i read a lot of people complaining of things on warlight, but only a few bunch of them actually submit suggestions to uservoice or go there to use their votes regularly.

they claim it's hard to find.

they claim Fizzer mostly ignores it anyways.

they claim they don't want to register in a new site.

they claim other players also don't really use it so it's useless.

and they keep whinning in game chat or occasionally creating yet another thread on the forum. this will very unlikely change anything. the devs do not spend their days canvasing the forum for great ideas, they spend their time implementing the ones they think are most beneficial for the site.

if you want something to change but are not using uservoice when the devs specifically told you to use that channel then you're just being stupid.

it's the official channel to submit feature requests and vote for them. it's much more likely the devs will read uservoice then go through your forum thread or game chats.

uservoice threads won't get derailed by trolls or get the discussion hijacked by other suggestions. people will either be for it, or focus on the ideas they favor.

it will measure exactly how strongly the community feels about it, with an actual vote count. not just subjective discussion.

it gives the devs an idea of how important that feature is compared to other requests that have already been suggested.

you might even discover others have already been suggesting your idea. or other ideas that are more relevant.

i agree it should be more prominently linked on the site, but:
1) if you can't memorize warlight.uservoice.com it takes exactly 3 clicks to get there: help -> "How can I submit feedback or suggest new features?" -> uservoice
2) new threads created get automatically emailed to the devs, they can browse by most recent, most voted or most trending topics; they can even comment on your idea or report implementation status.
3) you just use the same email as your warlight account, if you're gmail it's even auto-login

if you want your voice heard, use uservoice

http://warlight.uservoice.com

Edited 9/29/2015 22:16:50

Keep Bumping this thread to get the message heard!

Fizzer says most people can find it ... but yet currently there are only ~10000 votes and everyone gets 10 votes so that is only ~1000 people (don't forget about alts). Last time I checked there were a lot more people that play on Warlight. That is a lot of people who don't get their voice heard.

Fizzer does need to mark the 3v3 ladder completed (has over 300 votes) so those can be re-used.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8B44ubqhi-w

The things with the most votes there, though, have been around there for 4-5 years...the developer don't take them into account unless they specifically like it.

My only problem is that I never feel like my voice/ideas are being heard. So many 1 vote ideas...

hey,it took me more than a year on warlight before i knew something such as uservoice existed
at that time i did not even know what's the meaning of uservoice

I made a uservoice for 3v3 Europe. Five or six years later we got it (because of reasons unrelated to uservoice), but with "no luck" settings and without a vote about settings. Uservoice is certainly the way to go.

What does uservoice have now?

#1 Peace Treaties, 900 votes.

This would establish a framework (beyond role-playing rules or etiquette) for FFAs, "dilpo" games, and role-playing games. In terms of numbers, these FDRs (FFAs, "dilpos," role-players) might constitute the largest group of players on Warlight.

Status: Ignored for about 3-4 years. Recently, Fizzer wrote a kind line about how he doesn't have time, it's not important to him now, but maybe he will in the future (1-4 years later?). Fizzer must be great at breaking up with girls. "It's not you, it's me. You are a great person. In the future you will definitely find someone who will love you the way you deserve. Thank you for our time together. I will treasure it..."

#2 through #5: Lots of votes, been there for years. Yeah! Go to uservoice to scream in an empty room where nobody will hear you!

#6 Bring back the old 1v1 ladder, 224 votes in two days. This is the real test of uservoice. Fizzer made a forum thread with the results of roughly 70% in favor of 0% WR and 30% in favor of 0% SR. He interpreted that as a strong need for change. Now the uservoice is on fire. If direct communication in Fizzer's own thread doesn't work and uservoice doesn't work, there should be no need to communicate with Fizzer in any capacity.

Edited 9/30/2015 04:39:31

http://warlight.uservoice.com/forums/77051-warlight-features/suggestions/9984525-identify-volunteer-moderators-as-such-on-their-ico

Well currently it is hidden in a link in the help section. You click and it will redirect you to a wiki page. Then it takes you some time to find the link to go to uservoice.

