<< Back to Ladder Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 30 of 57   1  2  Next >>   
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 02:03:40

Qi 
Level 55
Report
http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?GameID=1974055

I sometimes watch games between good players. I sometimes read their chat. This game's chat is rather interesting for how wrong the assumptions are.

MathWolf: I know you are holding out on a loss and honnestly I really don't mind. I rather have you at number 1 than Gui.

AceWindu: I suppose I am holding out on a loss but tbh I can't remember the last time I left the site with no turns to take, so that also impacts on how long it takes me to get around to this game. Also speaking of Gui, his ladder antics are almost as bad as Doushi's were back in the day. He manipulates the system so that he only plays against 1900+ players. He also takes 2+days per turn. One more thing, I actually rejoined the ladder to knock Gui off the top spot :)

MathWolf: Yeah, I know about Gui. Glad to hear that was why you rejoined the ladder. I almost would give you the win if I didn't want to improve my own ranking. Also, if Gui really wants to bet 10000 dollars, we'd have them, because I do know a fair way (with some help of Fizzer) to effectively keep you on top of the ladder.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 02:12:46


Trombolians
Level 36
Report
a qué se refiere con lo de los 10000 dolares? hay un premio en las escaleras? a qué se refiere que con un poco de ayuda de fizzer?
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 02:48:59


myhandisonfire 
Level 54
Report
haha
exposed!

looks like it paid off for you watching intresting 1on1 games

@trombolians un premio de 10000 dolares? jaja que chiste :) no gui ha apostado 10000 dolares que el sigue siendo el numero uno de la escalera una semana
a qué se refiere que con un poco de ayuda de fizzer? <-- yo tambien quiero saber ;)
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 02:59:23


[WM] Dazed & Insane 
Level 50
Report
I seem to recall Ace taking 2+ days on every move when we last played a 1v1 :) Good thing I like the guy. Ironically I ended up getting booted in that game!
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 04:43:48

Qi 
Level 55
Report
What I found interesting were the assumptions.

*Assumption #1: Gui's intent is to postpone his games to avoid losing and remain #1.*
Truth: I dislike 1v1s in general and prefer to play them in real-time, if at all. I don't want to be in the 1v1 ladder at all. But since I have the highest rating, I feel obligated to play the minimum. And I was playing games I was winning slowly.

*Assumption #2: Gui is cheating the system like Doushibag did.*
Truth: Doushibag deliberately postponed surrendering and played games either fast or slow depending on whether he was winning or losing. If I have more than 5 multi-day 1v1s going (I've had 5-11 the last month), I play all my 1v1 games slowly, unless I get the guy in real-time or if I like the map/settings (the ladder map/settings bore me when played in the multi-day format).

*Assumption #3: Ace can play slowly and postpone his losses (which he admits to), but Gui can't play slowly and postpone his wins.*
Truth: It seems that most players get the #1 syndrome: "I must remain #1 at all cost." Check zaeban's losses when he was #1: he postponed surrendering to avoid yielding the top spot to unknownsoldier. I'm very healthy. My only problem: I don't really want to play multi-day 1v1s at all.

*Assumption #4: Gui deeply cares about the 1v1 ladder.*
Truth: I don't. My only goal was to get to #1 and then hover in the top 5 or 10 for a bit and eventually quit the 1v1 ladder altogether. Pogo.com's 5-player Risk (the traditional game, not a Warlight version) and 3v3 Europe are, in my view, the most strategically challenging games of 'risk'. I was the top Risk player at pogo.com before coming to Warlight. I played about 2000 games, winning about 65%. That means something to me. The best 3v3 Europe players know how I play. That means something to me. If Fizzer made a traditional Risk game (copyright protection doesn't allow him to) with 5 players, no cards, all traditional Risk rules and I became #1, I'd care. If Fizzer made a 3v3 ladder, I'd expect my team to be #1 as long as we want. It would matter to me. The 1v1 ladder is more like chess (static, fixed, pattern-based) with occasional coin flips (cards, who gets first move, etc.) and an odd short-term rating system. Being #1 on the 1v1 ladder was just a minor goal. I don't take it as seriously as others might.

