I think there is a generational issue. I would guess (it would be interesting if Fizzer has done any analysis or has statistics) that a majority of Warlight players are 35-60 years old, people who remember playing Risk as kids. I tried to get my kids to play WL and they only wanted to play if they could do it easily on their phones. There are, as others have said, many templates/settings that are a challenge on mobile devices.

I'm also curious about gender. I would guess 90+ percent of WL players are men. Are there ways to make it more appealing to women? I do remember when there were A LOT MORE of the diplomacy-style games that tended to have more users that seemed to be female (one can't necessarily know from user name/profile). I was never much into the diplo games myself, but some people like them.

i raised solid issues in my two previous posts above.
all I can say is, appealing to female gender wont' help matters.
it didnt' work for star wars, the marvel universe and superman fans.
wargaming has always been 85-90% male, no different than D&D back in the day.
i played with "erika" and she is one of the few females, very friendly and very good at advanced game play in a team 2vs2 game.

the quickmatch system is dying or dead, with few players on it, and tired old templates that haven't been changed or shifted for..........ever.

the quick match system is dying
the templates used in QM are not rotated.
europe 1vs1 with LD is not suited for a QM game, for example
europe 3vs3 in real time would be ideal, but is not an option.
there are 2,885 templates. why are there so few templates on QM?

too many games that are created with fixed teams by the teamA duo who have fixed the rules to suit them, and they know all the strategies of gameplay.

the warzone system is gamified to reward those who win, penalize those that lose, and it's not about community, it's about winning at all costs to rack up points and gold. this is all contrary to community, where the whole point of it just playing and having fun.

even the 3 day clock for multi-day is too long. who wants to be playing a game that can take up to 72 hours to turn the clock?

team games are best when randomly assigned, 3 man teams.
not everyone can win.
if winning is the most important thing, then all below average or average players will leave.
i'm not a bad player but the level of playing here is VERY high. this tells me that all the average, below average and even slightly better than average players simply have moved on.

WZ is slowly becoming an elitist club where only the best players hang around, playing their obscure setting games like 20/80 and 1x25 territory with 0/2 allocation army each turn. and stupid rules like "normal fog" but then giving 80 surveillance cards which defeats the entire point. when I call out that kind of BS from the L65 players who did that setting, then i'm told "eat shit, loser" and "your fault for not going thru the settings before you signed up for the game".

i've emailed the above paragraph in real time to fizzer----he knows that player and it's BS like that which causes 95% of the users to simply move on. Not many people are like me who know what kills a community, and has the time or typing speed to find out where to post it and get it up.

nothing wrong with creating games with odd settings, my beef was it should be noted clearly in "game notes" since losing even one or two turns for such a game will basically cost someone the game. if the game is intended for advanced users or open to new gamers, then for heavens sake just state the settings so people know before they sign up.

the community needs to appeal to the fat 65% of the population who want some mobile gaming, and who won't get destroyed by L55-65 players who are the ones creating oddball games that don't appeal to the average gamer.

currently i'm in a USA 35 man FFA with a one-army per turn ration. there are 35 players and only 48 states in the continental usa. i'm looking at that game now in turn 2, and wondering how stupid is this game. if 100 turns and 2-3 days per turn it may be middle of 2027 before the game is over.

maybe something as simple as "if you post a game that is a little off, please type up a "top five strategies to at least be competitive". and, i suggested to fizzer that if any game is posted while in lobby, that someone could "one touch click" a button to at least try out the game one vs 3xAI and practice the game, to see how it plays.

2,885 templates and looking thru them is like finding a book in a library without a card catalogue.
I may be repeating myself but the solution is NOT, appealing to LGBTQ or female gamers.
the problem is..........the average gamer is being driven away by the hardcore gamers, or cant be bothered to join a clan or dig thru the 2,885 templates, THEN try to find someone to play with.

for example, the second highest rated game out of 2,885 is "silk road"
I just found it and i'm trying to get games played with it.
however as a free member i can only create 2 games at a time.
no one knows this template so no one signs up.
after 48 hours being posted, if all 3 open spots are filled (i create it so i am player #1), then the game automatically goes into "not posted mode" because it didnt' fill seats up quickly enough.

like WTF, I sent this to Fizzer. I am trying to promote a GOOD template that no one is playing and deserves more attention. and because it was 4th of july long weekend and people don't know the board, it gets taken down and i have to keep renewing the posting every 36-48 hours just so that it can be seen.

here i am trying to get it more game time and eyeballs, and the system is set up to make it as difficult for new content to go up. the average person will just throw up their hands and say, "f**k this sh*t, I'm out of here".

it's like having a golf course that is so difficult, that only the pro golfers like playing there
and the average golfers get tired of the BS and end up leaving.

