It's called Ethics, Just because something doesn't get punished in a broken system doesn't mean you let all your members take advantage.

Whether this is "ethical" or not is a totally irrelevant matter. I'm not into policing our members over having played with alts on the ladder. Every person has a differing opinion on this.

@Platinum:
And you have the right to complain? You?! Should I throw dirt at you, as you used your alts on the ladders without letting your games expire?

@all:
Once again, set a date when enforcement of the rules start and I will rage with you. Before this, it is simply a cheap witch-hunt!

what is this dicustion even about..... there is coming new rules and enforcment(hopefully), and that's that. everyone knows the ladders have been a mess

+1 Njord
We may not all agree that this should've been made a big deal in public, but I think we're all reasonable enough that this was the wrong spot.

This thread was under 90 posts last time I checked. I naively hope for some constructive disscussion on ladder rules...

Nope. Just throwing shit at individual people, as I expected.

You guys suck so much I can't find right words for you. It's the most important thread I've seen in a while and still you can't keep it safe from flamewars. YOu have absolutely no respect for Beren's work.

I saw it coming from miles away when linberson posted his senseless shit... I asked to continue this in another thread. Nope.

---

FYI: Octane was informed that alt switching like that isn't really OK and said he'll stop. Cowboy made a post about it 4 days ago in this very thread. As for his 3v3 run, he was looking for teammates, couldn't find them, so he started an alt run. When Cowboy and DemoZ got more time to play, he switched because it's more fun to play with real teammates.

That's it. 4 sentences of explanation. Half of which were already in this thread. Why are there 30+ new posts about it?

anyone got anything to add on the new ladder rules?

Yes. You won't successfully fight stallers with warning + bans. A good player will do a ladder run, simultaneously stall some games at the end, take the trophy and not play this boring ladder again. What will a warning accomplish?

I partly agree with knyte, if you want to fight stalling, do it with shorter turns + banked boot times.

Or even better - ignore stalling. Focus on ladder runs instead. Stalling is a consequence of runs. And honestly, who cares that 1 in 20 people stall their way to the top when 10 out of 20 just do an easy run, not play anyone with over 2000 rating and then take #1 with a rating of 2250 or so. Focusing on that low % of stallers when you have runs a common practice is funny in my eyes.

The best solutions imo:
1. Change Bayeselo to something else (requires coding but solves the issue)
2. To get ranked you need 20 finished games, including at least 1 loss (So runs won't inflate the ratings THAT much. Still requires coding but probably a lot less)
3. Do nothing. Still better than kidding ourselves that giving a warn to a staller once per month solves anything.

there is not gonna be any code changes now..... still you coud just take the trophy away

I agree that effectively preventing runs will destroy the incentive of stalling on most ladders. On the seasonal it won't be possible to fight stalling that way cause the concept is very different tough. If there can be found a way to solve the problem on seasonal, it can be adapted to the other ladders as well.

In my eyes, a formula which takes income, armies and turn speed in account has to be found as a guideline. But there will always have to be a mod who checks the individual cases.

yep

"Stalling is a consequence of runs. And honestly, who cares that 1 in 20 people stall their way to the top when 10 out of 20 just do an easy run, not play anyone with over 2000 rating and then take #1 with a rating of 2250 or so."

This is nonsense. Most rank 1 runs have stalled. Not 1 in 20.

Who got #1 in the last couple of months?

Motoki didn't stall.
I did a bit, then got fair #1 again after Motoki left
Pana didn't stall on 1v1 ladder
Swisster didn't stall
Awesomeguy didn't stall
Krzychu didn't stall
krunx didn't stall
Nox didn't stall
Widzisz didn't stall
Farah didn't stall
NoMercy I'm pretty sure stalled after he got the trophy.
Pardon didn't stall
Kurdistan didn't stall

What are you talking about Nauz?

(sorry if I forgot someone)

Not relevant again. I suggest making a new thread about who did what. 1/20 is enough to have a serious discussion how to improve the situation.

Sorry, I got sidetracked by clearing up this bit of misunderstanding.


I thought a "Lynx-General" would have been knowledgable enough to realize his own mistakes. Anyway I wont comment on this anymore and hopefully everyone involved learned his lesson, including Coqboy that you shouldnt defend your clanmates if their errors are so easy to prove.


As for the rules, they arent the problem. Enforcement is. I like the new potential ones.
Imo banked time is one of the most underused features on WL, and could also be used against stalling.


Although I agree that stalling isnt the problem, but the system which encourages runs.
A few suggestions against this have been posted here: https://www.warlight.net/Forum/247708-concurrent-1-ranks

I disagree mod. I'm making my point that stalling isn't as frequent/as big of a problem as people make it to be.

Why do we care about stallers when everyone who goes 20-0 is (unvoluntarily) gaming the rating system?

@linberson

If you're not going to comment then don't comment. You're trying to have the last word on that topic and that last word is accusation. Dick move.

Edited 9/27/2017 13:34:12

"I will defend our members if I feel they are getting treated unfairly. I would hope you would do the same for a Turtle's player."

And I'd hope people were more blunt and honest and didn't let clan affiliation stay their voice.

Not that I am saying you shouldn't defend Octane, just defend anyone being treated unfairly, and similarly have the backbone to call out your clanmates when necessary as well.

"Who got #1 in the last couple of months?"

You then go on to list people that hit rank 1 over a year ago and people that hit rank 1 while not even on a "run".

Nice stretch.

Here on Earth months have 30 days, not 300-400.

"Why do we care about stallers when everyone who goes 20-0 is (unvoluntarily) gaming the rating system?"

You do realize intent is the major difference, right? Intent is how most crimes are judged. Or do you like brushing that aside because you're one of the ones who intended to game the system?

Edited 9/27/2017 13:35:43

Ignoring Nauz' posts from now on.

Back on topic:

For a solid player who ranks about 3-4th place it's irrelevant if the 1st got his rating because he stalled or because he beat 20 players rated under 2000 and he happened to get 1st because the system's shit at evaluating perfect scores. Neither deserve that 1st.

THAT is the problem.

THAT is why I'm bringing this up. There are plans to put some artificial, subjective ladder policing system in place, while it will 'solve' at most 5-10% of the problems, it will create new ones. There will be countless disscusions of moderators' decisions like there are now on who deserved that 1st and who didn't. Waste of effort. Could turn out to be worse that what we have now. With all respect to people who were going to moderate it - you will never do a good job because in this case 'good' is still subjective.

"Ignoring Nauz' posts from now on."

Yeah, it's usually the best course of action after I destroy your argument.

Arguing that it's okay for you to stall because it just evened the playing field vs. those that got lucky on their runs is like me saying I just robbed a bank because I didn't win the lottery like other people.

Edited 9/27/2017 14:07:10