if this is ever done again, I. think it would be better to do it offline, because that gives you multiple days for grading, and you have time to play some games on it.

Since everyone is complaining about the template contest, I want to go on record thanking all of the guest commentators, master of desaster, Sephiroth, and Gnuffone for giving several hours of their time to talk about our submissions. I especially want to thank szeweningen far putting it all together and offering up a prize. This isn't something he had to do, so I think people should be more appreciative of the time and effort he expended.

Up front szew said that he had two goals: (1) to encourage more people to try to create strategic templates, possibly implementing features of Warlight that traditionally hadn't been considered viable for them, and (2) to reward the best submissions. I think we can all agree that he was successful on the first count, and on the second, while you may not agree with the particular winners, they are definitely both very solid templates.

As far as implementation criticisms go, I would agree that it is hard to get a complete sense of a template without having played it at least a few times. I still don't quite understand why they didn't open up the sample games, rather than looking at the distribution of a new game, since obviously you get a better sense of the template by looking at a game even very briefly rather than just looking at the settings.

That being said, I was very impressed with how quickly szew in particular was able to get to the heart of the templates. His criticisms of all of the templates (including my own) were generally on point even without having looked at games. The only exception I'd make for that was his handling of ChrisCMU's template, which I think deserved better. MoD (the only one who had actually played the template) rated it a solid 5, and instead of asking him why he thought it was an OK template or looking at the sample game they skewered it.

And finally, since all of us template makers must complain bitterly about the unfair judging, I now cry for vengeance against master of desaster and Sephiroth for their craven betrayal! Henceforth I proclaim a vendetta against the both of them! I shall make them pay for the injustice they have done! I shall likewise bring down my wrath on all those who grant them succour! Let all who love justice stand with me!

Edited 12/1/2015 14:44:59

Do you need some bribery to be my friend again? :(

wuhuuuuu..... Beren on a crusade xD... i love it

Well, I cannot watch the video broadcast, so it is hard for me to comment on what went into the ratings (talk, games played on it, etc). What I do know is I explained it when I posted it, and I played about a dozen games against people and got pretty positive feedback on it (except for Gnuff, who only played the first of 4 versions of it, which I suspect he did not see the changes I made to it or something).

I don't care about winning the contest. What I care about is that I was basically given a zero rating for a template I worked hard on, and I think has merit. Yet it was 0.5 above a lotto in the eyes of Sze. I think that is total crap and obviously he did no real evaluation on it.


I applaud the idea of this (it isn't something he had to do). I give an A for thought, a D for execution.

What Chris said.

Please tell me what exactly is that we did not understand about the template. I've explained to the viewers how 100% luck can be more/less managed by high stacks, I also explained why it has not been used before (because of order delay moves). OD cards do not help this issue, I've even suggested that possibly overriden attack kill rates can help with that.

Why do you think OD cards don't address the issue? If you received an OD card each turn, and even had one at the start of the game, then for all intents and purposes, single-army delay moves would be moot under very nearly all circumstances.

As I explained on the other contest thread (after your stream, to be fair), when I tested the template on several occasions, the need to use delay moves was actually fairly limited. That's why I didn't really bother adding extra OD cards to the template for your contest, because I expected that you wouldn't just *declare* that delay moves would be a problem, but you would have done a little leg work and found that, no, actually, in practice it's not such a big deal. In short, I expected you to either try the template or to examine at least one of the games that I linked (something like 7 or 8 of them).

There is another aspect of delay moves that you did not consider, which puts the nail in the coffin regarding whether they will be a big problem or not: The number of delay moves you can make is not *only* limited by the number of armies you have, but also by the number of connections between territories you have access to. If you've got 1 million armies in a territory which only has 3 connections out of it, you can only make 3 delay moves from there. Combine that natural limitation with OD cards, and problem is pretty much solved except in rare circumstances where you both only have 1 or 0 cards, a large stack in each of your territories (very rare) and desperately need to out-delay each other. A situation I have yet to experience even *without* extra OD cards.

Again, the only way you can really know about this is if you either think about it a long time, as I did in prep for making the template in the first place, or actually try out the template yourself to get a real feel for how it works.

The whole idea of the event was to promote strategic template making, nothing else.

Well, that seems to have back-fired in a lot of ways, hasn't it? I won't say it was a failure though, because it certainly did raise a lot of interest in making templates, but it has obviously left a bitter taste in many of the participants' mouths. Don't get me wrong, here. I'm glad you did it and appreciate the time you put into it. In the grand scheme of the universe, I would agree that it was a success (esp. since there was nothing like it before). But I think you are not really appreciating the other perspective in the conversation here, that of the template creator whose template was not given a fair shake (I do not include myself in this category, since I didn't care about the contest aspect of this from the beginning, but I do understand how the others feel in this: severely let down, perhaps feeling cheated, perhaps losing a lot of trust and respect for you guys). Sure you put in a good effort, but so did they, and I personally think it would be beneficial if you not only defend your efforts, but also acknowledge the efforts of the others, and their feelings of being betrayed. A simple 'sorry' would probably be enough, honestly.

