1v1 Legendary Level League [LLL 08/2021]

The Legendary Level League offers an additional opportunity besides the traditional 1v1 tournament series to participate in exciting 1v1 games.

Reply until August 14 (Saturday) if you want to join. Signing up earlier is recommended - because if there is an uneven number of sign-ups, the last one will literally be the odd one out for this round :wink:

For the uninitiated: 1v1s are a fun challenge for new NP2 players and veterans alike. You will face off on an epic mirrored map with no experimentation so you have the exact same starting position as your opponent. No diplomacy - instead it’s 100% strategy and game theory. It’s turn-based with only two players, so games can move along quickly - but if you need some more time sometimes, there’s also a very generous turn deadline (48 hours).

(some testimonials)

So what’s the gist of the format? You only ever have to sign up for one game at a time - and that game is likely going to be with a similarly experienced opponent. This makes it a perfect place to build your 1v1 skills in tight matches. The main goal is having fun games, but if you’re looking for a competitive one it will be rising to the Legendary Level over time and defeating the defending Legendary 1v1 Player to claim that title for yourself!

Although the game is turn-based with a 48h deadline, please make sure you can start your game within one week after it’s set up and generally have enough time to keep the game moving along at a steady pace, i.e. at least two submits a day, preferably more (as it’s 1v1, the game will move forward in absence of your opponent after you submit and you can submit your next turn already). No worries if you don’t have time for NP2 some days though.

*** Hall of Fame ***
(Legendary 1v1 Players)

@Solfyre (2x, defending champion)
@Trucriot (2x)

fine-print on how the concept started and works
  1. Players sign up and get placed on a level according to their latest ranking (link) - new 1v1 players get the starting rating of 814 and likely play each other first.
  2. They get paired up through the (active) ladder, 1 vs 2 (legendary level), 3 vs 4 etc., so will play others on a likely comparable skill level.
  3. Winner of the top level match is the “Legendary 1v1 Player” until next round.
  4. Ladder gets re-arranged according to results (winners go up slightly (except #1), losers go down slightly (except last)). Players sign up for the next round -
    … if previous ones choose not to, no problem: they won’t be considered in pairings, but lose their position on the ladder (to encourage staying active even high up or as leader) - for come-back players the new-joiner rule will apply.
    … if new ones join, they will be placed on the ladder according to their relative ranking with a slight malus (to encourage joining early)

After that, back to step 2 and repeat indefinitely. I’m thinking of one round happening every two months, giving ample time for games to fully play out without a hurry. If a match hasn’t finished when the next LLL round is about to start, the players will be warned and after another week a tiebreaker will be applied (stars, else ships) to determine the placement on the next-round-ladder. The game can continue on afterwards until it’s settled though.

If everything works out, it will be an endless casual tournament with players never having to sign up for more than one match, but lots of interesting matches on all skill levels, with the top being particularly competitive and the lower end being a good place to gain experience and raise the level / staying engaged due to not facing impossible opponents, but similarly experienced ones instead.

The settings are the same as the KO tournaments’ ones (except starting cash). For detailed reasoning check @HULK’s tournament thread.

Here’s all settings deviating from the default NP2 ones:

  • Stars For Victory: 66%
  • Turn Based: On
  • Tick to Jump Each Turn: 6 Tick Jumps
  • Turn Deadline: 48 Hours
  • Dark Galaxy: Disabled
  • Stars Per Player: 64 Stars, Epic
  • Home Star Distance: Far
  • Starting Stars: 1
  • Starting Credits: $3000
  • Starting Ships Per Star: 100 Ships
  • Starting Economy: 20
  • Starting Industry: 20
  • Starting Science: 4
  • Cost Science: Cheap
  • Cost Scanning: Normal or Expensive
  • Cost Experimentation: None
  • Cost Manufacturing: Expensive
  • Cost Banking: Cheap
  • Cost Weapons: None
  • Starting Experimentation: Level0
  • Starting Weapons: Level3 or Level4
1 Like

Vote on setting changes here!

