Niko got number one because there was noone else at the top at that time

Isn't that, by definition, true about everyone who's ever held #1?

Haha, yes. I meant there was noone else good making a ladder run at that time. He didnt have any serious competition.

I am deeply offended that you dont consider me a great 3v3 player Qi. What does one have to do to earn that title?

http://www.tpolm.org/~ps/wl_clot/eastasia3vs3random/

;)

nice one ps. i amddeeply offended that you said the seasonal ladders are different. don't you see that fizzer is like a kung fu master training you all to become better 1v1 players by slightly changing the settings. he's keepingyou in your comfort zones (1v1 ME and maps with similar approaches as ME) but giving you a chance to find your inner grasshopper?

This thread would not exist if piggy was terrible at 1v1.

it took sze, myhand, gnuff

You just affirmed Myhand reached n1??? Now we want to know which one was his alter.

eheh, is a secret, sorry.

I look down on you because youre telling everyone youre a girl and acting girly for attention. Youre a girl, I get it, stop talking about it you self absorbed brat.

I lost respect for dead piggy for even though you're good at 1vs1 you love telling others of it and crave attention because of it. You know how to play this game,I get it, so stop whining and blattering about it you arrogant prick.

it took sze, myhand, gnuff and me about 2 months of focused attention on 1v1 gamesbbefore we were good enough to reach #1 on the 1v1 ladder.[\i]

The reason for that is because you had at least 600 3v3 Europe games under your belt.

I think 3v3 (not necessarily Europe) in general is more complex than 1v1 (and i played 757 1v1s, and 1120 3v3s). Most of the tactics in 1v1s (like Gui pointed out) are present in 3v3s. However, in 3v3s, you also have to contend with other factors, most significantly, teammates, most of which are already discussed.

3v3 players can skate by, never needing to learn how to properly make use of leftovers, how to calculate a few turns in advance, how to pick with an inbalanced map because there is always someone looking over their shoulder, and someone else to blame when they lose. [\i]

That is true if you are playing with noobs. Go join Gnuff's or Psy's 3v3s and the intensity level will be much greater.

fuck, why is it all italic?

you wrote "\" instead of "/" in [ /i] italics closing thinggy

[/i] :P

damnit i hate when i don't refresh my tabs and this happens

Each element of the game (picking, move order, possible outcomes, options, etc) is far less predictable and thus controllable in 3vs3 than in 1vs1.

It took me less than 500 1vs1 games to get above average in 1vs1 games.
With over 700 team games I still play like shit in team games.

Team games are harder to learn than 1vs1, but 1vs1 is far more competitive field to play.

Don't say that with proper teammates you can win above 90% of 3vs3 games, or held 1st spot of 3vs3 ladder for ages, that's easy if you have little competition.

3v3 europe cities tournament: http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?TournamentID=4521

1v1 ME players are welcome to join

Piggy, you might just be bad at non-1v1 games. I learn more from FFA's than I do in 1v1's. Keeping track of multiple players is more difficult. I consider myself more of a versatile player than anything else. To be able to handle yourself in any situation, you really need to play a bit of everything.

1v1's are great, but eventually there isn't much more to learn and it just comes down to luck. The fate of a large number of my 1v1's come down to OP/OD cards being played by both players at the same crucial time. I've lost games I should have won, and won games I should have lost. There is an element of luck in all games, but much more room to learn in games with more players.

I think that learning curve is more relative to how people play than what they play. I go through the history in any game that I lose, whereas most players shrug it off move onto the next. If you want to get better, just work at it and question what your opponents did differently than you which enabled them to win. There is no point in being good if the only reason you are good is from habitually playing the same thing over and over. You should want to be able to handle yourself in any gametype/map.

"Piggy, you might just be bad at non-1v1 games." I'm not.
"eventually there isn't much more to learn" Lets be honest...neither of us has reached that point.

I agree with that last paragraph, and I think 1v1 lends itself to learning much better ( as well as being more fun).

I cant believe noone agrees with me, oh well, I guess Im wrong.

whoopsie daisies

why does it matter what the master race is?
Why does it matter how you can be the best?
Why does it matter what settings you play?
Just cause you are all smart, know how to form long drawn out arguments, doesn't mean you have to get so far away from the point of warlight. Not as a competitive sport, but as a game. If you want to compete, all the power to you, if you want to be the best, all the power to you. However stop generalizing and most of all PUTTING DOWN everyone who doesn't think and see it how you see it, whether they post or not.
I'm sorry but you are all taking this just a little to seriously. There are to many Ego's people cant post without bringing in there ego's and epeens and showing off the winrates or ladder stats. Though it is nice when there are threads dedicated to these things, so it has a hope of not spilling out into every facet of the forum.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad you are saying/showing where the real competitive play is. I just found it very egotistical and rather rude to everyone who doesn't play warlight for the thrill of a 2 day plan coming to fruition, but rather play it for that lulz when you make a mistake causing a FFA to descend into chaos. or the 2v2v2, 17 FFA or 8V2V4. Point is warlight has all these crazy settings that can be abused. but people seem to forget that and keep trying to make the next strategic 1v1 Map or the new most prestigious league.

Interesting thread. I can see both sides. I'm a much better team player than an individual one. Why? Because i spend a lot of time discussing overall strategy with my team, play unselfishly and recognise the importance of position. Thats a skill in itself.

I get beaten 1v1 by players who spend more time considering picks & expansion/countering strategy than i do. Thats also a skill. 2v2 is a balance between the two.


I know a lot of very good 1v1 players who i struggle in a team with, namely because they are focused on their on growth and not the health of the team or disrupting the opponent.


I suppose it boils down to what you want to achieve from the game. Personally, i enjoy sharing a victory rather than an individual one, but thats just me!