*Assumption #5: Gui is making a $10,000 bet because he is full of himself.*
Truth: Someone on the sycophantic thread congratulating Ace questioned the duration of his 'reign'. I was also curious so I checked his games and my games. Ace was ahead of me by 20 or so; Ace had 2 wins expiring in nine days worth -20 to -50 points; I had a loss expiring (worth +50 to +80 points) in nine days; I was winning my games (worth +20 to +40 more); Ace was losing 1-2 of his games. Based on reality, when our games expired in nine days, there was absolutely no way Ace could lose 40 points and still remain #1 while I gained 70-120 points. It was a certainty that Ace would not be #1. The bet was a figure of speech.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 05:26:42


AquaHolic 
Level 55
Report
I find this forum interesting
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 05:45:34

Basil 
Level 28
Report
*audible gasp* How scandalous! It really is like a television drama... Except the Kings of the ladder need sexy queens and more affairs.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 06:07:54

Qi 
Level 55
Report
*Assumption #6: Gui cheats the system by playing opponents rated 1900+.*
Truth: If I'm going to play a 1v1 game whose settings, map and format (multi-day) I don't much care for, I'd like to at least make it interesting, meaningful and competitive by playing the best player possible each game. I tried to get two games and got them: with [Yangshuo] V and zaeban. I'm not sure how that extra win over V is cheating the system. I wanted the zaeban game because when he was #1 and I was #3, we agreed to 'cheat the system' by playing each other (for competitive purposes to make our games interesting). It didn't work out and he later quit the ladder. He's back. I respect him. Our games our interesting. I want to play him.

Should I instead try to play the worst player possible and run up my wins by playing as many such players as I can get, and beat them all in real-time, if possible, since the relativity of time is such an important matter for the highly dramatic 1v1 ladder?

Ace and Math remind me of old women sitting around the living room watching CNN and making biased, subjective or exaggerated conclusions about the financial or political news they don't much understand. Or, to better suit my current environment: they are like middle-aged upper-middle class Taiwanese women drinking 'afternoon tea' and gossiping with great certainty about a bunch of meaningless topics (housing prices, clothing, trips abroad) while their husbands are at work to support them.

(Now I'll never make onto the mighty Mathwolf's 'List of Great 1v1 Players on My Profile Page Whom I Have Beaten, Thus Proving How Mighty I May or May Not Be', the most definitive list of great players...)
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 06:12:00


DeмoZ 
Level 56
Report
I think Gui might be a wee bit upset =P
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 06:52:04

Qi 
Level 55
Report
Not really. I just dislike emotionally charged opinions masquerading as facts.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 07:13:02


[WM] Dazed & Insane 
Level 50
Report
QQ
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 07:21:04

(Lost)SGV_STH
Level 23
Report
Private Messages: Allowed

You would think that they would have realized that people can see the Public Chat by now.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 07:28:59

RvW 
Level 46
Report
|> I do know a fair way (with some help of Fizzer)

Maybe I'm crazy, but doesn't needing a bit of help from Fizzer pretty much automatically mean it's an *un*fair way...?
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 10:03:23


Trombolians
Level 36
Report
@myhand bueno, esperemos que no pierda su dinero, solo pienso que algunos se toman esta página y pasatiempo de una manera muy intensa. No pierdan el criterio, es sólo un juego, un juego muy bueno, pero un juego al fin.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 10:24:41

Paul
Level 3
Report
la apuesta no es en serio, trom; es una broma. me gusta jugar con mis palabras tambien.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 10:35:00


szeweningen 
Level 60
Report
If the implication is if Gui had recent lost games he postponed them, then the implication is true from a logical point of view :)
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 12:48:34


Ironheart
Level 53
Report
if i ever get a membership i would not join 1v1 ladder because my 1v1 sucks 2v2 better and 3v3
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 13:47:29


x 
Level 58
Report
|>"Assumption #4: Gui deeply cares about the 1v1 ladder.
Truth: I don't."

