koadah
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/11621913544284994cadd9f.gif)
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 12:21 |
|
|
Cyrus-Havoc
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/9470011024dcec2d863b84.gif)
Joined: Sep 15, 2006
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 12:28 |
|
I lost my last game v smallman but my ranking still went up. 154.03 to 154.35.
The game before I won but my ranking dropped 154.84 - 154.03.
I wonder do the game pages show the CR at the start as I was sure it used to be CR an the end?
On my about page it shows me as 153.98 as against 154.35 on the last game. |
_________________ Not Undead but perhaps the oldest living coach! |
|
Guardikai
Joined: Jun 23, 2009
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 13:05 |
|
Thanks for that Christer. You're a star ^-^ (or should that be legend?) |
|
|
Christer
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/212093185457642fe6c6ee4.jpg)
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
Cyrus-Havoc wrote: | I lost my last game v smallman but my ranking still went up. 154.03 to 154.35.
The game before I won but my ranking dropped 154.84 - 154.03.
I wonder do the game pages show the CR at the start as I was sure it used to be CR an the end?
On my about page it shows me as 153.98 as against 154.35 on the last game. |
That's a bunch of things in one post:
1. The match page now shows the ranking before the match rather than after it. This is a conscious choice on my part and is by design.
Before your last match (https://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=match&id=3937776),
you had a CR of 154.35. After the match (ie, now, you have 153.98. This means that you lost 0.37 rating for that particular loss.
In the match prior to that, you started the game with CR 154.03, and the win took you to CR 154.35 (which of course was your starting CR in the last match you played). This is a net of +0.32.
What you have done here is to not connect the fact that the CR is prior to the game rather than after it. So taking the CR listed on one match and comparing it to the next match shows the delta of the previous match, not the latter one. |
|
|
Grod
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/85124973249f0274912f2b.gif)
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 13:52 |
|
One side effect. If you are winning a game and your next TD will make it say 2-0 (in the second half) you are better off stalling to ensure you win by 2. Under the old system, you would score early since 2-1 is just as good as 2-0. |
_________________ I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.
Oscar Wilde |
|
mister__joshua
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/3535374255f3401a3a52cd.png)
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
Grod wrote: | One side effect. If you are winning a game and your next TD will make it say 2-0 (in the second half) you are better off stalling to ensure you win by 2. Under the old system, you would score early since 2-1 is just as good as 2-0. |
But how are you going to win 4-0 if you don't make it 2-0? |
_________________ "Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum |
|
Cyrus-Havoc
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/9470011024dcec2d863b84.gif)
Joined: Sep 15, 2006
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 14:10 |
|
Christer wrote: | Cyrus-Havoc wrote: | I lost my last game v smallman but my ranking still went up. 154.03 to 154.35.
The game before I won but my ranking dropped 154.84 - 154.03.
I wonder do the game pages show the CR at the start as I was sure it used to be CR an the end?
On my about page it shows me as 153.98 as against 154.35 on the last game. |
That's a bunch of things in one post:
1. The match page now shows the ranking before the match rather than after it. This is a conscious choice on my part and is by design.
Before your last match (https://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=match&id=3937776),
you had a CR of 154.35. After the match (ie, now, you have 153.98. This means that you lost 0.37 rating for that particular loss.
In the match prior to that, you started the game with CR 154.03, and the win took you to CR 154.35 (which of course was your starting CR in the last match you played). This is a net of +0.32.
What you have done here is to not connect the fact that the CR is prior to the game rather than after it. So taking the CR listed on one match and comparing it to the next match shows the delta of the previous match, not the latter one. |
Thanks that makes perfect sense. |
_________________ Not Undead but perhaps the oldest living coach! |
|
Grod
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/85124973249f0274912f2b.gif)
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 14:15 |
|
It doesn't matter. Not sure which version of the scoring system we are on, but you only need a 2-0 victory to achieve the full effect?
At least thats how I read:
"The TD effect is reduced somewhat, making S=0.9 or 0.1 for a 1 TD differential and 1.0 or 0 for 2 or more TD difference. This was reduced from +3 TDs required for full CR effect."
mister__joshua wrote: | Grod wrote: | One side effect. If you are winning a game and your next TD will make it say 2-0 (in the second half) you are better off stalling to ensure you win by 2. Under the old system, you would score early since 2-1 is just as good as 2-0. |
But how are you going to win 4-0 if you don't make it 2-0? |
|
_________________ I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.
Oscar Wilde |
|
MattDakka
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/7018948714f7352955a174.gif)
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 14:17 |
|
muaddib68 wrote: | Hi...well not sure the "New" cr will be so great , after some processing and calculating i see the first of race are player who dont play many games....for exemple for halfling in the 30 first on CR classment 25 have 5 or less game ...so, not sure the cr can be taken for classing ...not sure that a guy who play 1 game and wining it (100/100) and having 150 cr on the race can be better than coach who got 200 or 300 but winig 75/100 of them...but having a less cr ....i think this classement must take number of game ...played...no ? |
I suggested rankings decay to fix that kind of anomalies.