Sounds like a skill issue

Well... if we ignore Alex that went with a troll answer, I believe the issue is you aren't coming across with the people that fits you as you want more casual gameplay with stuff that you enjoy. I'd be also happy with more templates on QM, I don't really agree with you on Europe 1v1 not fitting for QM, yes sometimes it may last like an hour but it's a fun template imo (You may disable it for yourself in Templates section under QM if you don't want to play it).
I guess you may enjoy some tournament gameplay? You may face someone stronger and lose (which is like... true for entire community, I may face someone stronger and lose) but at least the settings you'd be more familiar with.
I'm not familiar with open game stuff, last time I set up an open game was recent (it was for a template I recently made so wanted to test) and it got me like 3 days for someone to accept, even for a 1v1 game. (I renewed the open seats each day)
Well... about points and coins, noone really cares about points and coins are "nice" but also like you don't become stronger because you own more coins.
So my suggestion for you would be try finding a community that welcomes more casual players (which... there are clans that are like that.) and try to join more games with more standard settings (through tournaments, or if you come across as open games)

Elon thanks for sharing your thoughts. This game has a steep learning curve and most people don't bother to put in the effort and time required to get better in strategic gameplay. It takes years quite literally to get to elite level. I agree with your observations as I had similar thoughts in the past. The game has a big potential but fails to attract new players and retain them, due to a lack of orientation and support for them, or integration of the community spirit into the official structure of the game.
Unfortunately, these are inherent limitations as Fizzer is an independent developer and you can't expect high-budget game features.
There are also many positive aspects, it is completely free to play and skill based as well as a lot of fun. If you like It and want to learn more you can join a clan that organizes events and focuses on different areas of the game, Competitive, Clan Wars, Idle, diplo etc...
TLA for example ;)

thank you for UzayAltay for his considered reply. some reply points:

1) on QM, europe is listed as "europe". it isn't listed 1v1 or 2v2. I can play 2v2 real time and 1v1 multiday. that would be a simple way to break it up
2) the suggestion about joining a tournament is sound. i will look into that
3) i'm not advocating points and coins. in fact i'm not for it at all. my point being that part of the enjoyment is just trying to play new games, and improve on them. And there is a significant % of higher level players who stack or create games that they will always win.
4) however at the end of every game it gives your rank. and your point rank is given for every type of game. this incentivizes people to play games they know, with strong teammates so they can win.

*** this is my point---> that if you make a big deal of your ranking on 1vs1, then you'll keep playing those games where you'll win, and avoid those where you will lose.


for example, if there are two friends really good at a game, instead of making a 2v2 where the teams are random, or they are playing each other, they will usually set up the 2v2 where they are TeamA, and whoever it is that is teamB playing against them will assuredly lose. I am in such a match now, and we as teamB are holding our own. Team A is claiming it's their first time playing the template but ......... no, that's just BS.


thanks for Fede for acknowledging my observations. I didnt' say there was an easy fix but the community is only there if there is a larger group of new players than senior players. Personally i've been on the network for just about a year and i'm getting tired of seeing the same old templates over and over again. How many ways can you play Romanium 1v1 before it gets tiresome.

Look at it from the perspective of a newer player. You join QM, there's a few games to play. most of the players are higher levels, and they have played those same templates over and over again for years, and can do so with their eyes closed.

I mean i know Fizzer is an independent, but with 2,885 templates, why are there only 10-15 templates on QM?
why has the original Risk map not ever been changed or tweaked? (ie, small world)
we could easily make five versions of small world within a day.
small world A, B C D and E with slightly different maps, different variations on the current small world so that there is something interesting and **new** to see when signing into QM.

i'm not expecting "high budget game features". but if someone at the top is asking "is the community dying?", then the simple answer is, from the perspective of someone who is one-year in----the big questions are:

1) if there are 2,885 templates, why are there not more templates being used on QM?
2) why is there not a "template of the month"?
or QM of the week? for people to try a new game out?
3) if someone signs up for a team game, there should be a penalty for if they get booted or surrendered which basically messes up their entire team. Just this past 48 hours there was a large world FFA game, and three players didn't show up to turn one. they were L1, L2, and L12.


