<< Back to Ladder Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 30 of 166   1  2  3  4  5  6  Next >>   
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 21:58:54

Fizzer 
Level 58

Warzone Creator
Report
Is it time to remove luck from the strategic templates? I'm talking specifically about the "Strategic 1v1" and the "Strategic 2v2" templates.

Today, WarLight games default to being no-luck (pure skill) games. However, we still have these two old "strategic" templates that use luck-based settings.

First, how did we get here? A history lesson!

When WarLight was new, the luck modifier didn't even exist (so all games were essentially the same as 100% luck).

When the luck modifier was added, it defaulted to 75%, and everyone cheered. The 75% luck smoothed out the extremes and stopped insane things from rarely happening, like 100 armies failing to capture a territory defended by 5.

Then the strategic templates were added. Since we were all used to 75% luck at the time, the strategic templates using 16% made a lot of sense. 16% was chosen since it's the highest luck where 4 armies will always take a territory defended by 2. 75% was considered normal whereas 16% was considered strategic.

Later, the default luck modifier level was changed from 75% to 0%, but the strategic templates were not changed. This caused us to end up in a world where the "strategic" templates have more luck than the default!

To newcomers who didn't progress through the steps with us, it seems crazy and out of place that a strategic template would involve more randomness than the default. I hear this complaint from new players all the time.

I think it is time to bring these two templates up to date with the rest of the site and make them pure skill. However, doing this would change the auto games and ladders, so I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on the subject.

Of course, everyone will still be able to play with the current settings for as long as they'd like, no matter what we change here. I will make a copy of the current templates and make them available for use.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:02:03


Skooma
Level 58
Report
sounds great, but a question, are you going to change the ladder templates to straight-round as well as 0% luck?
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:07:50


master of desaster 
Level 65
Report
Me personally, i like the 1vs1 ladder as it is. Risk management should stay a part of a ladder imo. In the 2vs2 ladder i would change the rouding mode to straight round or at least set the luck factor to 0%.

Please don't make the ladders the so called "pure skill" settings. I would really dislike that cause in fact it requires less skill to play a template like this.

Edited 8/10/2015 22:11:39
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:09:29


VaporWolf [FROG]
Level 56
Report
Anna when he said default as Pure Skill, that is what he meant, because Pure Skill is straight-round
I assume he means he will be adding that as well, i also support these changes but it will of course change strategy up a bit as far as defense and offense goes

Edited 8/10/2015 22:12:20
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:11:13

Quicksand 
Level 60
Report
+1000000
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:11:26


Skooma
Level 58
Report
i personally would prefer the 1v1 ladder stay as it is. strat 1v1 straight-round is something i'm not very strong at :D
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:14:36


Benjamin628 
Level 59
Report
I think the 1v1 ladder should stay 0% WR.

If you are going to change anything on the 2v2 ladder, give us 4 picks.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:17:02


master of desaster 
Level 65
Report
+1benjamin. 4 picks would be even more important than a change of the luck factor
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:22:32


Benjamin628 
Level 59
Report
As ChrisCMU said in the other thread about this, I don't think Fizzer is going to change the 2v2 ladder to something like China 2v2, but I don't like 2v2 on Final Earth in general.

Also, whatever you do, don't make either ladder No Luck Cyclic. Most players on ladders take it very seriously and like to think things through. NLC is perfect for real time coin games, but not for Multi-Day ladder games.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:43:02


Hades
Level 63
Report
Yeah I think keep the 1v1 ladder as is
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:46:17

Master Bjarke
Level 63
Report
I second the plea of not making the it No luck cyclic move order. That who can pick first get an advantage gives a disadvantage to people playing ladder games from their phones or who have a slow internetconnection.
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. I don't think there should be advantages given on the basis of going though hoops like that.

So in sum; I think it would be sweet with 0% SR, but would prefer that it didn't come with No Luck Cyclic.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:48:27


ps 
Level 60
Report
if it was up to me i'd have everything 0% SR.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:56:26


Timinator • apex 
Level 64
Report
Make 2v2 4picks and 0% WR aswell, that's all we need.

