Ladder Site Online...

Discussion of all aspects of multiplayer development: unit balancing, map development, server development, and so forth.

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Post Reply
frodo42
Posts: 3
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 7:58 am

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by frodo42 »

neki wrote:Hi!

I am pretty sure this is my first post on this forum, and it is because of Rigor's "Rules update p1/p2". In my opinion it's complicated and no fun. I am in favour of random maps, random starting positions, I am almost always playing grrr's random extension, but this is too complicated! We already have ladder.subversiva.org as a third party website, why do we need the 4th party (so to call it) http://www.randomresult.com/ ? If I were a wesnoth player, trying to start playing ladder, it will discourage me for sure, too many headakes to start a single ladder game...
No point in me writing to much stuff here I agree totally with neki, I haven't tried out www.randomresults.com yet, but just the fact that I have to visit another website before a ladder game is annoying. I'll try it, but I have to say I am very much against using a website for this (couldn't I just get a few tickets until I get the result I want and then post that ticket to my opponent).
The idea of random starting sides is fine, but it doesn't matter that much that I think we need to make things this complicated.
Just_end_turn
Posts: 71
Joined: December 31st, 2009, 3:09 pm

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by Just_end_turn »

Well Rigor said me that it was better to write here that as 2 players can't register on the same IP ( I'm JET's brother) I will share his account with his autorization :)
User avatar
eyerouge
Posts: 380
Joined: June 29th, 2007, 4:37 am
Location: wtactics.org
Contact:

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by eyerouge »

Just_end_turn wrote:Well Rigor said me that it was better to write here that as 2 players can't register on the same IP ( I'm JET's brother) I will share his account with his autorization :)
It's possible to register with the same IP on the ladder - it would just show your accounuts as dupes in the dupe check in the ladder footer. Now that you mentioned it here I don't think anyone would mind/care really since many people share IP:s due to their living situation. With that said, I reserve myself for corrections - I don't know what you guys agreed on or why really.
User avatar
Rigor
Posts: 941
Joined: September 27th, 2007, 1:40 am

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by Rigor »

ah many things:

first, frodo thanks for participating, i appreciate your comment on the current situation.
shortly, i want to say two things:

ok you can throw up more than one result, and present one of those to the other guy, picking p1 or p2. but thats not the whole truth. the website makes it possible to not let you know the result yet. and thats a crucial point. the OTHER player can open the key and from this moment on knows the result as the first person. plus, at the same time, you as the player that threw the coin and sent the ticket to the other guy also have access to this information. i would strongly recomment it USE IT ONCE XD

it is really waterproof.

furthermore, tesafilmchen, our busy bee, is working already on an implementation on the ladder mainpage so you wont need a third party webpage. however, we have to make it waterproof as well, and thats the whole "problem" now if you want to call it that way.

about the other thing, having multiple accounts for one IP, jet nicely asked me what happens if you create a second ladder player account from a certain IP addy and if its OK to do that.

answer: yes of course, for instance when you live in a shared appartment it would make no sense to NOT play from the same IP. the main idea of the dupe check is, that you dont register a "flawless" account when you start losing a lot of ladder games and play with your alias account only for your own ego. we all know anyways that you are an advanced player that is using a different name trying to show off with your rank (especially when we have never seen you playing games b4).

that being said i hope i could answer all of your questions
enacui
Posts: 3
Joined: April 6th, 2009, 5:42 am

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by enacui »

I find that I can not connect to http://www.randomresult.com/ .
The problem of balance can be sovle on the maps,not in such a troublesome way.
I don't hate playing as p2,maybe more challanging.
BTW,my suggection of timer: 200,240,150,20
Eskon
Posts: 184
Joined: August 12th, 2008, 2:21 pm
Location: Esslingen, Germany

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by Eskon »

In reply to silent:

A game is defined by its rules. This includes not only the hexagonal grid, movement system, combat system, day/night cycle, but also unit stats and resistances and terrain values - namely, faction and map. Yes, in theory there is a clearly defined number of official ladder maps everybody plays on; in practice, each player plays by different rules simply by choosing the maps they'll play and maps they won't play. Different rules make a different game. Ladder or not, if two players can simultaneously exist who will never play each other since they specialized in different maps, they're not playing by the same rules. Enforce the random map mod and you'll have all on one page. Whether that change is worth making in light of retaining the freedom of ladder players to play on agree condititions is what's doubtful to me.