In reply to Fede, I understand completely the need for practice to get good at strategic game play, no different than chess. however, my rebuttal is that if the settings are fixed each and every game, then there is just one version of that game that dictates strategy. i'll give you a few examples:

1) in small world, would strategy change if we made the continent bonuses slightly different in a different version of the game? same map but different bonuses? Why does it have to be the same as Risk was, all those years ago?

2) there are medium world versions with antarctica, some without. some have more islands mid-pacific, others don't . each variation of the world requires a slightly different strategy. never mind that. the same map with different SETTINGS alone, can create 5-10 versions of the same template, by merely fiddling with the settings.

3) so my question is. why aren't there 3-6 versions of small world on QM?
it would take any of us less than 15 minutes to generate 6 versions of small world which we would refer to as SW1 thru SW6.

4) it's one thing to have a board game where nothing can be changed. when any setting can be changed with the wave of a hand, it makes no sense why there aren't several versions of Small World that are slotted in for QM duty. I just want to play it on QM, but why does it have to be the same settings over and over again with zero variation?

that's like playing chess. the rules are fixed. you can memorize the openings. i'm sure that's skill but that wastes the true advantage of a computerized setup where the settings can be adjusted easily to create 5-10 versions of the same basic board.

true skill/strategy can adapt to different parameters and sets of rules.
for example the startegy at Risk will be different if the Bonus for Australia is 3 instead of 2. Africa at 4 instead of 3 will change strategy. can we add antarctica to small world and see how that changes strategy, with access at the south of sth america, south africa, and australia?

honestly in one hour, i could come up with 3-4 alternate versions of Small World, and each one could have 2-3 versions of settings, resulting in a dozen versions that could come up at random.

just like tennis, they play on grass, clay, and it changes the game.
just like world Rally Champion, they have different races that are desert, snow, gravel, depending on time of year and location. same driver and car, but different tires and setup.

why can't the QM templates not be the same?

sometimes i will click on QM and there is simply no one on the network.
other times i want to QM and won't bother because it's the same damned games over and over again.

even kids would stop eating ice cream if the only flavor was vanilla and chocolate.


the above took me about an hour to type in.
if QM were more interesting, i would be playing there and not typing this here.

the original poster asked, is the community dying?
and as someone who has been here just one year, my answer is: yes it gets boring and it doesn't need to be like so. I would much rather play QM if i signed up for "small world" and was going to get one of 12 possible versions.

there would be far much more interest, community and a level gaming field if there were 5-12 versions of any basic board, not just one same template being used for 10-15 years. this lack of variety and innovation doesn't serve anyone. its like having eggs and always cooking it scrambled, even though there are 20 ways to prepare eggs.

I'll ask it another way. imaging leaving the warzone community for six months or six years. then coming back and finding out, nothing has changed.

think about that----the same games being played on QM.
same templates being played over and over again.
same settings being used, not once being changed.
same Risk board layout being played, without any change or variation.

to me, that sounds like our own little special version of hell if nothing changes, or there is so little variation that even the veteran players seem bored of it.


i sign up for open multi-day games when i see a new board, for the variety
if i see settings that don't make any sense, i decline

quickmatch is one avenue
open games are another
(some 1vs1, some team, some FFA)
tournaments are another
and now we have TT.

it's important that each aspect not get stale.
"template of the month"
or "game variation of the week" would go a long ways towards keeping things fresh.
even on a rotational basis.

even mcDonalds knows it needs to bring back McRib every 12-18 months.

i just played a 1v1 on QM, medium world
most neutral is 2
some neutral are 4, which is fine.
but, then there are SEVEN 10-unit wastelands, which is excessive on a game where army counts are low.
thus no one selects these areas to spawn into. one is fine, but not seven 10army wastelands. SEVEN?

i mean medium world is about the right sized map, but with seven wastelands of 10-army??
sorry but how boring and stupid does this setting make this template, when it should be fun to play?
has anyone played this recently?
does anyone know how tiring it is to take photos of the map ( they are all visible during territory selection) to try to keep track of where all the 10-army wastelands are located?

why have 10 army wastelands??? whose idiotic idea was this in the first place?
some may disagree with me but in my opinion these are the exact settings that are ruining QM, ruining WZ play.
Zero variation
Zero different game settings
Zero chance of selecting a different version of medium earth.
because, this is the ONLY version of medium earth.

