"Luck management requires more skill than just doing constant successfully 3vs2 attacks..." Yes, this is true. Plus, having so many extras with straight round leads to expansion being too fast.

A while ago I tried to adjust the defense and attack luck percentages (and the straight round luck percentages) to get better results. Ideally (to me), the best settings for straight round would be like this:

EITHER (a) 3v2 works every time but the conquered territory has 1 army, not 2, so you have to deploy 3 there the next turn to take another territory (this slows down growth by requiring an additional deployment each time...it adds up)

OR (b) 3v2 doesn't work every time, but it kills just enough so that the following turn you can kill with a 2v1 every time AND 4v2 works every time but the conquered territory is left with 2 armies each time.

Games with fast growth are less strategic. Anyone can throw around 20 income and do somewhat well. Getting to 20 income in the first place should require more skill.

Edited 9/26/2015 11:18:35

3v3 Europe :)
Straight Round on 3v3 Europe :)
Straight Round on 1v1 Ladder :(
Straight Round on 2v2 Ladder :(
New Map on 1v1 Ladder :)

new map for 1v1 ladder sucks. miss the old one. can't just change the map like that

A dark day for warlight. I checked the forum today and had almost to cry. We just lost our best ladder. I can't believe this really happens. Did you even read your thread about removing luck from the 1vs1 ladder? I can't handle this...

This is indeed a dark day for WL....

Well at least the 2v2 ladder improved in my opinion.

The map really did not work with 16% WR, when you could fail trying to capture your starting 3 bonus it put you a turn behind.

Also it feels like the thread fizzer asked for opinions on luck settings was disregarded, it seemed a strong majority wanted to keep WR for sure on the 1v1 ladder.

Ya the 16% where annoying indeed, but removing WR is just nonsense -.-

my opinion worth 100 people opinions, thats why ladders changed...

What the hell have you done!!! You ruined your own game :-(

Strategic 1v1 and 2v2 templates have been changed to remove most luck from them. They now use 0% luck, straight round, cyclic move order.

So you make a thread asking whether or not you should change the luck on the 1v1 and 2v2 ladder. As most popular and frequent answers you get that 1) the 1v1 ladder shouldn`t be changed and 2) the 2v2 ladder should have a big change. This is what you come up with?

It has been said quite often that riskmanagement is a part of the game. You need more skill with a bit of luck than you need without luck.

Also it feels like the thread fizzer asked for opinions on luck settings was disregarded, it seemed a strong majority wanted to keep WR for sure on the 1v1 ladder.

tbh, to me it feels like the community got disregarded on the 1v1 ladder topic. I`d personally rather go back to the old 1v1 and lose the 3v3 than this.


On the otherhand, we at least got a 3v3 ladder, which was the most requested feature. So thats something.

A while ago, there was a stream with Szeweningen and Gnuffone, where they had quite some troubles predicting very simple expansion within first 3 turns (sic!) with WR rounding mode. Whereas with SR you can easily calculate it up until you actually met the enemy. Which by itself is not such a bad thing, but it's more than enough to require at least the change of the name of the template / ladder, as obviously it require totally different approach.

Games with fast growth are less strategic. Anyone can throw around 20 income and do somewhat well. Getting to 20 income in the first place should require more skill. The more armies on the board, the less strategy involved.

But at the same time, when there are too few armies, both players have limited options, making it easier for worse players to play on par against better ones, no?

EITHER (a) 3v2 works every time but the conquered territory has 1 army, not 2, so you have to deploy 3 there the next turn to take another territory (this slows down growth by requiring an additional deployment each time...it adds up)

Like 75% defensive kill rate with SR?
(b) is impossible to achieve now.

Also it feels like the thread fizzer asked for opinions on luck settings was disregarded

Yea, I thought the thread was weird, and was only posted to soften the surprise blow.

Edited 9/26/2015 11:53:05

gg fizz, wp

Too few armies: Worse players don't know how to use fewer armies. They misuse the armies and give the more skilled player openings/opportunities/advantages.

When I want to level up faster, I specifically make templates with this concept in mind.

I'm having trouble digesting this. I just don't get what the point of that big thread when the opinion of 90-95% of the posters on that thread was ignored. Everyone called for no changes to the 1v1 ladder.


The best ladder on Warlight as of yesterday has been taken from us. Please give it back. Just pretty please.

I am not nearly as good as MoTD or piggy, or gui or whatever, but I call for a ladder boycott.

Meh, anyone better than me want a 3v3 teammate who has decent picking skill and will listen to team chat?

Edited 9/26/2015 12:34:36

The 1v1 ladder was by far the best ladder in Warlight. I've been playing at least 2 games at a time constantly for over 2 years. Now I don't know if I'm even going to bother playing it anymore. Please consider changing it back, or at least having a vote about it.

The 3v3 Europe ladder is much appreciated, but please fix the settings. 5 income per start is too much when you have 0% SR.

what the fuck Fizzer

the Setting for the 2vs2 ladder improved, but there are still only 2 picks. Looks like that update wasn't only a waste of time, even more, it was bad. no real benefit from that update as far as i can see.

Edited 9/26/2015 12:50:48