MattDakka
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/7018948714f7352955a174.gif)
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 20:40 |
|
mawph wrote: |
Point of question: The one [B] and [R] combined tournament I've played was earlier classed as a [B] game (despite being a [R] team). Was this intentional? |
It depends of the host.
Probably your opponent had a Black Box team and he hosted the game.
That made the tournament game count as played in Black Box division, even though you played it with your Ranked team.
It happened to me with my High Elf team in a FUMBBL Cup match. |
|
|
Dominik
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/1635118722489726a343882.jpg)
Joined: Oct 29, 2004
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 20:44 |
|
MattDakka wrote: | Dominik, the rankings are being calculated again for a fix, be patient, it will require some time. Slowly the number of your games played will increase, don't worry.![Smile](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif) |
But what if I complete games faster than the calculation is performing? |
|
|
Arktoris
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/3872745114a5ea3224cf96.jpg)
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 20:47 |
|
watching my CR evolve is fun. I'm reliving all my past highs and lows in Bloodbowl. Ah nostalgia. |
_________________ Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
MattDakka
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/7018948714f7352955a174.gif)
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
  Posted:
Oct 16, 2017 - 20:49 |
|
The games are always saved even if they are not currently displayed on your profile, don't worry, it's not related/dependent to the rankings calculation process. |
|
|
Arktoris
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/3872745114a5ea3224cf96.jpg)
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
  Posted:
Oct 17, 2017 - 05:36 |
|
I like the new CR system. More spread on the range. Never liked how everyone was within 5% of each other. |
_________________ Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
  Posted:
Oct 17, 2017 - 07:28 |
|
MattDakka wrote: | powered by Tzeentch |
GOBLINS!!!!!!!!!
Here are two facts that I can't reconcile with my understanding of how the rating system works:
1. My current overall ratings are 165.43 (overall), 159.2 (R), and 157,77 (B), which means my combined rating is bigger than the ratings I suppose it combines.
2. My overall rating for B is 157,77, which is 7,77 over 150. But when I add the ratings for all the races (by adding and substracting the differences from 150) I get more than +9.
Am I missing something, are Goblins involved, or both?
PS: I think Glicko would be great. It would somewhat penalize those who "sit" on their ratings (i.e. it becomes riskier), and it may penalize less those who play against those who don't play often (i.e. playing less means having a less faithful rating). |
_________________ There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
The_Murker
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/20451654904e064e042d2bd.gif)
Joined: Jan 30, 2011
|
  Posted:
Oct 17, 2017 - 08:17 |
|
Despite what CR actually stands for, I think there could, or even should, be a distinction made between a coach 'Rating' and a coach's 'Ranking.'
Rating, to me, should be an indication at how good a coach is. This feels more like what a CR should be. A skill indication.
A Ranking, to me, means where a coach is in the 'ladder', or in the current pecking order, with competition implied. A coach Ranked higher than me should be one more succussful in his recent matches, especially ones against tough opposition. For a Ranking, I think a decay for inactivity would be appropriate.
A coach with a 'Rating' higher than mine should be, well.. just 'better' than me. This would be ideal, but is vitrually impossible to ascertain, given the random nature of Blood Bowl, the differing TV effectivness of 24 teams available, etc, etc. ANY Rating system in such a complex enviroment is going to have it's innaccuracies.
FUMBBL CR, however, feels like a weird mis-mash of both. I think it is 'intended' to be a Rating, or evaluation of skill, but many, many coaches treat it like it is a Ranking, with many trying to manipluate their score, as if it is a ladder to be climbed.
So how do you keep a skill Rating's accuracy while at the same time trying to discourage people from treating it like a Ranking? I don't know. I believe this is what is being attempted. The dual nature of the number is what makes this such a complex task, imo.
I am mildly frustrated at the idea of a coach such as Smallman being Rated highly.
I also wish a rating would show coaches who are clearly elite in the top 50, or so.
My main concern with any system that adds weight to a 'TD differential' factor is that coaches who DO prey on noobs are actually rewarded in a large number of games.
Noobs often get destroyed, and destroyed early. Coaches who poop the bed early get lots of TD's scored against them. This bumps noob-hunters artifically in the Rankings. It also bumps agility teams who score TD's at will, or coaches who play teams that can do both, like a Dark Elf coach who can bash well, then run up points.
Min/Maxers like Smallman get dually rewarded, as they not only crush teams and run up high scores, but they can use their CLAWPOMB exploit to get several key cas early, and run the score up against ANY level of opposition. Dozens of Super Stars and Legends will have fallen to a min-maxed clawpomb team, and exploiters will have very high CRs to show for it.
Conversly, coaches who will play against all opposition in fair ork vs. ork, or dwarf vs. dwarf matches will have a ton of 1-0 victories, which shift CR very little, especially if most opponents are rated lower than they are. They will also have a significant number of upset defeats, for which their CR takes a beating.
What's the solution? I know I don't know. But for the reasons above, I have the following suggestions.
Have a Rating AND a Ranking. Ressurect a Ladder division if we must, so the uber-competitors can't hide, and have somewhere to go and be uber competative.
Remove the TD Differential effect on a Rating. We all know very solid dwarf coaches who play the 1-0 or 2-1 game at an extreemly high level.
Most importantly..
