FUMBBL :: Online Blood Bowl League

Joined: Jun 26, 2006

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 00:52

I am not a regular box player, long time I played. So maybe sleepers are not a problem, but anyway I hope that the box is going to come to LRB6. So reading Qaz blog on becoming nr 1 and that he will turn into a sleeper and comments posted by people, it made me thing of a possible solution.

Instead of a time limit period where you have to be active, why not put a cumulative upkeep time ticket counter on sleepers?

If you are not active within lets say 21days (or 30days), your rating goes down. In the start it will decrease slowly, but as longer time goes by your rating drop faster until it reach a fixed min. set point.

Just a random thought late in the night. So please feel free to tear it apart Very Happy

Nidhug

Joined: Aug 05, 2007

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 01:58

I think its a brilliant idea Ehlers.

The problem of "sleepers" in the box have already been discussed many times. I am yet to see anybody argue for inactive coaches taking the topspots. So what I would know is what is stopping a solution to this problem, that have been adressed a handful of times at least?

bxnyc

Joined: Jun 23, 2009

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 03:14

slowly reset to 150 Very Happy

Cloggy

Joined: Sep 23, 2004

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 07:44

Sleepers can be a problem.

This isn't only a thing of Blackbox ranking, but also of the active player top 10 lists, that are full of guys that never play.

It's not important to everybody, but some of us really enjoy the added flavor of having the "#3 best active something".

So in that sense I'd say removal of some stats would be a good idea. And we all know it's possible, otherwise http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=coaches&order=3 this would still show Emphasy as the coach with the most games played Smile

_________________
Proud owner of three completed Ranked grids, sadly lacking in having a life.

Last edited by Cloggy on %b %26, %2010 - %07:%May; edited 1 time in total

Shraaaag

Joined: Feb 15, 2004

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 07:44

This problem and several possible solutions have been discussed alot in other threads. I guess moving on the FFB changes things abit, but I believe some of the old arguments against decaying rating still stands. I think one of the arguments against was that it's an ability ranking rather than a ladder.

Personally I do support a decaying rating system (if you don't play for a while, then your rating starts dropping)

_________________

Rawlf

Joined: Jul 15, 2007

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 08:15

Shraaaag wrote:

it's an ability ranking rather than a ladder.

As far as BWR goes, this is it for me.

Anyway, from the perspective of official intent, BWR is only a byproduct and not set as the ultimate goal to strive for in [B]. Instead, you are supposed to win the major tournaments. And to achieve that, you shall be teambuilding in all non-tournament games, which is of course often different from playing for the win and the BWR. So a high BWR might even suggest you are letting your teambuilding duties slide.

Personally, I would prefer a monthly competition instead of both ranking and tourneys.

Gromrilram

Joined: Aug 28, 2006

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 10:01

so...
if someone just doesnt play bbox for a while he gets easier matchups?

_________________
Every problem can be solved by a Desert Eagle .50

asharak

Joined: Nov 27, 2007

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 10:26

1) I play [B] to win. I fail a lot, but I am certainly not trying to team build. That is what [R] is all about as far as I'm concerned.
2) BWR isn't used by the scheduler anymore I think grom. Could be wrong but think it was removed. This may have been as it was making people just wanting to kill things even worse by giving them a hefty advantage in each game. Not sure though, kinda making that bit up Smile

_________________
Give a man a fire and he will be warm for the rest of the day.
Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

DukeTyrion

Joined: Feb 18, 2004

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 11:15

I think all that needs to happen is any coach not playing for 3 weeks gets removed from the list and added again when he next plays, even if that means coach number 1 plays once every 20 days.

I would also like to see a list of top BWR by each coach, but that's a whole different story.

Were_M_Eye

Joined: Sep 24, 2007

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 11:38

I think decay would be a good thing. In R coaches don't stay at the top indefinitely because the major gives them a incentive to play, and sooner or later someone kick their but and they drop from the #1 spot. B don't got anything like that to keep people playing and risking their #1 spot. If we introduce decay coaches that whant to be #1 will have a reason to continue to play.

JanMattys

Joined: Feb 29, 2004

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 12:08

I know nothing about B so excuse me if I'm wrong, but...
What's so bad about sleepers? If they want to sit it out of the whole box just to be number one, let them or beat them. They got where they got because they were good. Be even more good and the problem quite solves itself, doesn't it?
Why make ranks temporary?

_________________

DukeTyrion

Joined: Feb 18, 2004

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 12:17

JanMattys wrote:

I know nothing about B so excuse me if I'm wrong, but...
What's so bad about sleepers? If they want to sit it out of the whole box just to be number one, let them or beat them. They got where they got because they were good. Be even more good and the problem quite solves itself, doesn't it?
Why make ranks temporary?

The issue, from a blackbox point of view, is that the rankings only show for the top 10 coaches (where in ranked it shows for all coaches).

In some of the other lists (maybe top player lists?) it only shows the ones active, which from a perspective is not unreasonable.

Of course, it might just be enough to give Blackbox the same statistics that Ranked enjoys. A full list of coaches BWR's along with a chart that shows BWR over time (like the CR chart).

On a personal note, I would love to see a top 10 list showing the all time highest BWRs.

Qaz

Joined: Apr 28, 2004

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 12:30

In ranked coaches are actually removed after a while. The current nr one Manp has lower CR than Fisherking but Fisherking is not showed there because he has not played for a really long time. I would be a fan of that for B. I would also like to see BWR for all coaches as well as BBR for all coaches not just top 10

_________________
Superstition brings bad luck.

"he who has relied least on fortune is established
the strongest"
Niccolo Machiavelli

gandresch

Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 12:39

Hi,

like it was said before, people are removed from the ranked-rating, when they don't play for a while. The problem here is, that a e.g. league game puts you back in the ranked ranking. So the only thing we have to do, is seperate the divions from each other.
If a player doesn't play ranked for some reason, he will not be recognized for the ranking of the division. If he plays ranked(!!!) again, he is in again. The same with box and all other leagues. If you do not play box for a while, you are removed from the ranking. Only playing box can put you in again. For people, who just don't want to play box because of their ranking, they are forced to play, to show their skills. That will solve everything.

The problem with the sinking rating is, that after a while you a weaker than you actually are. You get easier games, just by not playing. This can't be a good solution.

Greets,
gan

JanMattys

Joined: Feb 29, 2004

Posted: May 26, 2010 - 12:45

gandresch wrote:

Hi,

like it was said before, people are removed from the ranked-rating, when they don't play for a while. The problem here is, that a e.g. league game puts you back in the ranked ranking. So the only thing we have to do, is seperate the divions from each other.
If a player doesn't play ranked for some reason, he will not be recognized for the ranking of the division. If he plays ranked(!!!) again, he is in again. The same with box and all other leagues. If you do not play box for a while, you are removed from the ranking. Only playing box can put you in again. For people, who just don't want to play box because of their ranking, they are forced to play, to show their skills. That will solve everything.

The problem with the sinking rating is, that after a while you a weaker than you actually are. You get easier games, just by not playing. This can't be a good solution.

Greets,
gan

I agree.
One of the factors of the Blackbox matching is the ranking of the coach. Having an inactive coach taken out of the rankings after a while is ok, slowly dropping his rank is not.

_________________