Clearly.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 15:17:48


Ace Windu 
Level 56
Report
"But since I have the highest rating, I feel obligated to play the minimum."
That's not true, you have said that you feel you must be present in the top level of the 1v1 ladder to gain some measure of respect. That is why you stay on the ladder when you readily admit that you don't enjoy it.

I agree that me pointing out that you are taking a long time on your games was hypocritical, however, I did offer some explanation as to why I don't play quicker.

Assumption #4: Gui deeply cares about the 1v1 ladder.
I think you care about how people percieve you. (see above)

"Assumption #5: Gui is making a $10,000 bet because he is full of himself."
I never made that assumption - now you are being presumptuous. I had a look at both our ladder games and saw that I had wins expiring and you had a loss expiring. I new that you would be on top and obviously you weren't going to bet $10,000.

Assumption #6: Gui cheats the system by playing opponents rated 1900+.
Yes that is my assumption and it still is. If you only play the best, your rating will be higher. You forego the risk of an upset from 1700/1800 players which is always a possibility. Even if you do it only to gain more interesting games, that does not absolve you of the fact that you're gaming the system.

Please continue giving us more of your very entertaining analogies.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 15:19:24


Ace Windu 
Level 56
Report
Also, I don't see any real drama. This was entirely about you and you felt the need to post it as 1v1 ladder drama. Kinda smacks of egocentrism.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 15:35:11


The Window Cleaner 
Level 56
Report
I absolutely play slower when it's not going well. It's human nature. If I'm ahead in a game, the orders are more straight forward. If I'm behind, partly I'm less keen to play, partly I want to make sure I've really thought about it before I do my orders. I of course stop short of extending games when I've clearly lost, and if people are doing that, I suppose I disapprove, but I'm certainly not going to start checking game links to find it happening from others.

When you have a list of 20 games I think it's very natural that the easier games are played first. And I don't feel bad about this at all.

This is unnecessary drama, chill out guys, and let's remember we're on the site to enjoy ourselves.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 15:46:03


Ace Windu 
Level 56
Report
The Window Cleaner, I completely agree with everything you said.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 16:28:39

Qi 
Level 55
Report
I've already stated the truth regarding my primary motivations, but now that Ace the Psychiatrist has delved deep into my psyche, I'm beginning to worry about my smacking ego and wonder if that was the curious odor my wife mentioned today...

I'm glad you like my analogies, A&W. I'd be glad to give you another, but since you most remind me of a high school girl who gossips about a prettier girl with her gossip buddy (MathWolf), I would then become the prettier girl in the analogy who ends up with the boy you have a crush on (the #1 ranking), and I don't want to be a girl with a boyfriend. So no more analogies.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 17:02:48


x 
Level 58
Report
you were a reasonable person for so long, gui. has something changed in your life to make you this way? are you being bullied by schoolchildren or something?
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 18:01:00


myhandisonfire 
Level 54
Report
AceWindu Quote:

Assumption #6: Gui cheats the system by playing opponents rated 1900+.
Yes that is my assumption and it still is. If you only play the best, your rating will be higher. You forego the risk of an upset from 1700/1800 players which is always a possibility. Even if you do it only to gain more interesting games, that does not absolve you of the fact that you're gaming the system.

@AceWindu : I don`t quite understand that, if you play only the best and by doing so, you win, don`t you deserve to be number one then? And how is that cheating?
Its a bit like a boxer or mma pro, who complains that he had a long career path behind him to get a title shot, while another guy beat the number one contender without that career path. Has he not beaten the number one ? Has he cheated the system by fighting the best right from the start?
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 19:20:06


Math Wolf 
Level 63
Report
I should say that I have not much to add to my words in that chat and I don't mind other people reading them.
But as this seems to be a trending topic, I'll give my 5 cents as one of the protagonists.

Fair way to keep Ace on top: Yes, I knew a way and it would have been completely fair.
How: Ask Fizzer to implement TrueSkill within those 9 days, in TS games don't expire as their weight gradually decreases anyway. Seeing how 10000 dollars is over 300 memberships, it may have been worth trying. I don't know if and when TS will be implemented and if it would have been ready on time, but it may have been possible.

