Open Games tab (it could be 'fake game' pinned on the top of list). It will surely attract many people who just play real time game.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 07:21:07

Level 57
Agree with Krzychu. Like this was in ps Greece ladder :)
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 07:24:11

[WM] Gnuffone 
Level 60
yeah. that's a great idea.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 08:41:35

[WM] ᵀᴴᴱ𝓕𝓻𝓲𝓭𝓰𝓮 
Level 59
If we set vote "value" to
5 +2
4 +1
3  0
2 -1
1 -2

we will get:
score seasonal ladder poll
  175 experimental features
  158 Randomized bonusses 
   54 Random teamgame
  -13 Local Deployments
  -57 No-Split
  -67 Autodist
  -82 Multiattack
 -131 FFA

score RT Ladder template
  176 No-Luck strat 1v1
  153 BI5
  134 Guiroma
  110 strat Greece
   47 Season  7 - Heavy Earth
   14 Season 12 - Turkey LD
   -1 Season  3 - EA&O
   -9 Season  1 - light fog, 0 neutrals
  -49 Season  2 - light fog, diplo card
  -50 Season 11 - LD on ME, light fog

   22 Treasure Map
   22 Baltic Sea
   14 Heavy Earth
   11 China 1v1
   11 GME III
    1 strat Turkey
  -14 Qina 
  -15 Slow Earth
  -17 Macedonia
  -33 Ancient Greece LD
  -43 Season 15 - Poland
  -49 Rad-Osil
  -70 France LD
  -83 BI5 multiattack

So while I agree on which to delete, the judgement on which to include seems way subjective.. Funny thing is - i personally would much prefer china to baltic sea, but the numbers indicate it should be otherwise..

Plus - i completely disagree on multiple templates being a problem on the ladders. Ladders are for experienced players anyways. First of all you need to either pay for membership (which you would if you are really into the game) or play your way up to lvl 49? by which moment you will have understanding of the game enough for you to compete on the ladder with many templates. If people really want it, do it :)

As for the "hardcore" being majority of the voters.. the votes of others would not have much meaning other than "this is to complicated, i'll just click randomly"

As for hiding who's on the ladder at the moment, for God's sake just do it. People clearly want it to happen, and if it will not help, then revert it afterwards. Delay in showing finished games is a great idea and by far will make abusing ladder much more difficult. Why not do it like other tweaks you quoted "and we'll se what happens afterwards"?

All in All - seems like a very big uptade is about to happen, and we are very happy for you to listen to the voice of community that much. Thanks and keep up the good work, Fizz.. :D
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 08:56:31

Level 60
that 3 neutral must go

YES!!! (if that means to erase it from the universe)
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 09:51:28

his balls. 
Level 60
Great idea kry. I would love if all auto games were logged in a table somewhere.

Top of the auto games tab should always be a rt ladder game. The map should not be shown though.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 09:59:41

Level 62
ME > MME surprises me most
The rest ended up almost as expected.

Btw: Neutrals of 3 are ok, but SR please, to get rid of lucky 4v3 or unlucky 5v3 (2nd does not apply on 0% WR)

I agree RT-Ladder should be advertised on Open Games (possibility of joining/leaving easier)
Some people are to lazy to go to the ladderpage to join or don't even realise it exists

Edited 9/11/2014 10:01:12
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 10:18:24

[WM] Gnuffone 
Level 60
Agree with timi about the thing of put SR 0% ;)
Why don't show the template though?
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 10:37:21

Level 60
Nice pool summing up, Fridge :)

I personally also think, that reducing no. of templates on RL ladder would be better. Not only to less expedienced players, but also to "hardcore" ones. While the first is quite obvious, the 2nd group benefit, because only really good templates will be left (Pretty PLEASE, remove EA&O, or change it to SR :( ). Yes, you can learn 15 templates or more, but it's much better to play on 5, that are really good, than on 15 and hope to not get half of it. Shame it was voted in this way.

First of all you need to either pay for membership (which you would if you are really into the game) or play your way up to lvl 49?
There is alot of players with Membership (I'll pay to be better, than others), of above 50 lvl (lottery games etc..) that don't even know difference between SR and WR, so I disagree on this.

As for hiding who's on the ladder at the moment, for God's sake just do it. People clearly want it to happen, and if it will not help, then revert it afterwards. Delay in showing finished games is a great idea and by far will make abusing ladder much more difficult. Why not do it like other tweaks you quoted "and we'll se what happens afterwards"?
+1. Couldn't said it better.

People will be too lazy to check profile of 50 players to see who is online, or to figure it out it in another way. Most people just looking on a participants list and are like "naah this guy. I'll wait until he goes away". At least that's what I'm doing sometimes :P

EDIT: maybe I'll add 1 more thing: Will it stop all the people from trying to figure out who's online? Probably no. But the question is: will it increase RT ladder traffic? Answer is YES.

Edited 9/11/2014 11:10:40
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 10:52:51

Level 60
1) LD on Turkey did not get voted out, instead the reasonable LD on Medium Earth was kicked. I did not expect that.
2) Hiding who's online might be a slight problem mostly because there is no range similar to 1v1 ladder. If your opponent is rated 600+ points below you, you can only lose points. Actually that feature has been a problem even earlier, I recall at least 3 situations when I wanted to play against zibik when only me, him and a 3rd low rated player were online and the algorythm paired up them despite us being in 1st and 2nd and him being almost in last place. Also if you still have the number of players visible 2 players that want to play together can just join when there are 0 people on the ladder. Again I don't believe it's a problem of visibility, it's much more of a problem of not enough players.
3) Poland -43? :(
4) Boot time on rt ladder with 3 minutes and 5 minute boot bank...
Nononnononononono I can say from experience I tend to be quick with calculation and order execution, but 3 minutes late game is definitely not enough to keep the quality of the game up. Also I'd like to poin out that majority wanted to keep it at 5, only difference is some wanted an increase only during the picking stage. If we drop it to 3 minutes even with banking boot time boots go up, quality of games goes down. Frankly banking boot time is very rarely used since most casual rt games are without autoboot. I must say I interpret the results of that poll very differently.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 11:03:08

[WM] Gnuffone 
Level 60
Little question: if we hide who he is online, we will know the opponent while we are playing?
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 11:15:45

Level 60
@Gnuffone - I guess yes, since there is no option to play Anonymously, so i don't see how it could work on RT ladder all of the sudden.
Ladder poll results: 9/11/2014 11:39:02

Level 55
Fizzer, thanks for doing this!

When are all these changes going to come into effect? In particular the 2v2 ladder template change to Final Earth?
Posts 1 - 30 of 60   1  2  Next >>   

Contact | About WarLight | Play Risk Online | Multiplayer Strategy Game | Challenge Friends, Win Money | Skill Game | Terms of Service