French Brawl, Sao Paulo, PMA for RT! Strat ME for 1v1! Increase picks for 2v2! Keep 3v3 the same but add Attack Only! Raj / GME / FVII for Seasonal! :D

Fizzer is paying decent attention, he noticed that Gui made a thread suggesting to lower base income to 4. I voted.

I don't see the point with lowering base income on the 3v3 ladder to 4, it shouldn't be voted

Don't ruin the only good ladder we have left too, just try to improve the other ones

Edited 4/23/2016 22:45:39

for once sephiroth is right

Can't wait to see the results

I can bet 100 coins with anyone that SR wins. :p (PM me)

mod will create 100 accounts and get it to high enough level and then vote wr with each of them

I don't have that many emails :( also i don't like cheating sadly :(

I hope nobody does that, since voting with alts is cause for a permanent ban, per Fizzer's first post.

Edited 4/25/2016 12:53:18

Thx for making the poll!

Edited 4/28/2016 11:04:53

What prevents you from voting those all from 1 account Pabse ?

ROR could be quite strategic in 2v2 with 4 picks and some cards. I have memories of such games with Metatron. On his twitch account (..) there are some sample games. But I guess its too late to suggest templates.

Thanks Randy.

please ban kids, who vote multiple times for WR :)

Quicksand seems to be a childish version of Boston :P

But if someone is able to read...

Note that only one vote is allowed per person, regardless of how many accounts you have. So be sure to only vote once, under penalty of having all of your accounts banned if you're caught.

...it will be clear to him that voting multiple times is forbidden.
Writing here that one does vote multiple times makes it only easier for Fizzer to figure out who to ban. :)

Though as I wrote, not sure how this corresponds with rules and terms of service we accepted.

One important question for Fizzer: will you follow the results no matter what they are?

Edited 4/25/2016 20:36:29

Don't know if all ladder games are with manual distribution, but, in sense of WL, there should be a percentage of games with automatic distribution - I expect about 20-40%. Why? Because, new players who joins ladder are in great disadvantage over players who are here more time, and probably didn't have a chance to try the maps themselves, and older players already know hidden flaws in game settings.

However, such games should not have less than 3 starting position in both 1v1 and 2v2 ladder games (2 for 3v3 ladders), and should not have obstacles (wastelands).

There is another thing I would like to be taken in consideration:

If possible, ladder games should have alternate settings - basic income, starting armies, number of picks, number of wastelands and size (for manual distribution games only), alternate One army must stand guard (zero for 10-20% of games), extra armies per teritory (bonus for every 4-15 territories), possible LD and Offensive and Defensive kill rate (offensive 30-60%, defensive 10% more than offensive until 85%), and alternate bonus income (+-1). Thus, everything will be random at the start, and nobody will easily outwit opponent by using old games models. Of course, such settings would need more time for preparation and playing, but that is the sacrifice one should take in consideration when join ladders.

Edited 4/26/2016 11:40:07

As seen in the current 1v1 ladder, you can't just change things and expect it to turn out well. I would not like to see auto dist and income/starting armies that allows me to get 13 income in 2 turns. You never even mentioned MA, Weighted Random, Luck %, No-Split, Attack by %, Attack/Transfer Only, etc, etc. Your list is highly incomplete, and would produce terrible outcomes most of the time.

Don't know if all ladder games are with manual distribution, but, in sense of WL, there should be a percentage of games with automatic distribution - I expect about 20-40%. Why? Because, new players who joins ladder are in great disadvantage over players who are here more time, and probably didn't have a chance to try the maps themselves, and older players already know hidden flaws in game settings.

This seems like a really bad reason to have a setting be represented in a ladder. The point of a ladder is to show who is the best, not cater to newer players who haven't tried out the templates beforehand. Automatic distribution doesn't do this very well, unless you reach an amount of picks granted that makes it very statistically likely that both players end up with somewhat equal starts. 20-40% of all games in the ladders being autodist seems completely wrong, since a big part of the skills you show when doing well in the ladders is knowing how to pick, as picking is a fundamental part of WL strategy.

^+1, auto distribution on the ladder is the worst idea ever. Even if only 5% of the games were autodist, I'd still probably leave the ladder because of it.

Wrong. Auto-dist isn't always unfair. And likewise with the WR/SR argument, it produces a lot of good games with no Intel (light fog is sometimes ok) and the luck factor always evens out.

Auto distribution on duel map is also fair.

But manual distribution is another area to compete, where a better player can gain advantage over a worse one.

While WR may even out and increase strategic value of a game, auto distrinution may even out but decrease strategic value of a game.

Correct me if I am wrong please.