I didn't doubt the bet was a figure of speech as Gui mentioned a few times he didn't even want to support Warlight by buying a membership of his own.

Why I don't particularly like Gui: it's very difficult to get along with someone who is so full of himself, behaves as if he owns Warlight, knows everything better, criticizes everything he didn't invent himself, has no respect for other people's opinions or dismisses them completely in a ridiculous way if too far from his own.
I'm sure he has some good sides too though, sadly enough I didn't see many of them yet.

That said, I never had problems with Gui myself, just don't like his attitude. I'm sure many people don't like mine either. So be it.


Other than that: feel free to overanalyse everything I say in chat as much as you want. I mostly type before I think and I'm way too busy (and ill lately) to look back at things and think twice about them. Besides, English is my third language, so I'm sure there'll be plenty of possible hidden messages you'll find under my at times strange grammar.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 19:42:47


Knoebber 
Level 54
Report
You guys are kidding about actually betting 10,000$ ... right ?
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 20:17:29


Ace Windu 
Level 56
Report
@myhand
The point is that he is avoiding the risk of losing a large number of points by losing to a player outside of the top 10/15.

If you play only the best then you lose less points if you lose and gain more if you win.

And I think it's also unfair to players outside the top ranks who could otherwise be matched against Gui, they are being denied the opportunity of playing against him.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 20:18:40


Ace Windu 
Level 56
Report
@Knoebber

I don't think anyone believed Gui was going to bet $10,000.
1v1 Ladder Drama: AceWindu & MathWolf's Dialogue: 2/18/2012 22:09:06

Qi 
Level 55
Report
lobstrosity: 2054
zaeban: 2107
2/15/2012 8:50:14 PM [中国阳朔] V: 1968
2/13/2012 8:44:16 PM 13CHRIS37: 1972
2/5/2012 10:02:51 AM Barney Stinson: 1705
1/23/2012 9:28:43 PM boobsy: 1580
12/28/2011 8:37:53 AM Tor: 1780
12/25/2011 7:28:41 AM Xyphistor: 1748
12/21/2011 7:14:13 AM ixouaeouxi: 1296
12/19/2011 11:53:47 PM WL Fanatic: 1772

Ace, your argument is fine in theory, but in reality it just isn't the case, as I've already said. Above, my games since I've been in contention for first. Why your assumption is wrong:

1. I've only twice increased my game count to try to play a certain player. I wanted to play V (he is a rising star, I had never played him 1v1 before, I was curious how good he is since he is one of the best players on the 2v2 ladder where we had 2 great games already). I wanted to play the best 1v1 player on the ladder since Impaller quit: zaeban. #1 vs #2 is interesting. #1 vs #30 is not.

2. None of the other guys I've played since being in contention were players I sought out. All were given to me randomly when one guy surrendered and another game was given to me. 10 names listed above. I tried to play 2. A system that only operates 20% of the time is not very effective.

3. I did say it would be a good idea to pick my opponents to make my games more interesting. But I have not cared enough to truly implement that idea, partly for the following two reasons.

4. I suspect Fizzer has slightly restricted (improved!) the algorithm that determines who the top rated players play. I've noticed a few more top players being paired up with other top players recently. Eg, when zaeban increased his games from 1 to 5, he waited a very long time before he got opponents (a couple days maybe). And look at the opponents he got (4 past #1s, 1 future #1):

fwiw: 1900
zibik21: 2008
[REGL] ferbi1982_PL: 1664
Mian: 1823
Guillaume le Bâtard: 2168
bytjie: 1861
2/13/2012 6:59:20 AM Heyheuhei: 1986
2/13/2012 12:44:55 AM Niko: 1737

5. If Fizzer hasn't adjusted his algorithm, according to his old algorithm, my rising rating restricts who can play me anyway, especially since there are so many top rated players I've never played on the ladder, who, according to Fizzer's match selection process, get first dibs: lobstrosity (the system recently paired me up with him), zibik, Teddy, unknown, Dr. Typesomething, alababi. I'm assuming a good number of my next few games will be with these guys.
Posts 1 - 30 of 57   1  2  Next >>