Could you say it is a good design?

Every extra click counts! There is an experiment about web design, and it tells you how small change makes big difference. It is about the reply box.

The first one is you need to click, and it will redirect you to another page which shows the reply box. Then you can input your comments and press submit.

The second one is the reply box is shown directly in the same page. You can input your comments and press submit.

Result: The second one receives so much more replies than the first one.

As a designer it is your job to make it more accessible, not to blame users when they couldn't find it.

If the developer feels the need to sticky this thread so more people can discover/use uservoice, it would be more rewarding if he could redesign the pages.

Edited 9/30/2015 07:00:31

There are some limitations on uservoice.

You have 10 votes only.
You can't make a new suggestion/idea if you have used 10 votes.
It does not favor small changes/features. People are not going to vote for them, not because they don't want them, but the benefits are small. The developer will probably misjudge the community needs for small changes/features.
Very few check for new ideas periodically on uservoice. Your idea will be left unnoticed if you don't post it on the forum too.
So you still need to open a thread to advertise your idea anyway. :P

For those who are out of votes, forum is a good place to make suggestions.

You can't make a new suggestion/idea if you have used 10 votes.

Incorrect. You can always take your votes away from ideas, so you can get your votes back at any time and keep making new suggestions.

You have 10 votes only.

This is by design. I can only work on one thing at a time, anyway, so if you're voting on more than 4 things it isn't really accomplishing anything -- all you're doing is spreading your voice thinner. Instead, you should put 3 votes into the three things you really want.

Last time I checked there were a lot more people that play on Warlight. That is a lot of people who don't get their voice heard.

Fair enough. But even if everyone's voice was heard, it wouldn't help me complete features any faster. The goal of UserVoice is to help me understand what people want. Even if only a small random sample of WarLight's audience uses it, it accomplishes that goal. Of course, you could argue the sample isn't random and only the most passionate users vote, which skews the numbers.

It does not favor small changes/features. People are not going to vote for them, not because they don't want them, but the benefits are small. The developer will probably misjudge the community needs for small changes/features.

You're making the assumption that more votes means it's more likely to happen. That's not true -- I judge the number of votes relative to the amount of work it would take to implement, and also factor in my own opinion of the item and how it fits into WarLight's overall direction. If you go to the UserVoice forum, look at completed items, you'll see there are items that got done with very low votes.

So you still need to open a thread to advertise your idea anyway. :P

Honestly all this does is skew the numbers. I try and use UserVoice as a way to see what the community wants, but if some ideas are advertised on the forum and others aren't it makes my job harder since it means that UserVoice votes are no longer a fair assessment of what people really want, since those ideas got more exposure than others. I factor this in, too, when examining the numbers.

Status: Ignored for about 3-4 years.

It takes minutes to hours to come up with an idea, and months to years to implement many of them. Not to mention there are thousands of people coming up with ideas and one person implementing them. By definition, most items won't be able to be completed quickly. But if they're still good ideas that I'd like to do some day, what would you suggest doing with them? Closing them isn't really fair since they're good ideas, and I'd still like to know how many people want them and if I close it then it can't be voted on.

Edited 9/30/2015 06:59:37

900 votes is a lot. How long would it take to program something so that when FFAs are played, there are settings that allow for diplomatic actions? For example:

(1) Alliances

- Players work together and are literally (the system won't allow it) unable to attack each other for the specified number of turns.
- The number of turns could be negotiated in private or public chat.
- If you want to make this really cool, the allies establish an "Ally Chat" (like team chat) for as long as the alliance lasts.
- If players want to end the alliance, they have to notify the ally x turns in advance (make this customizable in the game creation settings).

(2) Truces

- This simply means you cannot attack someone else (the system won't allow it). There is no alliance per se.
- Negotiate the duration in public/private chat. It cannot end early. Or, if someone attacks during a truce, the player is punished (eg, maybe half income the next turn).