Risk-management could also be classified as "skill"
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 22:58:41


AWESOMEGUY 
Level 63
Report
I agree with Bjarke. If it were just changed to 0% SR, I would find that better. However, I prefer the 1v1 ladder to stay as it is. The 2v2 ladder requires more change, and a good first step would be to change it to 0% SR.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 23:15:27

Sabali
Level 56
Report
I'd personally like to see more 0% WR in rt ladder and seasonal templates
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 23:18:18


USA Biches
Level 61
Report
I prefer the 0% WR for the 1v1 ladder. It makes the ladder much more strategic.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/10/2015 23:20:26


Benjamin628 
Level 59
Report
+1 Timinator. I want to see Fizzer's reply to this.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 00:07:00


à la recherche du temps perdu 
Level 57
Report
I don't play the ladders so often, you could even say never. But lately I was considering trying them again. While pure-skill seems perfect for RT games; I have a huge problem with the pure-skill system applied to Multi day games. This is not logic, a nonsense IMHO, it's a Multi-day game!!! Why would you have to be fast, especially in team games? But in 1vs1 as well. The picking stage is so important, that ruins the game. But wait, I'm sorry, I think I'm off topic and fighting a yesterday's war.


" Please don't make the ladders the so called "pure skill" settings. I would really dislike that cause in fact it requires less skill to play a template like this. "

+1

" Risk-management could also be classified as "skill" "

+1


I'm maybe not in phase with the trends, but whatever, trying to eliminate any luck factor is a bit of a witch hunt. If you generalize pure-skill to the whole WL "offer". I would bet that soon or later, we will come back to something close to what we know today.

0% WR or SR could be needed though. I guess the random move order should be the only "luck" factor admitted. it has a certain charm.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 00:16:08


à la recherche du temps perdu 
Level 57
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. I don't think there should be advantages given on the basis of going though hoops like that. "


Forgot to give +2 to this one...
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 00:33:51


almosttricky 
Level 61
Report
Please no "no luck cycle." I like to take the time to think my picks through. As far as the 16% luck, I am leaning to keeping it, but I don't have a strong opinion.

Edited 8/11/2015 00:34:37
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 00:44:18


hedja 
Level 58
Report
Please keep strategic 1v1 as it is.

I feel like, as mentioned earlier by master of desaster, risk management is an extremely important part of the template, and is one of the things which makes it so "strategic". Being able to balance the risk of 3vs2s with the safety of 4vs2s, or going for 6vs4s instead of 7vs4s is one of the things that makes it more interesting to play than 0%, even though it does give you some frustrating situations (e.g. a game last week all 4 3vs2 attacks in one of my turns failed, missed a card and all expansion) most of the times it gives you better situations imo.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 03:08:06


ChrisCMU 
Level 60
Report
I am always for removing luck. But, i also am not a fan of the speed of picking factoring in. I will live with that if it gets us less luck though for sure

Can we have no luck minus picking?

Edited 8/11/2015 03:09:36
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 03:19:11


Beren • apex 
Level 63
Report
The 1v1 ladder is perfect as it is.

The 2v2 ladder would be fine with either 0% WR or 0% SR, but it would be better with 4 picks per player.

I completely agree that no-luck cycle would be bad for the ladders.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 04:41:33


Mythonian 
Level 55
Report
Don't play the 1v1 ladder so I have no comment on that aspect, but I have plenty of comments for the 2v2 ladder.

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.

It's similar to many card games such as poker. There's a randomness aspect of it, obviously, and yet it's still a game of immense skill and the best players will stand out compared to average ones. Poker is a game of complete risk management. This is true of WarLight as well, and is part of the reason the game is as fun as it is, to me at least. WarLight was inspired by RISK, which as the name implies was a boardgame entirely based around risk management.

If everything was pre-determined it just becomes a game of realizing start locations of your opponents and then you can know the exact state of the entire board. In real-time games it's harder to count income and backtrack through the turns to realize the entire board state, but for multi-day games it's easy. This makes things way to predictable and removes any sense of tension.

I'd be fine with 0% WR, since it doesn't seem plausible to oppose it, but SR completely removes risk management as a concept that players need to focus on. As Timinator said, Risk-management could also be classified as "skill"



On a side note, 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, and I think that the added layer of metagaming by viewing the opponent's previous games for picking habits and the psychological layer of predicting their picks from insufficient information should also be considered an aspect of skill.