If I did misunderstand some of the templates I'm sorry for that

I wrote the above before reading this part of your comment. For me personally, I consider the matter closed (to a large extent in my case, it was barely ever open, though I can understand why other participants would have been more offended).

I was hoping new template makers could use both positive and negative feedback in order to make more strategic templates in the future.

I agree that constructive negative feedback is a good thing. That is not the issue at all. The issue is that the critique of several templates was not an *informed* critique; the critics did not actually understand or have an accurate feel for the templates in question, due to lack of preparation which led to lack of time.

Considering we were all in agreement on most templates I'd find it weird if all 4 of us missed a specific thing.

Well, hypothetically, if none of you have actually played a particular template with unusual settings, such as Kain's for example [clarification: the example of Kain's is an example of having unusual settings, not an example of a template no one played], I would not be surprised at all if all 4 of you had missed some particular subtle setting that was crucial for balanced play. That's why trying the templates out is so important, IMO. Nothing beats actual experience.

Edited 12/1/2015 17:52:40

Since everyone is complaining about the template contest, I want to go on record thanking all of the guest commentators, master of desaster, Sephiroth, and Gnuffone for giving several hours of their time to talk about our submissions. I especially want to thank szeweningen far putting it all together and offering up a prize. This isn't something he had to do, so I think people should be more appreciative of the time and effort he expended.

Personally, I agree with this. Even in the case of Gnuffone, who I feel could have done a much better job and with much more humility, I still thank you all for the time and effort you put into this. My disagreements do not take away from that. It seems to have got off to a rough start, but I think the main idea of promoting template creation is here to stay, with special thanks to szeweningen for the idea and first implementation.

OD won't solve the delay-war. If you play the same amount of delay cards, it still comes down to who makes more delay-moves. Plus you'd want to delay as hell to gather info about your opponent using one (or more) of his OD. Thus adding more OD cards makes it even worse, "forcing" you to make max delay all turns, not only the ones you plan to attack.

wct, I wouldn't bother mate, it's just falling on cloth ears.

Well, it would have been nice to have these debates on here like the OD one. Then template makers could address that feedback, and settings would have been well known when rating/voting was done.

This is like having an election with no debates. Sure, the candidate's record (in this case settings) are out there, but with no debate there is no context.

Yeah, that's how I felt too...

IMO, the biggest goal should be to have some viable templates come out of this contest. And if you have no communication/debate, then the templates that maybe just need a tweak are discarded and never used.

Yes, but when Timinator + Sze + Gnuff + Seph + MoD said "OD moves are a problem on this template", all with good points on why 10x income is bad for delay moves, and if you can't take the criticism, why join a contest at all?

I discussed this with Sze here: https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=9963978

The long and the short of it is that he/they have not actually demonstrated that the cards won't largely eliminate the need for delay moves (except in relatively rare circumstances). They *claim* it will be a common occurrence, but fail (IMO) to take into account how the cards change the game when they are fairly plentiful. For more detail, see the chat in the linked game. If you have specific questions/objections, let me know.

TL;DR: Nothing beats actually trying the template. Intuitions can be misleading.

and if you can't take the criticism, why join a contest at all?

a) What makes you think I can't take criticism? b) I already explained my reasons for joining the contest: to demonstrate that 100% luck can still be strategic, contrary to the intuitions of many.

Edited 12/2/2015 00:42:20

I was referring to Fleece calling the judges, particularly Gnuffone "retarded".

i could quote myself again, but i guess you're still refusing to understand it :/

I can understand and see the flaws that happened in this event but I would like to point out that:
1.) This is Szeweningen's money so he can give it to those he chooses.
2.) This is the first time something like this was done so if it is ever done again I'm sure it will be run much more smoothly since we can learn from our mistakes.
3.) Thank you to all who commentated and spent their time looking over the templates. A lot of us take for granted the time and service your giving to us. I myself was a bit harsh and rude about this so I'm sorry about that.
4.) Thanks to all who submitted templates because you spent some time and effort into making a better template for the community to use and to supply for the competition. Even if your template was not deemed good it is still your creation and can be done with as pleased.

Really those first 3 points are the important ones. I really think we should all calm down a little bit, it's just a game after all.

I think the major issue for most of us was point number 4.

I get that it's his money, I'm not arguing over his decisions, but asking people to submit templates and then simply being downright rude about it and not even thanking us for our efforts is in my opinion unacceptable. I'm pretty sure you're the first person to actually thank those who submitted work to this competition, and if it's to "happen again" then we're going to have to be a lot nicer as a comunity to our template creators.

Well, that's just my opinion anyway...

i could quote myself again, but i guess you're still refusing to understand it :/

I understand it, I just think you're not considering the other factors I mentioned in the chat with sze. I could quote it, but I guess you're still refusing to take the time to investigate and understand before rushing to judgment. :/

If you want a response, show me you understand my points. Quote them. Disagree with the quote. Make an argument. I addressed your exact point in the chat.

Edited 12/2/2015 03:25:09