Severly limit CR gain and loss between coaches of different Ranks. The very greatest CR gain should come from beating a coach of your own rank, not the Ranks above. There is no HURRY to get a new coach to the CR he should be at. If he consistantly defeats coaches of all ranks, he will climb to his spot eventually. He will climb fastest by playing players of his own rank, but again, speed of any climb is not important. If ACCURACY of the system is important, then lower the importance of all cross Ranking games, don't increase it. The bigger the difference, the less CR moves around.
I can draw a parity with the Rankings in Brazilian Ju-Jitsu. You are ready for the next Rank when you can consistanly defeat those of your own Rank, and when you can hang in there with the guys of the belt Ranked above you. This means you are ready for the next rank. White belts don't compete seriously against Brown or Black belts. It just isn't something taken seriously. If a blue belt taps out a brown belt, jits guys know it is because the brown belt was probablly trying some new moves, was just goofing around, etc. In Blood Bowl.. we call it dice.. or 'playin' stunties.'
A noob or a veteran should not be rewarded massivly for defeating a Legend. We all know it was probablly a fluke. A veteran has earned his place with his losses, and we should not be in any hurry to get him out of that hole. Likewise for a Legend.. as long as it was difficult to become a legend, one ork vs. ork loss to a noob should not push him down very much.
TL/DR.. Defeating coaches of your own Rank should be the fastest way to gain CR. |
_________________
Join the wait-list. Watch the action. Leave the Empire. Come to Bretonnia! |
|
Wozzaa
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/3481284985f7fd204568ce.png)
Joined: Apr 23, 2016
|
  Posted:
Oct 17, 2017 - 08:31 |
|
Has there also been changes based on race? |
_________________
![Image Image](https://member.thenaf.net/nafsig/?uid=23174) |
|
OenarLod
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/12511395144d415501302f6.jpg)
Joined: Jan 26, 2011
|
  Posted:
Oct 17, 2017 - 09:30 |
|
PurpleChest wrote: |
...
And especially bad with Dwarves, my lowest rated of the races that I have played >10 games with.
...
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
...
|
I had no time to look at the formula in details, but something is strange with racial CR.
While my Box CR shows an upward trend during my learning phase and then some volatility around a stable average, my Human Box CR is just some white noise where I have some difficulties to even reach the 150 breakeven.
Now, I'm not here to say which one is the good one, but coherence is missing given that I play almost exclusively the VTS in the Box. |
_________________
Join the Human League Premiership! |
|
koadah
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/11621913544284994cadd9f.gif)
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
Oct 17, 2017 - 09:54 |
|
|
koadah
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/11621913544284994cadd9f.gif)
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
Oct 17, 2017 - 10:09 |
|
|
Christer
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/212093185457642fe6c6ee4.jpg)
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
Ok, so I made yet another update last night, and it still doesn't look right to me. However, I'm fairly confident I'm on the right track with these changes. I will be posting the exact details into a new thread for mathematical discussion for those who enjoy such things. |
|
|
Purplegoo
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/202431727158f9b313e5b5e.gif)
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
  Posted:
Oct 17, 2017 - 10:27 |
|
I have no stake in this, having not played a ranked game in more than a year (just an eternal lack of time, nothing sinister), but one thing leapt out at me from reading C’s OP. A pet hate of mine at TT events is a scoring system rewarding a ‘big’ win more than a ‘little’ one. I don’t like someone getting lucky via the draw (e.g. round 1 Ogres) or via rolling great armour / injury dice, winning 3-0 and being handsomely rewarded while someone wins a fantastically coached Dwarf-off 1-0 and is half a round behind after one game (an exaggeration to make the point, in most cases). Such scoring systems also incentivise ‘bad’ play; putting it in early or attempting to run up the score isn’t classically what you’d describe as good coaching.
Pick-up FUMBBL games are, of course, a touch different, in that I suspect very few coaches are going to set-out to win big to maximise CR gain. They’d likely come unstuck far too often for that to be a reliable strategy anyway. So I suspect it’s not a big deal at all and is a minor part of the formula, but just in principle I think a 1-0 win should be treated the same as 10-0. Having said that, I’m out of touch, so if we have an issue with ignoring the ball we’re trying to combat, perhaps I’d agree if I’d seen it.
Apologies if this has been covered in the previous 8 pages, I’ve not had chance to read and catch up. Apparently it’s an emotive issue! Maybe I’ll play a game one day and see how it all works in practice, but I doubt I’ll get chance. ![Wink](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif) |
|
|
koadah
![](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/11621913544284994cadd9f.gif)
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
Oct 17, 2017 - 10:38 |
|
Purplegoo wrote: |
Apologies if this has been covered in the previous 8 pages, I’ve not had chance to read and catch up. Apparently it’s an emotive issue! Maybe I’ll play a game one day and see how it all works in practice, but I doubt I’ll get chance. ![Wink](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif) |
Sounds like ranking vs rating again. As only just mentioned. ![Wink](./modules/PNphpBB2/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif) |
_________________
[SL] + Official Stunty teams. Progression KO. Old & new teams welcome. 29th May! |
|
Zabriskie69
Joined: Oct 18, 2016
|
  Posted:
Oct 17, 2017 - 11:14 |
|
Purplegoo wrote: | Having said that, I’m out of touch, so if we have an issue with ignoring the ball we’re trying to combat, perhaps I’d agree if I’d seen it. |
always same coaches, the same which prefer to have MB/Claw than guard/dodge as player skills. |
|
|
|
| |