Myhand wouldn't that only work fairly with a single game type? I don't personally see this happening. This 'xp' idea is much better IMHO.

Apollo all your queries except the level cap one have been answered here or on the blog post :P

After hearing the answers to my questions, I think it is a very good idea and should work well. I am sure there will be some problems with it but I have no doubt you will correct the errors and make it as close to perfection as it can be.

+1 to JSA. I can't wait for v2.0 to be released :D


Fizzer, do you have any idea on a time frame at all?

yeah, i want to know also if it iwll be a week or a few months

Despite the validity of muhand's argument we should notice that WL wont be just about this points system. We already have players in some quite bad clans who only think about stats and this wouldnt change much to the emntality of those players. It is obvious that if you want to be considered a good player you need to do things correctly, and no one will consider another billy walsh as anyone relevant

He said already: as soon as possible.

My initial reaction: you are devaluing membership, meaning less revenue, and encouraging people to play lots and lots of games, which means the site will be more expensive to run.

Then I remembered about the adverts, so I guess on that model this makes a lot of sense (and maybe membership will be even more attractive).

My only remaining problem is that you are making warlight to addictive, and it is harmful to society.

Also these farmer should be a lot easier to find, and Fizzer will have to do more to find them.

I wish i was a new player. I played for 3 years... and now i feel sorta "exausted".
This is like...uhm...like we all have a car, someones are older, some others are new. They all go on gazoline. Now they invented a new fuel which will bring more efficency, fun, money etc etc, but some o the cars are still old as shit. They have their own KMs...so already near the end of their "life" or lets say already passed the peak.


How do you think i feel in front of the idea that all my 4000 games or the infinite games of HHH doesn't count nothing? :S I can't see any incentive for leveling. Maybe i should still wait for the release to talk, but imho we'll have a lot of "pro" players with a lower level than other new players rated higher because of more games played.

A level system based completly on skills would be much better.

anonymous, we should probably wait and see... what seems to be obvious is that this improvement may attract more ppl to the site (=money), and hopefully the other players wont be in a much worst position than previously

A level system based completly on skills would be much better.

I would agree, but that could also be called the ladder.

Something which mixes both (which I think he is hinting at) would be the best. Many games + many wins + beating players who have a high rank = better ranking. Take out any one of the three and you have a system which is easy to be gamed, and doesn't actually show real skill.

Maybe a way to find everyone's "true" level would be where people can only get so high without beating those of a higher level. Once they do they can continue getting points and leveling themselves.

Come on guys, when was the last time you remember Fizzer implementing a new feature sloppily or without thinking it through?

I'm aware this post may sound a little fanboyish, but WL has an incredibly low number of bugs and just about every game play mechanic (with the possible exception of multi-attack; maybe it's just me, but I never figured out how to defend against that??) works rather well. Sure, the AI is not perfect and there are a few "exploits" (multiple negative-sanctions cards at once comes to mind), but it's not like any of the cards are massively overpowered, the built-in maps unbalanced (or ugly) or the default settings horribly broken...

Unless you can tear the paragraph above to shreds (with good counter-examples!), how about we give Fizzer the benefit of the doubt? If there's any huge problems / issues / oversights / bugs / whatever with WL 2.0, we can always complain after it's been released. So far I've never seen a change to WL which, for instance, stabbed members in the back, so why would it happen now?

My suggestion: let's all just look forward to WL 2.0, because (statistically speaking :p ) it's probably going to be awesome! Let's not spoil the anticipation with endless discussions of "but maybe it will be bad", because honestly, I see no reason to seriously worry about that possibility.

Agreed.

2.0 = perfect time to introduce ELO and leagues

ELO "ladders" (all-time + last 30 days) including members and nonmembers give motivation/incentives to play. currently, too many people (wrongly) think the 1v1 ladder is the measure of all things. many players get to #1 and think they are the best for a day and stop playing. a website that fails to motivate some of the best players to keep playing is not as successful as it could be. an ELO system and top 100 list (on the dashboard's home page) would provide motivation.

also, if there is an ELO, making leagues becomes so much easier and playing them would be more enjoyable. without ELOs, players waste hours trying to prove their worth or memorize the patterns of one template. without leagues players spend hours organizing shit and counting results (and then spend too much time writing shit on the forum).

ELO = definitive rating, motivation to keep playing
automated league system = saved time, more fun

as it is, when i finish 3-4 more games to win 2 tournaments i plan to stop playing. the only thing that would keep me interested would be ELO and/or a league system. i think there are a dozen or so other top players that are on the fence about quitting. the more of us that quit, the more that will follow.

myhand, Qi: Are you guys getting sponsored by the sacred church of ELO or something? Would be cool to have, but i don't see how it'll make the whole world (or the whole warlight experience in this case) a better place.

yeah. +100. for this i plan to retire to and i stop to join new tourney.

As long as there are features beyond what members already get, older players will have some incentives as well

official music of the sacred church of ELO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYzbViYoWmM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

post script:

ps, wl has to appeal to all levels of players.

level 1: singleplayer: for learners, solitaire type
level 2: multiplayer games: have fun, learn/experiment
level 3: tournaments, ladders

levels 1-2: wl 2.0's cute badges

i've won 30+ tournaments, reached #1 on the 1v1 ladder twice and on the 2v2 ladder three times. i need a new or interesting challenge to remain active.

no challenge = no motivation = no desire to play.

an easy example: make a list of all the players who have been #1 on the ladders. if you could count their game count before they became #1 and after you would notice a significant decrease in their activity (games played). i'd guess there is a drop off of at least 50%. you might also be surprised by the number of players who stopped playing or became semi-active after they reached their "level 3" goals. how many times do i need to reach #1 on the ladder before i become tired of playing those templates? how many tournaments does myhand have to win before he stops joining them? how many live tournaments does tim need to join before he stops playing? brisk is #1 on two ladders now and has been #1 on the 2v2. how much longer will he remain active on the ladders before he runs out of motivation/desire to keep beating the same people?

level 4: ELO/leagues: once you reach a certain skill level on more than one map, you seek out new challenges. ELO/leagues is the only challenge left. they dont exist now so top players have no reason to keep playing.

to keep top players around the site needs a bigger challenge (leagues) and a universal rating system (elo). it's a simple question of psychology.

why do we (myhand, gnuff, others) care about this? bc the first three levels dont interest us anymore. to keep us active we need more. cute badges are a great innovation. 2.0 will be a big improvement. but i wont stick around just to collect badges.

I agree with Qi 100%. I plan to retire for similar reasons. Ladder is only a determinant of skill in standard settings against the people who >happen to compete on the ladder at the same moment in time<, stats are irrelevant as they are very dependent on the quality of games you play, and there are to many rubbish tournaments, that have no worth or fun in them.. So i see not much to keep me playing. An ELO system would make the experience much much better (at least for the top players).

+1002 on global ELO... :(