(3) Coalitions/Public Enemy

- Players negotiate and agree to attack one enemy together for a specified duration.
- Joining a coalition means you cannot attack any other person (the system won't allow it) until the coalition disbands.

(4) Card or Income Sharing

- In the real world, allies share resources, fight in the same armies, etc. Make this happen in WL and it would be cool. WL resources: cards. WL armies: income.

Diplomacy cards don't do any of this. A diplomacy card is a unilateral action. The above settings would be bilateral or multilateral -- that is, real diplomacy.

-------

If a diplomacy framework (above, an example) were designed, couldn't you make some money by having it exclusively pay-to-play -- ie, "no luck" coin -- or require players to pay a one-time fee to create and join games of this nature -- diplo memberships of one month, one year, one WarLife (we will live longer than WL...)?

Edited 9/30/2015 08:10:15

So it takes a lot of time to create a poll for voting on the 1vs1 ladder changes? You're saying you see votes in relation of the amount of time you'd need to make it. I think changing 1vs1 ladder settings wasn't that much of work.

EDIT: just realized you edited that part to "and also factor in my own opinion of the item and how it fits into WarLight's overall direction." So we won't get back our old 1vs1 ladder ever? Will you not even give us the chance to prove you by poll what the community wants?

Destroying the template i associated with warlight isn't the way to make coin games more attractive.

At least you semi admitted that the ladder change wasn't requested by the community. You was never interacting with the community in your thread asking about our opinion about ladders becoming no luck. You just tried to prepare us on that change. Claiming you care about our opinion was pure hypocrisy.

Edited 9/30/2015 09:06:11

This thread went a bit offroad, but I would like to give my own opinion about the subject.
I would like to reefer to what you said in last stream regardless "Overhall of Clan System" idea on uservoice. You said, that only 2-3% of all players belongs to any clan and you'd rather change something, that will make 100% players benefit from, than only 2-3%.

Have you ever heard about 80/20 rule? It was originally about time management (80% of work require 20% of time, and last 20% of work takes 80% of time). In this case, 20% of players have impact on 80% of Warligth, while 80% have impact only on 80% of what happens in this game. For example 1v1 ladder started from 75% luck. Community reduced it to 16% and then 0% WR. Clan league is still one of the most prominent league. Livestream tournaments, or other events like this are rum ONLY by players who belongs to clan. Check fourm - I dare you to find any thread in any topic with over 20 replays, where 50% or more players are clanless. List can go on and on.

So my question is: is it fair, to adjust whole site to this 80% of mass, that doesn't care so much about WL and just play casual game once a week? Shouldn't you been more concerned about players, who actually stick to this game, helped improve it and mold it into the way it looks like now?

Edited 9/30/2015 10:41:28

Latnox: i want to see a clan member host the livestream this Saturday then ;)

Also about 1v1 ladder, 2v2 ladder - you want to adjust this settings to 80% of players so badly, but do they really benefit from those changes? I mean if someone doesn't see difference between WR and SR, maybe 1v1 ladder is not for him?

2v2 ladder - 2 or 4 picks makes difference only for experienced players. Newbies doesn't even know how much they should pick to not get random spot on a start! If they don't understand the settings, and can't make good strategy with 4 picks per player, again, maybe 2v2 ladder is not for them? Noone force them to play it if they don't like it. I'd rather play ladder, that have 100 competitive players, than 300 players, with 200, who doesn't know how to play.

And I'm not saying, this because I'm a big fan on Strat ME. No, I'm fine with 0% SR, because good player should be able to win despite the settings (as long as they are fair). But I completely disagree with reasoning behind this and I don't like how community is being neglected.

Edited 9/30/2015 10:31:32

PS - ok, you're exception that confirms the rule :)

the 80/20 is the famous Pareto rule :) i hope everyone know him, one of best microeconomics of history.
Yeah i agree 100% with what latnox said.

for example, check 1v1 and the new 3v3 ladder, around 80% of players are in a clan.