For this i think in 2v2 we can play with alt. but my question was about 1v1.

The clear advantage about elo is that you arent restricted to the ladder setting sin order tho show your skills, and i suppose it wouldnt eb limited to 1v1 games. The points system just counts who plays a lot, pretty uninteresting for me, though i admit it may be interersting for new players

and some more then i don't want say, bc they want keep secret.

What a fellow member to its "hide the alts" club owned by himself-gui-myhand... did you guys considered adding JSA to the club?

HE already join our club :D

I did ask Fizzer, and he told me it is against the rules to play two accounts on the same team unless the other team explicitly agrees every game.

Qi: i see your point a bit better now, guess it couldn't hurt.

Gnuffone: CLOT is not really that complex to develop, i abandoned due to lack of regular free time, i got involved with a project that required my attention full-time and had to cut back on some hobbies.

Ah ok. Sorry.

How would ELO work in customized games? Team games? FFA?
Also, there is way too much luck in WL for ELO to be accurate. Or should only a certain type of games generate ELO rating maybe?
And with all the multi's around, it's just going to tempt more players to cheat.
If you want to show ur (ELO) strength, play chess.

chaos, at least elo would apreciate the kind of games players like to play.... it might be inacurate to some players, but it would probably make a better average of the games which are actually played

Personally, I have no problem with someone playing 2v2 ladder with two accounts (on the same team).

I don't think someone should be allowed on two different teams on ladder at same time. I also don't think same player should be on 1v1 with multiple accounts either.

You should only be allowed to be on 1 team (even a team of 1) on the ladder at any given time. Otherwise, the system can be gamed.

I completely agree with Chris. I don't see how one player playing 2 accounts on the same team is breaking a rule. Oftentimes it is better to have a teammate than to play alone anyway, no matter how good you are. If they are allowed in Live tournaments and other tournaments, why wouldn't they be allowed on the ladder? And also, why didn't Fizzer shut down me or gui or Nauzhror when we played the 2v2 ladder with an alt? Or when Nauz played the 1v1 ladder with both Scorched Earth and Nauz or when Tigger played the 1v1 ladder with both Tigger and Master Race. Does he not realize that they are alts? Or does he not care?

I think Fizzer doesn't care much + i don't see why shouldn't allwed.
I agree at all with Jsa.

I don't like it on 1v1. It gives you an unfair advantage. You have double the chances to get a high spot playing two accounts, plus what happens when you match up. Plus, say you get both accounts in top 10, you also help yourself by beating other contenders with your 2nd account.

Just gonna say, as I only read up to page two before becoming overly disgusted by some player's replies lol. This obviously isn't my first account, and I too have an account with several thousand games played.

That said, I think a few of you are acting rather childish over not getting to start at a higher level just because you already have so many games played/won. Randy doesn't have to implement this new feature(s). So for those of you complaining, you just sound silly.

Also, to touch lightly on what's being discussed above. I'm not sure what side of the issue fizzer supports regarding people using alts to play beside them in 2v2's, and I personally have no direct opinion myself. However, this is Randy's game. Not yours. His opinions are law, so like yeah, stop crying ;o

I agree with you on "starting higher" for being here longer. People didn't play 4,000 games because they thought they would get some sort of prize. They played those games to get good and have fun. It is like Blizzard coming out with Diablo 3 and everyone in Diablo 2 with a level 60 character saying I want a ton of sweet items because I put in a bunch of time on the previous version.

It's like if I offered everyone a slice of cake, for free. Those who have eaten cake longer stamp their feet and demand that they get two or more slices for their exhaustive efforts in eating cake, instead of just being appreciative of my gesture

Yeah, actually that system (of rewarding longevity) would punish someone that is just as good of a player right now, but hasn't been here as long. It would discourage those who are playing at a high level right now.

Say you have person A who is a top 10 player, played 4,000 games.

Person B is also a top 10 player, played 500 games.

Do you give person A eight times as many rewards even though person B is just as good of a player?

Wl 2.0 is a great time to start new things from scratch:

- cute badges/levels: if you are a member you already have the features so it is just something new/fun for you to do (if you want...I won't)
- other updates Fizzer won't reveal yet: they will also be good but minor improvements (based on fizzes track record)

Warlight is long overdue for major changes beyond pretty stickers and new versions of the medium earth map:

1) ELO
2) league system, improved tournament functionality
3) live ladder(s)
4) new multiday ladder(s)
5) improved website (appearance, functionality)
6) improved ladder rating system (rating limits for less than 20 games, True Skill system to encourage people to stay on the ladder)
7) more democratic system for choosing seasonal ladder settings/map (more democracy = more participation = more fun)
8) more cards
9) Singleplayer seasonal ladder: winner based on points (fewest turns to win, enemies killed, etc) and players only get one chance to play each game they join (the Singleplayer side of wl is underdeveloped: there seems to be quite a few people who play wl only or especially for Singleplayer games)
10) new game modes:

A: capture the flag/capital: allow players to pick where their flag/capital is located from their starting spots and have the game be won or lost based on who captures the other team's capital/flag first
B: FFA heaven: automate alliances, ceasefires, peace treaties, etc. (ideally, an FFA menu would be created to organized all these things) so players are unable to attack other players for an agreed number of turns...create alliance chat (same function as team chat but visible only to allies)...declarations of war as an optional setting (one must declare war a turn in advance before fighting begins)...the future of wl's playability and excitement lies in FFAs...

wl is more than just medium earth, 1v1s, team games and outdated ladders. leagues, Singleplayer, FFAs and better rating systems (eg for ladder games, ELO) are what will keep players here, increase membership numbers and attract people to the site. All the minor updates to date are nice. But changes to GAME PLAY, GAME MODES AND COMPETITION is ultimately what players would be most excited about.

The fanboys love Fizzer for giving meaning to their lives. But let's go beyond the knee-jerk bullshit of "Fizzer made a great website and you should lie prostrate before him for giving you the opportunity to play." We all know wl is cool. That is why we are all here to begin with. The question that brought me to the forum for the first time was a simple one: how can wl be better?

Let's look at the facts. Fizzer is a great programmer. He is a top ladder player. He has never made a unique map on his own (everything he has made is a variation of someone else's map ideas). The website itself is a variation of someone else's idea (ie Risk: the first map on this site was the Risk map!). Fizzer is good at math, not innovation. My conclusion: alone, Fizzer will not make anything but incremental changes. So all you sycophants out there merely encourage him to remain the same. He needs constructive criticism, not deification. Give him something to shoot for. Don't make him complacent with your incessant praise.

though i believe gui is beign 2 harsh on fizzer, i agree with much... the proposals and what he says about fizzer. Though by deciding to make WL 2.0 and not 1.xxx as has been doen so far he seems to have decided to go much further than before.
Havign said that, 10)a, 10)b, 1), 2) are the proposals i enjoy the most

Qi: why isnt ELO rating on uservoice?