That said, the ladder was a fine institution before. "Random Result"? A website for coin tosses? Seriously? At least make the blasted thing optional, as in players can just agree who plays what. I think the pre-flagged villages change is more than enough.

Much rather than any rule changes of the planet, tournaments are where it's at. Code for an automated tournament system is something I'd much rather see than anything else.

Also, democracy: It works for some things. It doesn't work for software projects.
SalsaRocoto
Posts: 41
Joined: November 5th, 2009, 12:34 pm

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by SalsaRocoto »

Hey all,

I concur with what has been said about using a third web site. The hwole idea of tickets, etc., even if included in the ladder web site looks cumbersome. Honestly, grrr random add on is great and moreover includes random map choosing. If I understood well the problem is about maintaining the add-on and having ladder depend on it. Then why not simply transfer the maintenance of the random add-on to the admins of the ladder ? then all ladder games would be played with that add-on and finally we would have a more balanced ladder. That doesn't look like it is much extra work for the ladder admin, but if it is let's beef up the admin team. I'm happy to helo if needed.

Cheers
hiro hito
Posts: 201
Joined: November 23rd, 2006, 8:00 am

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by hiro hito »

To make it easier for all players, I would suggest an add-on call "Ladder" with all setup for a ladder match....
"Of course His Majesty is a pacifist. When I told him that to initiate war was a mistake, he agreed.Thus, gradually, he began to lead toward war."-Emperor Shòwa (Enlightened Peace)'s chief cabinet secretary
User avatar
Rigor
Posts: 941
Joined: September 27th, 2007, 1:40 am

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by Rigor »

ive got a lot of things to say - let me work through this slowly:

enacui: i believe doc patterson is working non stop to solve any balancing issues there are on mainline, so this will not be an issue here. about your timer, plz dont just write your suggestion in numbers, but rather what would be changed and why you believe its a good idea to change it to that setup. alternatively also use a special scenario to further describe how it would work in practise.

eskon: if i understood you correctly, you prefer the random mod for the ladder rather than having a third party website like most of you guys who decided to express yourselves. if i understood salsarocoto correctly, he recommended himself to maintain the mod. what leads us right next to

salsarocoto: yes u absolutely got me right with what i said, the thing is, since none of the admins seems to know you, and i suppose you arent here for too long, i dont think it would be so smart to give u instantly access to admin privileges. sorry to be the one to say that and please dont take it personal, its just some sort of precaution. however, if you want to prove yourself trustworthy you could help us through adapting grrrs mod to 1.8. and here is what u do: you DL it, change it, contact grrr if its ok what u did, go to this website: http://wiki.wesnoth.org/Distributing_co ... -on_Server to see how to upload your great creation, and tell us all thats "ITS ALIVE!" in this thread. not neccessarily in that order :mrgreen: .

hiro hito: that sounds like a good idea. im not sure if everybody would play it with those settings (for instance, some players [me] generally dont like to play with timers) but on the whole it would resemble grrrs mod i believe.



BTW, what about other problems with no solution in sight such as...

*) playing more games than other ladder players seems to lead to a higher overall score even though the player is rather mediocre

*) all of us competitive players can decide who our next opponent will be (& different time zones in the world will make sure arranging games will be hard)


something funny i saw while browsing the many wishes made on the devs platform https://gna.org/bugs/index.php?10904 - notice the year of the original submission :mrgreen: - LUCKILY i just had a look at my request https://gna.org/bugs/index.php?15798 and WOW IT IS ASSIGNED TO SOMEBODY !!!! this makes me hope that it will be implemented rather sooner than later :P :P :P :P :P :P
SalsaRocoto
Posts: 41
Joined: November 5th, 2009, 12:34 pm

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by SalsaRocoto »