I get that there is strategy involved,
but have 3 spawn points, 4 spawn points,
have neutral being 2, 3 and 4. or 2 and 4. or 2 and 5.
but, not 2, 4 and 10.
the template simply isn't large enough for seven, 10-army wastelands

play this a few times and it gets plain tiring
let me ask any of you reading this--------when was the last time you played medium earth on QM, and after finishing a game, said to yourself, "damn, that was fun! let me play it again right away I can't wait!!"

i just finished a game, and felt like I soiled myself a bit.

it's easy to create or improve interest in the community by either adjusting the settings, or creating variations of the templates using different settings.

my main point being in this thread:

a) not enough variation in the templates being played
b) zero variation in the templates/settings on QM
c) the settings being used on QM, less than ideal
d) too many incentives for people to win games they are already good at, to improve their online ranking
e) not enough disincentives to discourage bad community behaviour.

What is your opinion on Donald's Trumpet?

"the quickmatch system is dying or dead, with f"
Objection your honor.

Vebastian is my 2nd account and is around since 2015. My first account was some 4 years old at that time.
Since then I played 26488 multi-player games (98.9% real-time) minus maybe 20 or so all have been the world map (RISK-like map) 1v1 5 minutes.

This particular game is not dead.
I deleted the AI written page long explanation why I say that because I believe me saying so should be enough your honor.


Thank you very much for your time.

on QM, europe is listed as "europe". it isn't listed 1v1 or 2v2. I can play 2v2 real time and 1v1 multiday. that would be a simple way to break it up

Their name is different, 1v1 mentions it's 1v1 when 2v2 just says "Fight of Europe", which I assume you know but I still wanted to clarify. You can set up different templates for multi day and real time, what you do is click on Quickmatch, then click on blue "Templates" button. Here you need to choose "Different templates for real time versus multi day" and then you can turn off templates for multiday and real time seperately, e.g. you can turn off 1v1 fight of europe for real time and keep it for multi day.

if there are 2,885 templates, why are there not more templates being used on QM?

Well current number for QM templates is 41, and like many people agrees that it should be increased. I don't know where you found that 2885 number though, as I really doubt the actual number is that and like there is probably many many duplicates.

About your Small earth question there is actually a different version of small earth with different bonuses (https://war.app/MultiPlayer?GameID=44258368 ) , and small earth itself has different game settings that are played a lot. I see you want with different bonus values, but I suspect that would break down into "try taking that territory with more bonus value", though one could try. (Though even if one decides to try it, it would be most likely with a multi-day tournament as it really takes effort to convince enough people to vote for a template from zero, like people really need to like the template for that and the last time that happened was for BK 1v1/Kabix 2v2 templates.) (On the other hand, even though it's hard to convince people to vote a template from zero, templates (especially the ones ranked 31-40) occasionally drop out from top 40 with another template from just below top 40 finding a spot in top 40, so it isn't like there is no rotation but like it could be more.

if someone signs up for a team game, there should be a penalty for if they get booted or surrendered which basically messes up their entire team. Just this past 48 hours there was a large world FFA game, and three players didn't show up to turn one. they were L1, L2, and L12.

That's a problem that many people have suggested ideas in the past, I agree that it is annoying as it basically ruins the game. I hope it's solved in the long term.

but, then there are SEVEN 10-unit wastelands, which is excessive on a game where army counts are low.
thus no one selects these areas to spawn into. one is fine, but not seven 10army wastelands. SEVEN?