Rankings decay would induce coaches to keep on playing (not just being active on FUMBBL) if they want to be on top of the racial rankings, otherwise, the coach who plays very few games, for example less than 10, wins a lot (maybe because he had a lucky streak) and stops playing that race will always be on top of racial rankings and will be hard to surpass, because the sample of matches is very small.
Another racial ranking issue is caused by some coaches cycling top tier 1 teams: if you keep on making Amazon teams and retire them after few games played the racial rankings of that coach will always be hard to surpass for coaches who don't cycle their teams. |
|
|
koadah
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/11621913544284994cadd9f.gif)
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 14:37 |
|
I don't think that decay is that useful for CR. It is better for championship style rankings.
With decay you would have people taking time off and dropping back to 150. They would then return and trash someones CR.
Just hiding people from the lists is better.
If someone has got stale while they were away their CR will drop if they continue playing.
A CCL style seasonal rating may be better for getting people playing.
Warning: CCL tends to die a bit towards the end of the season. That may be less of an issue if teams are NOT kicked from the division at the end of the season.
2/0/0 coaches being top of the rankings just looks like a bug. |
_________________
[SL] + Official Stunty teams. Progression KO. Old & new teams welcome. 29th May! |
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 15:05 |
|
So the way it's been tightened up, it looks like 160 is the new 170. |
_________________ Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
PurpleChest
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/84003247953344960caf11.png)
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
The new rankings have confirmed what I have long suspected.
I'm not very good at Bloodbowl.
And especially bad with Dwarves, my lowest rated of the races that I have played >10 games with.
In fact, you would get a tougher game vs a Rookie.
My New CR for Dwarves is 148.89.
Some coaches who are rated ahead of me:
El_Dude 1 (0) 0/0/1 149.47
arry 56 (22) 8/9/39 149.24
dreamscreator 20 (38.) 5/5/10 148.97
dapperdan 79 (48.) 29/18/32 148.9
and then me
PurpleChest 1212 (75) 809/196/207 148.89
Should be a lot easier finding the games i need to learn how to play BB. |
_________________ Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone |
|
Harad
Joined: May 11, 2014
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 16:09 |
|
A part time hobby of mine had been to get to legend with each race in the box. It's an arbitrary goal and not an important one. I think I was just missing 5 or something. I was surprised at how much effect this change has had. I haven't gone through it in depth, but I think it's interesting that, for example, for undead and khemri I've gone from legend to star and emerging star respectively. Anecdotally the lists seem to have more people higher on them with fewer games but I could be wrong.
On the assumption that CR was trying to crudely measure 'how good' someone is, this suggests that either the previous method or the new method doesn't do an amazing job of this because otherwise there would be unlikely to be such variance.
This is NOT a complaint. CR can be whatever people want it to be, it's just a bit of fun and I don't mind. I just thought it was worth sharing this perspective as when changes have large effects it's worth checking that they were as intended. |
|
|
easilyamused
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 16:29 |
|
PurpleChest wrote: | The new rankings have confirmed what I have long suspected.
I'm not very good at Bloodbowl.
And especially bad with Dwarves, my lowest rated of the races that I have played >10 games with.
In fact, you would get a tougher game vs a Rookie.
My New CR for Dwarves is 148.89.
Some coaches who are rated ahead of me:
El_Dude 1 (0) 0/0/1 149.47
arry 56 (22) 8/9/39 149.24
dreamscreator 20 (38.) 5/5/10 148.97
dapperdan 79 (48.) 29/18/32 148.9
and then me
PurpleChest 1212 (75) 809/196/207 148.89
Should be a lot easier finding the games i need to learn how to play BB. |
I'm sorry PC but this genuinely made me laugh out loud. And it must mean that you were just insanely lucky in every game we've played
Either that or I suck worse than you..... |
_________________
![Image Image](https://fumbbl.com/i/532385) |
|
Christer
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/212093185457642fe6c6ee4.jpg)
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
Christer wrote: | I am aware of the fact that the current ranking formula has some undesirable effects |
|
|
|
|