Potential setting changes for this round: Following @plug’s suggestion, I’m thinking about making Scanning Research more expensive to increase the cost of extensive insights into the opponent’s movements. This may not help break-up late-game draws, but may reduce the risk of them happening. Fixing Weapons at 4 is another prominent idea to encourage attacks (re-surfaced by @Solfyre). Any opinions on these are welcome.

I sign up!

I actually think making scanning more expensive will make draws more likely. At least with my playstyle, I like to have intel before I attack, so disincentivising scanning will make it less likely for me to attack.

Good to have you again! That’s a valid concern regarding Scanning that I also share.

I would like to partake

Hey. Yep, sign me up. Thanks

Put me in coach

Sign me up! :slight_smile:

I’m back, back again.

I’m in!

I’m not sure how I feel about the scanning. I feel like the actual outcome of whether it was a good idea or not won’t be know until we try it out.

Sign me up!

I want in too.

I’ll join. I agree with weapon level 4 capping.

I wanna sign up

I’d like to sign up for the LLL again please.

My idea with the Scanning was not to make it more expensive to research, but to lock it at a low level (not researchable), possibly even level 1. That way players would have to do some guessing about where their opponent was building up forces, and could make bold strikes aiming blind for warp gates etc… It would reduce the amount of information players have, and mean they must compensate for this by out-thinking (out-bluffing) their opponent instead.

I also like that idea about making the galaxies smaller - fewer stars and smaller distance between home-worlds. We probably need to speed up games, while allowing for a 48h deadline still. Given everything is completely symmetric, going small should still be fine.

Maybe we could try a test game with all the above and see what happens?

Meant to say, my own view is that Weapons 3 is fine - helps tip the balance - but I’m happy to try Weapons 4 to see how that changes things.

I may sit this one out due to some travel, but it would be interesting to see how W4 plays versus W3 … plus the other possible changes.

Locking Scan at 1 is a pretty wild idea - would be almost like a dark galaxy … although yea, could actually result in LESS attacking - I’m not sure. Another reason maybe not to do it is that means one less tech to choose to research … so you’d be down to just 4 to choose from…

Right now, it’s helpful to research Scan to get Intel … and also see those Warp Gates … but Scan (and Hyper) do eventually top-out. I don’t know a good way to address this …

Note that the downside of making the galaxy smaller is if you make a mistake, it’s harder to recover from. I.e. if someone grabs a key stars, it may effectively be game over … since there aren’t as many other areas to try to grab.

The REAL solution is to modify the map generator so that there is more “clumping” of stars at the border that results in multiple attack vectors for both sides. If you think some of the current 1v1 maps can lead to deadlocks, you should see the majority that I toss because they are even more unplayable.

BTW, since it’s difficult to get a “tight” map, you could change the “jump time” from 6 to 8 ticks … which would effectively “tighten” up the map a bit and open up more attack vectors.

But this makes the game more “jumpy” and random luck can play a bigger role.
Those that have played a 24-tick jump game can attest how that is just crazy! :wink:

I would like to put in my 2 cents as well. Making scanning more expensive or locking it at level 1 would only make games much longer and end at a stalemate. This is because all attackers lose more ships than a defender does, so unless they know they can win a fight, they aren’t going to attack. Raising weapons really doesn’t make too much of a difference so if that’s what people want to try, then we can if we want.

These were the things I was worried about when fixing Scanning, but making it more expensive and not locking may mitigate it partially or could make it even more likely to cause less attacks. Might as well go all-in if doing that change.

Some more cool ideas all around. The real solution of a code change is obviously hard for us to implement and as you say, we have to throw out a lot of maps already. One interesting idea by Gabrio on Discord was also to add one star in the exact middle of the mirrored galaxy, though it’s questionable who reaches that star “first” and gets defender’s advantage.

I’m gonna start a poll (let’s see how that works here) on potential setting changes and then implement the result for this round. At the end we can also do an “exit poll” how well the change was received.

@HULK: Give it some thought, you’d only have to start the game within a week after the match-up release. Last round you earned the right to challenge @Solfyre for the title again :wink:

@BelSon: Thanks for the input! Can I count you in for the LLL? :slight_smile: