I want to join the random template ladder

luck settings, in order of what is most commonly played: 16% weighted, 0% weighted, 0% straight round, 16% straight round

any way to have different luck for different templates? not everyone enjoys calculator games of exactitudes and absolute certainties like gnuff and sze. personally, i think 0% round is the worst common luck setting possible.

also, luck should match the map and settings, like how a pair of shoes matches what someone wears.

for example, battle islands should have a luck setting that chaos prefers. he made those maps with a strategic purpose in mind. i bet his luck settings for it would be most appropriate.

Frank: added

Gui: it's possible, i just hate going for an initial combo and not getting it because of luck, so that's why i set them all to 0% straight round. but i guess some exceptions on certain maps might make sense.

you're the boss. but making that first turn bonus a gamble instead of a certainty changes everything, including whether or not you win the pick lottery:

pick lottery luck + certainty of first turn bonus could lead to an insurmountable early advantage. allowing the possibility of missing 3v2s decreases the influence of the pick lottery on the outcome of the game. this is why i prefer 75% luck to 0 straight round. going for 3 3v2s on the first turn when an enemy is a move away is usually a mistake.

...with 75 luck

next suggestion of gui: " i think autodistribution work better again. bc remplace "pick lottery"

also, PS, make what luck you want, but i am not sure that good player are willing to lose a match bc they fail a 4v2 maybe...
and for sure, on 75% , luck influence more then a "pick lottery"
also, i don't agree on say pick are a lottery. usually there are a lot of best bonus, not a single best bonus, that take it = win match

for some settings (heavy earth fixed warlords), autodistribute might be better or at least more enjoyable. i know you don't mind sitting around for 10 minutes in real-time waiting for people to pick. you seem to have as many supercomputers going as games/accounts being played. for me, i prefer to relax. if I play realtime it tends to be late at night. waiting 10 minutes for picks in addition to the 5-20 minute wait to get enough players can be annoying.

next suggestion of gnuff: "i think determining each team's winning % average and then letting the 'better' team win is best. then my team will win more and i won't have to worry about luck at all. i especially want this for the fixed team ladder."

(has sze challenged you yet? or did your 1v1 me best of 7 victory over him scare him away?)

yeah, maybe autodistribute could work for it, but i am not sure anyway.
I do not think sze is afraid of me.

if it is 75% luck why don't people treat neutrals differently? this is how i think:

75 luck 3v1 is almost the same as 16 luck 2v1.
75 luck 4v2 is similar to 16 luck 3v2
75 luck 5-6 v 2 is similar to 16 luck 4v2

if you really want something in 75 luck:
4v1
7v2

after my first 500 games i figured that out. but if you play 75 luck solely based off what the calculator says and don't ever use 4v1 or 7v2 attacks (when you can afford to) for neutrals that are essential, then there is no reason to complain. you are playing 75 luck as if it is 16 or 0 luck so you should miss here and there and maybe even lose because of it. if you adjust your important attacks to fit the settings you can better manage your cumulative luck.

still going bad.
bc if i attack 3v1 5/6 v 2, and my opponent risk and he take bonus, i lost ONLY for luck.
and which is the point for lose from luck?
if you want a funny clot, put 100% luck a lot of start full distribution.
i want a competitive clot, that best team fight. and the best win. not the best lucky :P
also, i alays see you play low luck, so why you suggest 75% luck?

*always

^^ this is why I think there is a different type of skill needed for 75 luck.

if a territory is not too important and/or i can't afford armies: 2v1 or 3v2
if a territory is somewhat important: 4v2 or 3v1
to gain positioning to approach the enemy's bonuses: 5v2
for other attacks: more armies = more certainty, based on importance and affordability

75 luck is the luck most commonly played i bet. then 16 luck. then 0. why would I want to play a luck setting less people play? is that why you prefer 0 luck? more certainty plus you are more familiar with it, which gives you an advantage?

75% is the most commonly played, ONLY bc only member can create low luck.
0 and 16% on weighted random are dimilar.
but on 0% luck 7v4 always work, on 16% luck could fail and this is bad. risk to fail=luck

*similar

7v4 can fail. so if the spot is important enough, do a 8v4 attack. that's what i do.

trying to add more features and also fix a bug about vacations not being honored,

2 games in europe warlords got created that are residue, don't have the ids, if you give me the ids i can delete them.

the only games that count for the ladder are the ones listed on the page.
http://www.tpolm.org/~ps/wl_clot/random3vs3/

could really use a way to search for all games recently created by user to clean these kind of screwups :S

to double the number of games being played i added a second set to the game creation. The first remains the same: random teams amongst the 6 players of each rank tier. The second set pairs the top player + 2 from the bottom (last and 3rd last) and throws them into a game against the second top player + 2 other bottom (second and fourth last). And so on consecutively until there are no 6 players left to make any more games.

As mentioned before the several templates now rotate on each batch of games created. First one was East Asia, currently it's Europe Warlords, next should be Medium France, then Europe Cities, Battle Islands IV and Imperium Romanum.

Fizzer pointed out to me how to check the games recently created, so all residue games have now been deleted. :) play on :)