The ladder is supposed to be a persistent thing where players are constantly fighting for the next rung above them, and information gathering on the habits of your opponent is important. Having enough picks to cover the entire board diminishes this greatly and gives players not only a lot of information on the board state but also potential early-game counters to nearly any possibilities. Working from 80% knowledge requires much less skill than working from 40% knowledge; I consider this identical to risk management.

The better the players are, the more they can do with little knowledge. It's not like your opponents are in random locations on the board (I've yet to face opponents who commit with 0 picks, at least). If the prevailing trend is that most people think there's "not quite enough knowledge" or something, then 3 picks should be plenty. 4 picks is overkill, though, IMO.


TL;DR: Risk management is important. Working from little knowledge is important. 2v2 ladder is fine as is, but if change must be made, 0% WR 3picks should be more than enough change.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 05:41:42


Perrin3088 
Level 44
Report
I've always been pro-slight luck.. because warlight is meant to simulate war, not chess.
chess is deliberate calculated moves that work exactly as expected...
war is not.. war has variables that are impossible to know the outcome of until they occur..
I felt the original strat 1v1 settings put the variables of war quite nicely into a strategic simulation.

but again, I'm sure I'm in the minority of this...
min/maxers always want to be able to min/max, and would rather not have to compensate for probabilities and indefinite variables.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 05:45:30


Fc Bayern
Level 63
Report
+1 Mythonia

With 16% luck you need to THINK "should i attack the 30blockade with 48armies(38% chance of taking the terretory) or should i use 52armies (100% chance of taking the terretory)" --> so, luck makes the game more difficult.
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 06:19:11


Krzysztof 
Level 66
Report
i have mixed feelings about 0% WR
i understand that in ladders we can allow single games to be decided by luck. In long run luck should be equal for everybody, and (as many mentioned earlier) risk management is also a skill.
But: one game can easily be the difference between #1 and #2 - one can win because he managed to take single-picked greenland in 2 turns (~20% chance) while his opponents failed to take FTB with 80% chance. You can't name it 'risk-management',it's just luck. I can live with it. In 1v1 and 2v2 ladders you can just play more games. I would stick with 0% SR in seasonals though - just to reduce such situations.

and on the side note:

having 2 picks per player has been growing on me, and I think that the added layer of metagaming by viewing the opponent's previous games for picking habits and the psychological layer of predicting their picks from insufficient information should also be considered an aspect of skill.

Cannot disagree more. What you have written is simple description of bad template. We shouldn't be playing paper-rock-scissors game where the main point is to guess your opponent picks. Best case scenario is template where you can focus only on finding optimal picks and strategy that always win, no matter what your opponents do. I'm aware there is probably not way to create settings that always work this way, but we should get something as close as possible.

Edited 8/11/2015 06:19:36
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 06:53:11


knyte 
Level 58
Report
I like the 1v1 Ladder the way it is, but would appreciate two more picks on the 2v2 ladder.

I also think that "risk management" is a valid point. This game is strategic because it has luck and we need to make decisions that best manage around it. Otherwise it's not as much of a test of your ability to make quick probabilistic calculations beyond adjusting for different predicted opponent behaviors.

Krzychu is right about the game being most worthwhile when there's actually a decidedly "better" strategy beyond just RPS. That said, RPS isn't incompatible with strategy- in fact, RPS is in itself a strategy game as long as there is Kore than one round.

Edited 8/11/2015 06:55:11
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 07:14:19


indibob 
Level 61
Report
Would it really be that bad to have two equally prestigious ladders running simultaneously.. one 16% the other pure skill?
People could choose to enter one or both.
Perhaps even have a play off system for the winners of both ladders over both templates if a number one is needed
Time to remove luck from the strategic templates?: 8/11/2015 07:41:44


Darkpie 
Level 61
Report
If you are gonna change it I think cyclic move order is more important than 0% SR when it comes to reducing the luck in ladders
Posts 1 - 30 of 166   1  2  3  4  5  6  Next >>