Ladder Site Online...

[Perun]

About cheap pray... well dont you think you maybe deny some awesome matches to low rated players?
The best my ladder match (probably and from all matches) was against Hagbart, if he had same point of view we would never play that match.

I think you top rated players should enter the low rated ones and play vs them and on win give some advices where were they do the worst move and such,Gallifaxes advices afther we finished the match turned me from noob to intermediate player.

And if you don't enter the low rated player game and you allow them to enter yours well thats little contradictoy isn't it?

And to player 2 is always harder to be cuz he haves to try to take over inicative and for lower rated ones that is harder than to you.

Basicly we all should play vs all.

[Yogibear]

And if you don't enter the low rated player game and you allow them to enter yours well thats little contradictoy isn't it?

I am not sure if you got me right: I don't want to refuse to play lower rated players. If they enter my games, there is a very important difference: It is their decision to choose that matchup, not mine. If they consciously say "yes, i want to play someone clearly better than me", that is fine for me.

I guess i was implicitly thinking that people mostly want to play opponents with similar skills. I can of course be wrong with that. I just didn't want to force them to say "no, i don't want to play you, you are too strong for me" by entering their games.

Again, i don't think playing less skilled players is no fun. I just thought that's not what they were watching for on the ladder. I have also made the experience that there are few people, who go through a period of (more or less) constant losing by playing better opponents to get better themselves. I have met some in the last years, but the majority seems to be different.

[Cackfiend]

About cheap pray... well dont you think you maybe deny some awesome matches to low rated players?
The best my ladder match (probably and from all matches) was against Hagbart, if he had same point of view we would never play that match.

I think you top rated players should enter the low rated ones and play vs them and on win give some advices where were they do the worst move and such,Gallifaxes advices afther we finished the match turned me from noob to intermediate player.

And if you don't enter the low rated player game and you allow them to enter yours well thats little contradictory isn't it?

And to player 2 is always harder to be cuz he haves to try to take over initiative and for lower rated ones that is harder than to you.

Basically we all should play vs all.

You could simply play a non-ladder game. I did this with a 1400 ranked player the other day that joined my game and wanted to play but the name of the game was "Ladder 1700+ ONLY". Although I admit I dont try nearly as hard in non ladder games


I like yogi's point of making games and letting lower ranked people decide that they want to play vs someone higher ranked and not joining peoples games that are lower ranked. I still don't agree with the massive abuse of so many players constantly playing much lower ranked players for rank though and I think its past time something is done about it.




And if they just wanted to play a game vs someone much lower ranked they could always do it non-ladder.

[Coz]

Umm.. I don't know where to contact the Ladder devs ( I couldn't find the information on the site! ) so I'm just posting it here. When I went to select my country when registering, I couldn't find it. Dominican Republic. My nickname is the same here and there.

[Cackfiend]

Dredge wont be playing though... still need that 5th orc player, MasterDerf might fill in...

[Rigor]

for those who are not up to date...thats the wescraft thread:

http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=27639

and

1800s are true masters of the game and that an 1800 has almost no chance to lose to a 1500. So then people complain that the 1800 is picking up 3 points by beating a 1500. Then you switch the rating system again, blah blah, you've basically compounded your problem.

very nice post, although a little long. better post two or three times, i read such long things only when its really late and i got a boring game opened.

i feel relieved that u say playing 1500's is no shame. today i wanted to play later than usual and found only below-1500s where i simply refused because i dont want to be one of these people who beat noobs.

actually its quite hazardous to play 1500s because of the potential loss of points (imagine devastating bad luck)

yeah i know what u think when eyerouge is posting...(long text, not now )

but

we were talking about that already at page 30, haha

http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic. ... &start=435

[nani]

Ladder-Player - Search-Engine for Firefox

Erm I just had the idea of making ladder-player-search
a firefox search-engine. So if anyone else is as lazy as
I am, take the file below, extract it and move the xml
to the searchplugins -folder in your firefox profile.

best regards.

p.s.: saves you the 2min of writing it yourself.

[nani]

Once upon a time there were two players, A & B.
B started playing ladder right after A has stopped to do so.
Both played the exact same style and most likely B appeared to be the reincarnation of A.
Up to that point, the world seemed to be (almost) in order.
But suddenly A appeared again, infrequently, and, although no replay could be seen,
(rumors say the matches have never been taken place) played matches versus B, only versus B, and lost them...

[Rigor]

HAHAHA what a great tale. and who is that player A aka B if i daresay? im sure u can write the formula

Code: Select all

a (i) + b (i) = 1(i) 

i=n 

with n for almost a tenth of ladder players :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

[Cackfiend]

my guess is Zeek_Noob

[Cackfiend]

REALLY disappointed a tourny hasnt started yet.... could we at the very least get a signup going?

[ano]

Hello. Would like to ask a simple thing. Is enabling timer and "use map settings" really so mandatory for ladder games? I saw a lot of games without a timer and personally I feel extremely uncomfortable with it. And it's not because I'm new and make my turns for ages (I try to be as fast as I can), just because I hate being restricted by something and that obviously leads to lack of thought and silly mistakes. Does it really improve one's skills? I firmly doubt it. Also, knowing that you can't even go to the WC or answer a phone call doesn't stimulate good gaming, IMO...
Fixed start ToD really benefits some factions while random starting ToD is just a matter of luck and thus brings more balance, IMO.

Sorry if these questions have been raised before. This thread is too long to read everything.

[Yogibear]

Hello. Would like to ask a simple thing. Is enabling timer and "use map settings" really so mandatory for ladder games?

No, it's not. As long as you agree with your opponent about not using a timer that is perfectly fine. For fairness you should tell him upfront, though, even if it shows in the lobby (if you know where to look at).

[Velensk]

The balance is calculated based on the advantage that fixed ToD gives. This is why 1vs1s have fixed ToD standard settings and 2vs2s have random ToD in default setting.

[Eskon]

If you ask me both should be mandatory, especially fixed time of day, in the same manner as ladder ratings are restricted to the regular 1vs1 maps. They have been designed with the factions and time of day in mind, so there is no guarantee that balance as intended will still work. Balanced playing conditions are vital to the meaningfulness of the ladder (what exists of it at least).

A time limit is just something I find obligatory in any competitive environment. In a competitive environment, players try to use all the resources they have. If they have unlimited time, some will definitely use it. The fast players will start to crawl out of their skin and get angry in chat, the slow players will react aggressively rightfully saying "I can think for as long as I want". As such it is best to force both fast players and slow players into a unified time limit; the fast players at least know that they will be waiting for a set amount of time, and the slow players, while they cannot think for as much as they might like, never have to deal with accusations of "playing too slow".