Thanks Rigor for bringing those changes for a better and a more fair ladder. But of course you are going to meet a lot of resistance from some players too attached to their rating. Here is an example: in the attached replay (we didn't actually play) I joined a ladder match and the player refused to play according to the news rules. He - of course - was playing as p1.
It is certain that a ladder add-on would solve this kind of problems.
Attachments
2p_-_The_Freelands_replay_-_ladder_not_played.gz
(6.67 KiB) Downloaded 165 times
Rembrandt
Posts: 6
Joined: May 5th, 2008, 6:30 pm

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by Rembrandt »

SalsaRocoto wrote:Thanks Rigor for bringing those changes for a better and a more fair ladder. But of course you are going to meet a lot of resistance from some players too attached to their rating. Here is an example: in the attached replay (we didn't actually play) I joined a ladder match and the player refused to play according to the news rules. He - of course - was playing as p1.
It is certain that a ladder add-on would solve this kind of problems.
I was the player in this replay.

SalsaRocoto, a few things:

1) As numerous players here have told you, it is troublesome to use a third party site.
2) You do not wait until the game has started and I'm in the midst of recruiting to tell me you want to random the starting positions, it irritates me.
3) You also do not follow up this with messaging me that I'm "just afraid to play p2" and then you stop replying. You are ranked 1614 on the ladder. Its not particularly intimidating. Please do not get the idea that me telling you not to join my games in future is a fear of playing you, I simply dislike rude and inflexible people.
4) I have played p2 numerous times, some of my ladder losses are due to it. If stop_chemtrails is here, perhaps he can kindly attach the recent replay where I was p2 on the same map you just attached, and lost.

Lastly, you are quite a rule nazi. You do not run the ladder, nor should you looking at how you do things. I applaud Rigor's attempt to improve the ladder but before its made official, all our opinions count, not just yours, SalsaRocoto. Try to remember that before waving a rulebook and sticking it at people.
SalsaRocoto
Posts: 41
Joined: November 5th, 2009, 12:34 pm

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by SalsaRocoto »

Quick answer, I just don't want a polemic.
You also do not follow up this with messaging me that I'm "just afraid to play p2" and then you stop replying
You forget to tell that your answer was "You are an idiot". I ignore in a systematic way all players that insult me. I'm playing for fun, I have no time to loose with that kind of annoying people.

My bad to let you start the game: you asked if I was ready and I said y. At that same second I realized that we didn't draw the starting positions and I told you immediatly. Believe me or not, honestly I don't care.

It looks rightfull to me as a player to decide to play my games according to Rigor's rules or not. I informed you I wanted to play with these rules and you didn't want. Not a worry, we don't play. However it highlights the need of clarifying whether the rules are legitimate or not.

Regarding this last point, you forgot to report what you told me: that Rigor imposed those rules without consulting anyone and that you didn't agree with that. Maybe the debate should be there.

It is also rightfull to me as a ladder player to have an opinion about those rules. Given the clear advantage p1 has (see the nice stats published recently), I definitely support them. Moreover, and that's just my personal opinion, I can't see any good reason to refuse to draw randomly starting position other that being afraid to play as player 2.

Cheers
Rembrandt
Posts: 6
Joined: May 5th, 2008, 6:30 pm

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by Rembrandt »

You forget to tell that your answer was "You are an idiot". I ignore in a systematic way all players that insult me. I'm playing for fun, I have no time to loose with that kind of annoying people.
You are an idiot. There, I've said it, again.
My bad to let you start the game: you asked if I was ready and I said y. At that same second I realized that we didn't draw the starting positions and I told you immediatly. Believe me or not, honestly I don't care.
I don't believe you. And yes, you told me after the game started and decided to be an inflexible dick about it, rude too. If you had asked nicely, perhaps I would have. But you didn't, and decided to be an idiot.
It looks rightfull to me as a player to decide to play my games according to Rigor's rules or not. I informed you I wanted to play with these rules and you didn't want. Not a worry, it just highlights the need of clarifying whether they are legitimate or not.
If I create the game, and you want to use random starting, say so before the game starts. Don't be an idiot, wait for the game to start, and then try to wave a rule in my face.
Regarding this last point, you forgot to report what you told me: that Rigor imposed those rules without consulting anyone and that you didn't agree with that. Maybe the debate should be there.
Rigor however, is polite and professional. And if the rules become officially coded in, I'll stick to them when they are easy to use, even if I don't agree with them. As I have told you, I'm not the only one with that opinion.
It is also rightfull to me as a ladder player to have an opinion about those rules. Given the clear advantage p1 has (see the nice stats published recently), I definitely support them. Moreover, and that's just my personal opinion, I can't see any good reason to refuse to draw randomly starting position other that being afraid to play as player 2.
Give me a break here dude. Your Elo rating is 1614, did you honestly think I was afraid to play you because of p1 advantage? And, as I have told you repeatedly, I play p2 a lot.

