I don't know if this was really going on or not, but I do want to enter my input about rigging the system so that you only play top-rated opponents. If that is actually going on, I think that is completely unfair and unethical. Taking a loss from a lower ranked person takes a good bite out of your rank. You can say "Yeah, but I would never lose to somebody ranked 300 points below me" but that is simply not true. Its a low probability event, but if that event happens it is quite harmful to your ranking. If you took out my worst two losses I would probably have been in the top 5 or so. But by only playing top opponents, while others have the chance to play lower-rated opponents, you get a completely unfair competitive edge. It destroys the integrity of the ladder.

It seems to be that the fact that Gui could manipulate the system to get the games he wanted at *any* percentage, proves that the system *could be* manipulated, if someone wanted to spend the time and money to do it..

although currently I see no way to prevent the possibility without reducing the flexibility each player currently has..

From the Wiki page:

The ladder tries to match you against players near your rating, while also preventing you from facing the same people over and over.

The rest of this section describes the how the game-creation algorithm works for the nerds out there that want to follow along.

The algorithm starts by taking a list of all players who are participating in the ladder in order of their rating. It enumerates through them starting with the highest rated player and moving downwards.

For each player, WarLight constructs a list of potential opponents. We start by populating the list with everyone within 30% of you on the ladder or 10 players/teams on either side. For example, if the ladder has 100 players in it, we would look at the 30 players with better ratings than you and the 30 players with worse ratings than you (the game creation algorithm only sorts by rating - it ignores rank).

Yes, but there are ways around that. If you leave the ladder and then only enter when somebody ranked highly just finished a game, it would increase your chance of getting the highly ranked opponent. Same with adding am extra game.

The system only works fairly if players enter, exit, or add another game on a random basis as opposed to performing one of those actions to position oneself for a higher ranked opponent.

"while also preventing you from facing the same people over and over." I think would be the greatest deterrant to the form of rating inflation I was picturing

Thus:

- Player rated #1 can only play players #2-#31.
- The system tries to get make the games as competitive as possible
- Players #2 to #31 I have not played and am most likely to be matched up against: unknown (3), teddy (5), zibik (6), dr (13), MathWolf (17), alababi (21), angelic (23), hokkaidorider (29), Niko (30).


My ladder record against those I have played:

zaeban (2) 1-1* (I surrendered on turn 1 or 2 bc I wanted to quit the ladder)
WindowCleaner (7) 1-1
Rubik (8) 1-0
HHH (9) 0-2 or 0-3
PaniX (10) 1-0
Chris (11) 1-0
Nuckluck (12) 1-0
EmperorCornInTights (14) 1-0
Chas (15) 1-0
Aquaholic (16) 1-0
bytjie (18) 1-0
Mentysh (19) 1-0
Diabolicus (20) 1-1
Trockerz (22) 1-0
Samurai (24) 0-1
WL Fanatic (25) 1-0
JimH (26) 1-0
GuyMannington (27) 0-1
Red (31) 2-0

Personally, I think the only way I could possibly cheat the system is to avoid HHH!

Theoretically, this is an interesting topic.

I prefer playing the best. If I cared more, I would try to play the highest rated player every time, because the highest rated player is more often than not a damn good player. This is a game. I play to have fun. Playing the best opponents possible is fun to me.

What if a player did the opposite: Bob likes to rake up victories against weaker players because each time he plays a high rated player he loses. Each time a weaker player he has not played before has an open game, Bob increases his game count.

Based on Dr's and Ace's idea, this is perfectly acceptable, because the only thing that matters is the effect on one's ratings. Since Bob risks losing more off his rating by losing to the weaker player, this is the game of choice.

Theoretically, the system is the way it is for a reason. If you play a higher ranked player, you are more likely to lose. Given this likelihood, you are punished less. If you play a weaker player you are more likely to win, which is also reflected in the points gained or lost after the game ends.

If Bob is ranked #20 and tries to play the best players possible every game and ends up beating those players 90% of the time, has he cheated the system by playing and beating the best?

I think some people take the system too seriously. As players we have freedom of action. We are not a part of the system. We play games within the system.

my thought was more on a way to arrange yourself with people you know to get un-earned wins against players, good or not, hence why I say that part is the best deterrant..

That is not at all what I was arguing for. To quote myself:

"The system only works fairly if players enter, exit, or add another game on a random basis as opposed to performing one of those actions to position oneself for a higher ranked opponent."

This implies that you are letting the ladder system run its course, just like everybody else. You are not gaming the system to match yourself with a better or worse opponent. You, like everybody else, are subject to the ladder-matching algorithm.

OK, back to your argument: "If Bob is ranked #20 and tries to play the best players possible every game and ends up beating those players 90% of the time, has he cheated the system by playing and beating the best?"

Yes, completely. If Bob rigged the system so that he is only playing top players, Bob has unfairly altered the ladder-matching algorithm to his favor. If Bob wants to play only the top opponents, Bob could always play games with them outside the ladder and led the ladder do its job.

"I think some people take the system too seriously. As players we have freedom of action. We are not a part of the system. We play games within the system."

OK fine. One can always go back to the "its just a game argument." It is. And its really not important. However, I greatly enjoy my Warlight time, and it is a goal for me to be consistently rank highly. However, if others prevent that by what I consider an unethical method, it slightly annoys me. Not very much. Just enough to make a few posts on the forum.

Ok. So we are all part of the system.

Unethical is a bit strong. If I saw Dr. play Impaller, HHH, zibik, zaeban, Chris, and unknown and beat them all, I wouldn't care how you did it. It would be an amazing feat and I'd think you deserve any rating boost you got. If, instead, those 6 games were played against guys rated #30-36, I wouldn't really care.

hm.. Strong arguments from both sides, however, I do have an inclination towards Gui's argument, I don't think he's cheating the system to get a higher ranking, but I understand he wants to play top players.

(And Dr. Typesomething, you said, and I quote "If you leave the ladder and then only enter when somebody ranked highly just finished a game, it would increase your chance of getting the highly ranked opponent. Same with adding am extra game." I admit i don't know too much about ladders, but this kind of behaviour is kinda, how should I put it, you gota have lots of free time on your hands... You have to stare at the ladder, keep track of all the top players, wait for 1 of them to finish a game, then quickly enter the ladder, wait for some time, if you don't get a game with them, then leave the ladder again. Of course, if Gui was actually doing this type of thing.. well.. I got nothing to say. But i doubt anyone would really do this.)

Still waiting for Quadaffi to show up...

Anyways, I challenge Gui to a best of out 5 on the strategic 1v1 template. If I win you have to quit the ladder forever.

Shouldn't be a problem for you since I'm ranked ~100

VaporX, what happens if Gui wins?

I'll do that, on one condition:

If I win, Vapor X has to change his name to [BMS] β走狗 VaporX and recruit 20 new members to the [[BMS] clan](http://warlight.net/Forum/Thread.aspx?ThreadID=3073).

OMG corruption I better find another 2v2 partner!!! Oh wait. I don't give a rat's ass about this. Nevermind!

Gui,I am sorry to hear the pain and dread boredom your obligation to remain at the top of the ladder causes you. Clearly you are doing if for all of us, so I appreciate it. But may I suggest you might be happier if you took your talents and moved to South Beach?

Seems the forum dramas are even more entertaining than the game itself. lol