maznaz
Joined: Jan 26, 2004
|
 Posted:
Nov 16, 2008 - 19:26 |
 
|
For starters, I'd like to say that for the purposes of this discussion, I don't want to consider the assumption that BR affects the scheduler. I've made my feelings known on that in another thread and I don't want it to derail this one.
That said, onto the suggestion. I propose that rather than relying on a single ranking score in [B], that instead we implement a ranking system with each coach having a position for every race that they play. In other words, every race has an individual ranking, which every coach that plays games with that race has a value for.
An example of this would be:
Ogre ranking: Coach A 1.88 (won lots of games with Ogres) Coach B 1.35 (lost lots of games with ogres) Coach C 0 (played no games with ogres).
The competitive aspect could be encouraged with published leaderboards (say top 20 coaches for each race on the first page for each) and maybe monthly awards for the leaders of each ladder. The awards if any would obviously be introduced after an initial period of testing.
One obvious advantage of this system would be to encourage players to play the less popular races, as they would find progress through the rankings of these races easier. I believe that one single ranking for the division would encourage players to pick the easiest teams to win with, to maximise their score. This will become more apparent as and when the rankings are made public.
Let me know your thoughts, and please bear in mind the opening paragraph when replying.
addendum: apologies if this has been mentioned before. I have mentioned it in chat a couple of times without being directed to an existing suggestion, and had a quick scan through the existing threads and didn't find it. |
Last edited by maznaz on %b %16, %2008 - %19:%Nov; edited 1 time in total |
|
Rijssiej
Joined: Jan 04, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2008 - 19:28 |
|
|
Mezir
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2008 - 19:29 |
|
Can we just have the individual team ranking back instead?  |
_________________
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day; set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. |
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2008 - 19:29 |
|
Good idea, but wouldn't it be a pain to keep track of all those stats? |
_________________
 |
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2008 - 19:41 |
|
Personally I would like the rankings to be done on a team by team basis. That way the first 4 games for each team could count for the BR without too much risk of abuse. A speshul1 abuse would just result in alot of above averagely ranked teams because they wouldnt play enough games to get any kind of proper rating.
I'd also like to be able to see BR, however it is implemented, especially since it seems to be a factor in the matchmaking system. |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced." |
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2008 - 21:33 |
|
| maznaz wrote: | For starters, I'd like to say that for the purposes of this discussion, I don't want to consider the assumption that BR affects the scheduler. I've made my feelings known on that in another thread and I don't want it to derail this one.
. |
| SillySod wrote: | Personally I would like the rankings to be done on a team by team basis. That way the first 4 games for each team could count for the BR without too much risk of abuse. A speshul1 abuse would just result in alot of above averagely ranked teams because they wouldnt play enough games to get any kind of proper rating.
I'd also like to be able to see BR, however it is implemented, especially since it seems to be a factor in the matchmaking system. |
Silly, try this thread |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2008 - 22:07 |
|
 I dont care whether or not it is part of the formula.... |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced." |
|
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