Your stupidity is amazing honestly.
Yogibear
Retired Developer
Posts: 1086
Joined: September 16th, 2005, 5:44 am
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by Yogibear »

Rembrandt wrote:You are an idiot. There, I've said it, again.

...

Rigor however, is polite and professional. And if the rules become officially coded in, I'll stick to them when they are easy to use, even if I don't agree with them. As I have told you, I'm not the only one with that opinion.

...

Your stupidity is amazing honestly.
Your rudeness is amazing as well. I suggest you take Rigor as an example for your own behaviour if you admire his politeness so much.

And if you think "well, he started it" you maybe also should think of the following cite: "An eye for an eye makes the world go blind!" (Mahatma Ghandi).

Anyway, either stop that immediately (both of you) or follow up on it via PM. Otherwise i will stop it :? .
Smart persons learn out of their mistakes, wise persons learn out of others mistakes!
User avatar
eyerouge
Posts: 380
Joined: June 29th, 2007, 4:37 am
Location: wtactics.org
Contact:

Re: Ladder Site Online...

Post by eyerouge »

Rigor
Rigor wrote:BTW, what about other problems with no solution in sight such as...

*) playing more games than other ladder players seems to lead to a higher overall score even though the player is rather mediocre
It's actually the other way around: The more games people play, and against more different opponents, the more exact and meaningful the Elo rating becomes.

The problem with "mediocre" players having high rating is usually based on one or both of two reasons:

a) The player tries to always pick an opponent he believes is inferior to him/her - minimizing risk & maximizing profit.

This is dubbed "cherry picking" by chains, and captures the process well. Cherry picking does work indeed, but only up until a point where it then stops working: As a players Elo goes up, the won points from the players victims gets lower all the time, until it one day becomes 0. When that happens the player has to start to cherry pick player that are somewhat more skilled (but still inferior). The process repeats itself, until he/she earns 0 points again from the wins. It then repeats itself over and over again, until one day, the victims he/she picks are not inferior any longer but actually on the same level or higher than the player.

This is already built into how Elo works, so, this "problem" is really only one of short term since it corrects itself with time. Clearly, nobody can keep on cherry picking forever since he/she will sooner or later get opponents on his/her true level. Hence, I wouldn't describe this as a serious problem or problem at all in the long run.

(If one does indeed think it is a problem the ladder supports 2 different methods of dealing with it already, which can be enabled in the config: 1) Only allow people to play x number of games within y days 2) Only allow people to play others which are within/close to their own Elo range. Of these options I'd say number 2 is the least problematic, but, I would not recommend any of them to be in place since they would both kill ladder activity and since the last one could really only work on a ladder that has 5-10 times more participants than ours.)

b) The player has simply played to small amount of games or against a too small amount of opponents to have his/her "truer" Elo rating.
This is also self-fixed with time. Actually it could even be a good thing - to many players having a good rating spurs activity ;) leading them to play more games. As they do, their Elo will fall if they really are "mediocre" as you suggest. (Summed up: This is a version of reply in a. above).
Rigor wrote:*) all of us competitive players can decide who our next opponent will be (& different time zones in the world will make sure arranging games will be hard)
Elo was mainly designed to be used in an environment where nobody picks the opponent, so the problem described above is not there. In any case, forcing a system where people are paired wouldn't work for the reasons you state, like different time zones, different lives even within same time zone, small playerbase etc. It would most certainly kill the ladder over time. As shown above, the problem is also really not that huge once properly understood, meaning, Elo already takes care of it today as it is. It's just a matter of perceiving it.

p1 & p2-hysteria

1. There are many maps to choose from when playing ladder. If you honestly believe a map gives a huge advantage that's related to starting position, then don't play/select it.