That template is one of the "easy to understand but hard to master" templates and it's played a lot.
Seven wastelands being scattered around the world means you cannot just master one strategy and play it repeadetly, you need to adapt your strategy based on where is available, where is not etc.
Keep in mind you see where the 4s and 10s are when making your picks. (The pickable territories that have not picked by either player become 4)
It is easy to understand how you should play, dont pick wastelands, complete your starting bonuses first (as they dont have 4 neutral), then expand into other neutrals without wasteland and fight your opponent if you meet. It is really hard to master though, which I won't go into detail now.
Oh yeah... also, you don't need to take a photo or keep in mind, you can just click on the history button and it shows what the map was looking like before either side makes picks.

i kinda miss TSFH old days, with all the spam monthly reports nobody read

Truth bombs in the answer to this 1:
but, then there are SEVEN 10-unit wastelands, which is excessive on a game where army counts are low.
thus no one selects these areas to spawn into. one is fine, but not seven 10army wastelands. SEVEN?

!!That template is one of the "easy to understand but hard to master" templates and it's played a lot.!!
Seven wastelands being scattered around the world means you cannot just master one strategy and play it repeadetly, you need to adapt your strategy based on where is available, where is not etc.
Keep in mind you see where the 4s and 10s are when making your picks. (The pickable territories that have not picked by either player become 4)
---

Join the MTL, https://www.warlight-mtl.com, we have cake.

This is a reply for Consequencer, who has gone to a lot of trouble to set up the TT games.
i went and tried out the link to this week's template, elitist Africa 3.0. and played it as a single-player and looked at the history of the the game shown on the link.

I think a lot of the templates being used for short-format games (the past year-and-half) would show great merit as QM additions. this week's game has 138 territories.

last week's template was "volcano island" and looked similarly suitable for inclusion into QM.
obviously no one is going to select "large world" for TT. again, the history showed a good, quick 4-5 turn game before a winner was called

this is the very reason why QM games should consider adding templates from the TT matches.
TT and QM are actually cousins of another name. templates that are suited for TT should be perfect for QM.

My suggestion is to canvas those playing in TT and vote if that week's template should be included in the QM system. I believe the added variety would be a surprisingly welcome addition, and reinject new interest into the QM format. (which seems quite rather quiet of late)

Edited 2026-07-13 08:35:42

bro can you stop with the literary crusade.
honestly if someone joined the game and saw this, they are more likely to quit

Edited 2026-07-13 09:10:39

both the templates you mentioned are in QM already though

Both Elitist Africa and Volcano Island are on QM though. (Ranked 26 and 34, respectively).

Elon's Musket and UzayAltay just have natural chemistry together, don't know how else to describe it.

Elitism is always part of any game that requires brain thinking. You win a few games and think you're great. Common human behaviour. I would say from my experience elitism has gone way done in recent years. You can see this in how "elite" clans recruit, it is now a unsustainable model to recruit "elitism" -> There is no elite requirements to join any clan these days. While in the past, only the best could join a select number of clans.

Why has clans thrown away the elitism from recruiting? Because there isn't enough players coming through the pipelines to recruit and stay alive that's quite telling.

Community is also important, however most discords including the "official" warzone discord, I've witnessed is mostly a dead wasteland. Community is the addiction for many to stay and be active. If you've chatterboxers, you're gonna be more inclined to talk and stay on the game. This is the critical criteria I judge a game's activity and it's gone very down. I'm told the forums activivity is gone down hill because of the discords, which is funny cause the discords are dead mostly.

The enthusiasm for the strat scene has gone downhill, mainly because Fizzer updates are mostly not targetting the strat community. Now we know this because Strat scene is not the cash cow segment of the game. No problem for most people here. But the updates Fizzer actually does for the strat scene are mostly destructive, the team ladders have been destroyed because to be number one you've got to play a lot of games, that's rewarding activity not skill. Clan Wars templates voting is in my view flawed, I voiced them and have gotten no reply.

For new players, because of how the game is designed, I don't think it's friendly or hardly encouraging. I've been on this site for a very long time, I still struggle to find the Warzone shop to buy colours. I can't imagine the difficulty in finding the forums to see what the community events is.

The strat scene is ultimately declining, will it die? Probably not but it's on a downhill trajectory for so many reasons that I can't detail cause this would be a very very long essay.

If the strat scene is declining, I can't imagine the other segments doing well since they work similar premises.

The money cow is Idle, Idle you could say is immoral cause in theory it's pay to win. You have to pay to accelerate the progress. That's Fizzer route to generating revenue which is his critical objective. Not us or dipliomacy or quickmatch or whatever community. Net result, you've got this decline.

It's nobody fault it's just how it is. As long as you're enjoying the game this is most important.