<< Back to General Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 18 of 18   
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 06:23:44


Vulpes
Level 56
Report
What should be changed on WL? http://vote.pollcode.com/54292191

Which luck settings would be best for the 1v1 Ladder? http://vote.pollcode.com/29825159

Which template would you prefer to play on the 2v2 Ladder? http://vote.pollcode.com/75539354

What should be done about gaming the ladders? http://vote.pollcode.com/89143734

Should there be a Strat 1v1 Real-time (RT) Ladder? http://vote.pollcode.com/68938657
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 06:39:55


master of desaster 
Level 65
Report
The 4th poll: there should be the option, to increase the min. Number games to get ranked in 1vs1 ladder and make anonym who's in the realtime ladder. The 2vs2 ladder doesn't have to be changed because it takes anyway long to get rated there already.
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 06:49:14


☁WARLORD♥t(ಥ۾ಥt)SirℜicharD✠[WOLF]☁
Level 54
Report
FOR THE IPAD, IT NEEDS CLAN FORUMS
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 06:56:27


professor dead piggy 
Level 59
Report
Whoever voted that the 1v1 ladder should use all 4 different luck types needs to check themselves.

Edit: Qi you put that as an option in another poll too, i thought you were joking...

Edited 6/18/2014 06:59:10
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 08:30:45

Qi 
Level 55
Report
The Strat 1v1 template was created before straight round existed. Some people prefer 0% SR, others prefer 16% SR, still others prefer 0% W, and some don't want any changes. All four have slightly different effects on how you play the template. To play any one of them for too long can become boring or frustrating. But mixing it up might be more enjoyable.

Cycling orders also were created after the template. Taking the four different luck settings and making one with cycling orders and one with random orders would be nice too.

So, actually, I would prefer Strat 1v1 with four types of luck and two types of order settings per luck setting, for a total of eight templates.
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 08:34:24


professor dead piggy 
Level 59
Report
dont you think that will just be confusing?
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 08:48:16

Qi 
Level 55
Report
Don't worry. It will never happen. It is simply my personal preference.
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 08:54:22


[WM] Gnuffone 
Level 60
Report
well but 0% and 16% luck are pretty the same (in both case, weighted random and straight round), but is just that with 16%, certain attack can fail and certain have some little chance to success.
Example: SR: in 16% you have a chance to make a 12v8, and at same time 13v8 CAN fail.
So i think use 16% is pretty mistaken.

However, apart the fact i am not a big fan of 1v1 ME with straight round, i think have 4 template like 0% WR 0% SR, and other 2 both with cycles could work.

But for a ladder, which the first goal is RANK people, we should try to avoid luck --> avoid any luck different 0% SR or WR. (though 0% WR still have some luck in leftovers and minor thing)

Edited 6/18/2014 11:15:47
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 11:13:36


brisk • apex 
Level 58
Report
you made a mistake in the 3rd line gnuffone

SR: in 0% you have a chance to make a 12v8, and at same time 13v8 CAN fail.

that one
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 11:15:38


[WM] Gnuffone 
Level 60
Report
sorry =)
i write wrong.
i want say in SR with 16% =)

i just checked:
in SR 16%, 12v8 have 8% chance to success and 13v8 have 11% chance to fail.

Edited 6/18/2014 11:18:39
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 11:55:33


Garrett
Level 56
Report
That first poll is so biased it's not even funny, you're supposed to leave personal opinions out of the question and answer in order to get an accurate representation of existing opinions, not change people's minds while they answer the question. Not to mention there's not enough options, it would be better put as a short answer question than a poll.

The other polls are fine though, they'll actually be useful in getting feedback, just not that first one.
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 12:08:03


Vulpes
Level 56
Report
Based on the feedback I have read, I think those answers reflect what people have been saying.

I have been saying the first response. Genral Arun and Chris seem to have been saying the second response. The general apathy I have noted from some players makes me think they support the third response. Some people are quite satisfied already and see no need for change (fourth response). And UN Lion (http://warlight.net/Forum/Thread?ThreadID=46287) and NinjaNic (http://warlight.net/Forum/Thread?ThreadID=46286) are clearly saying the fifth response.

Garrett, do you mind sharing your position in as unbiased wording as possible?
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 12:29:21


ChrisCMU 
Level 60
Report
Ladder gaming is big issue, but i also think there needs to be something for clans added. People paid to register clans and have no functionality outside a picture next to name (nobody uses clan forums because they have no admin powers there). I know Fizzer was reluctant to make an official clan system at all, so there might be nothing happening there a while.

I think some real simple changes would go a long way too. More tournament filters on the drop down, for example. A chat load that is somewhere between only new stuff and entire history. There are lots of pretty simple things like this that would improve the WL experience a lot.
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 12:29:46


Green 
Level 56
Report
The poll referring to gaming the ladder needs to include the other ideas floating about, I support Sze's idea of penalty points, but I think games in the first 15 should be counted as a loss before completion. This way there'd be no benefit of delaying games. Increasing the min game count would just worsen the problem.

I also think we should be pushing for one thing at a time otherwise I'd be ages before it's all done. Fizzer may also be working at solutions to these problems and just be reluctant to tell us in case he runs into problems with the code.

Also template settings in the 1v1 and 2v2 ladders absolutely cannot be changed as it would invalidate all the past data and make achievements of past player even more incomparable.

Edited 6/18/2014 12:34:14
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 12:34:03


[WM] Gnuffone 
Level 60
Report
if you just put in the 1v1 ladder the same true skill mean rating that we use in rt aldder the problem is fixed =)
not hard....we see already work very good in real time ladder, but seems it wont happen.
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 12:48:35


Vulpes
Level 56
Report
Sze's idea is basically what happens in the seasonal ladder and RT ladder. Three different means to the same end. So, simply by stating True Skill, I imagine we cover that option.
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 12:53:14


Green 
Level 56
Report
I don't really like True Skill because I (unlike Sze?) don't like the idea of games that don't expire and the idea of changing the rating system in such a fundamental way. I think the solution I proposed it better because it doesn't invalidate past statistics but it does get rid of the stalling problem inherent in the current system.
Change WL? Polls: 6/18/2014 15:31:41


Wenyun 
Level 59
Report
Honestly, the first question doesn't really make much sense. You go one way with the question and first answer ("What should be changed on Warlight?"), but then the other four answers answer a completely different question ("How much should Fizzer listen to community ideas?")

I think you were mostly aiming at the second question, so answer #1 should be "WL is flawed. Fizzer should listen to players ideas and implement them ASAP to make WL better", because that's basically what you want. Then you have a sliding scale from "Fizzer should listen to us" to "We shouldn't even bother suggesting ideas at all".

Personally, I feel like Fizzer's already using something between answer #2 and #3 - He does consider the community's ideas (Clans), but he works at his own pace, and sometimes throws the occasional oddball that people don't really ask for. (Local Deployment, Levels)

The other four questions are fine but I'm an odd person who thinks of odd ideas. I sometimes use 17% luck, SR, with slightly modified killrates. For the ladder question, a lock on rating determined by how many games one played didn't seem like a horrible idea to me >.>

EDIT: Plus, remember, while you guys who are at top-level play are the forerunners for expanding Warlight's top-level game, you're also a minority :/ Ladders for the top-level probably won't go as well with the much larger group of new players, plus the dashboard's already cluttered. >.>

Edited 6/18/2014 15:50:09
Posts 1 - 18 of 18