Use another, and then contact the mapmakers of Wesnoth or whoever maintains it with your arguments that try to show there is a real problem and maybe, since you're so smart, also the solution to it by editing the map (in contrast to solutions that accept the broken maps but tries to even out the problem by forcing every player to have a share of it at random. Big difference on what level the "solutions" are, clearly...)

2. The notion that your player position will win/lose the game for you is almost always totally false: Really, get a grip people, and use your logic to see the apparent here. The better player would win, per definition, the game no matter what position he/she starts out at (yes, most of the times, even if the RNG gods show hatred, but let's not involve that factor as well in this post).

For starting positions to matter enough to decide if you will lose the game a certain condition must be met in the game. That condition spells equilibrium, or close to it, of skills between the players. Only time RNG and/or player positions matter enough to change the outcome of the game is if the players are of identical skills (or close to it) when it comes to everything beyond those two factors. (And even when they are at that identical skill level I'd still maintain that a good player is one that can plan for RNG disatser and that can understand what needs to be done when starting the game in a crap position.)

So instead of whining and self-proclaiming what's broken or not in Wesnoth and blaming game results on that instead of lack of own skills people should stop and ask the apparent question: "If starting position only matters when we're of equal skills, how often does it happen that I play somebody which is just that?"

Answer would probably be "seldom". In fact, a majority of games on any given ladder players account is against people that is either more or less skilled than that player. And this seems to be valid for most players. It is so because it's really hard to find people that possess the same skills as you do using the matchup of factions and using the map you picked to play. (Even if me & you had same skills using factions a & b on map x one of us is likely to be more skilled when we use factions b & d on map y... etc...) Summed up: While itäs logically possible that you would meet an equally skilled opponent that has identical skills as you have, it is very highly unlikely to happen and won't be the case most of the times you play.

Skills, luck and other factors in BfW
I won't even go into explaining all this, since it has been done several times already and the forum is filled with it:
  • If you think a system is broken, be it the ladder or BfW, then don't play it if it brings you more grief than joy. Nobody forces your hand.
  • If you are disturbed by it but still get more out of using the system than not, then try to deliver constructive criticism to wherever it belongs. Technical details about the code of BfW should be directed to the great developers of BfW, just as Rigor did. It is also always better to release an actual fix to a problem on the game itself than releasing mods and addons that try to fix it and then depend on people being around to maintain them for every new release of BfW in all eternity to come.
  • Starting positions are really not a very huge issue, as shown above and which anyone capable of deductions could conclude if (s)he'd bother thinking for a second. It is however a very common psychological reaction to try to blame other external factors when one loses a game. It was the dogs fault, it was the timer, it was the starting position, it was the RNG, it was whatever. Sure, some of these could very well be valid and important factors to why one lost a game, but, most of the time they are totally irrelevant. There is usually a much easier explanation that nobody wants to face: You lost the game because you played it badly compared to your opponents performance. Learn from it, and simply play the next one better. By always failing to see the apparent (you sucked that game?) and blaming external factors you hinder yourself from dealing with the number one factor to a majority of your losses - your own lack of skills - an internal factor. With other words, your self-pity and hurt feelings that require you to go irrational in an attempt to suck up the loss by blaming it on whatever is sabotaging your development as a player. <--- I give this to you for free guys & girls. ;)
  • Lucks is, over time and over games in the long run, not relevant for how you fare in this game. At least not when all your efforts are summed up in a nice Elo point and rank on the LoW. A good player is, among other things, one which can handle RNG setbacks and which relies as little as possible on the RNG. A bad player is, among other things, one which does the contrary. Add to this the external factor thoughts above and you'll be fast to understand why everyone keeps on ranting about the RNG in this game.
Post Reply