| Poll |
| Is this good |
| Ye |
|
10% |
[ 8 ] |
| Na |
|
67% |
[ 54 ] |
| Maybe |
|
22% |
[ 18 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 80 |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
 Posted:
Jul 21, 2005 - 11:30 |
 
|
I don't like wyrm suggestions about dodge/tackle.
I mean... If I have one dodger and the oppo has tackle, my dodge would not count?
What if I menage to stay well out of sight with my dodger? The presence of a tackler in your team is not enough to make my dodger useless. I can stay out of your tackler's range, and still use my superior mobility to lend assists and such.
I admit that in a situation "11 longbeards vs 11 zons" your suggestion does have a point... but in a (more likely) normal situation where a couple of tacklers meet a couple dodgers (let's say humans vs orcs), it does not. I would be a fool to place my catchers in range of your tacklers... I mean, it MIGHT happen, even quite a lot if I suck, but just the fact that you have 2 tacklers doesn't mean my dodgers are useless. I just have to put some care in their placement.
So, while canceling the tackle TS if there's no dodge makes sense, canceling dodges if there are tackles does not seem right. Imho. |
_________________
 |
|
Mithrilpoint
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 21, 2005 - 12:04 |
|
@Sk8bcn - No you wouldn´t get any reward CR-wise for winning such a matchup. Which, imo is a good thing as your skills as a coach is better measured against your peers and not against muche higher or lower rated coaches. Granted, 10 CR points aren´t much so maybe the line should instead be drawn at 15. But you´ve got the basic idea yeah. Slower decreases/increases for everybody.
I consider BB a bit like backgammon regarding luck. It is possible to win by luck solely but 90% (or so) of the times the better coach will win. Again given the premise that the matchup is totally even which is not gonna happen. So i´m just talking theory here.
That would mean that your game vs. circularlogic would be part of the last 10% of which luck decided the outcome which would mean that it would not be counted for cr as luck - and not skill - decided the outcome.
I know that i´m not leaving any room for surprices here, like for example the 140 cr coach beating the 170 cr coach and the harsh consequences on both coaches CR for playing one game only. (in this case it was 7 cr points - way too much for a single game imo)
Granted, the match in question was an official R tourney which features a horribly high K-rating which has a huge impact on CR. In the recently closed GLT the final was played by the two coaches with the highest CR in all of fumbbl. My thesis is that any two coaches reaching the finals in that tourney would have the highest cr on all of fumbbl, simply because of the number of games played (7) and won with k-value 8.
That means that the daily CR-grind doesn´t matter at all as you can always just join a Royal Rookie Rumble with a frontloaded undead team and win a few matches. and then your CR would skyrocket. (again, you´d have to actually win to make this statement true).
@Wyrmtainter - even though i like your idea i have a feeling it might be hard to implement as the system doesn´t know which team the zon´s ts are to be calculated against. Being relative to nothing would then be the same as the current ts. Against dwarf it would drop and against lizards it would rise (as lizards rarely have much tackle). so the first time you would see the actual ts (your new ts) of your team would be after the match, thus risking to break the 40 ts rule without even knowing.
M |
|
|
Ironik
Joined: Jun 28, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 21, 2005 - 12:35 |
|
again a LONG thread on modification of the ranked point system? |
|
|
Wyrmtainter
Joined: Nov 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 21, 2005 - 12:53 |
|
JanMattys:
You have misread the suggestion about Dodge/Tackle. Point a) nullifies TACKLE TS value if there is no DODGE on the oppo. The Dodge value is only DROPPED proportionally to the number of Tackles there is in the opposition. Therefore, in a 11longbeard-11zon your example), it would render the Dodge TS value to 0 (since the oppo counts 100% of tackles, making dodge useless where it would be used otherwise). In other scenarios with less dodge or tackle, it is only dropped.
Mith:
Maybe the calculations could be made by the site as teams are sent to the Gamefinder. The client dont really need the TS except for the result sheet at the end. System wise, it serves nothing on the pitch, neither to the client. So it could be kept on the site, calculated before the game, on the gamefinder. In fact, a coach could know this relative value by checking a specific match-up before playing. |
|
|
Mithrilpoint
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 21, 2005 - 13:11 |
|
@Wyrmtainter - yeah i just thought of that too, but that would mean you would have to check each matchup before agreeing to play it, (possibly applying a "check match"-feature on gamefinder) and i don´t think that would go down well with the majority of coaches. I could be wrong but i don´t think so.
@Ironik - if you have got no input please keep your statements to yourself. You don´t HAVE to post you know. You could just choose NOT to post. Do the right thing.
M |
_________________
Stop the Whining! |
|
Curro
Joined: Jun 07, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 21, 2005 - 13:52 |
|
Bad coaches like me don´t need another division with points. I think it´s enough with Ladder, Faction and Unranked tournaments. Let just one division for coaches like me, taht just want to play for play, not to see how bad we are!!
Thanks! |
|
|
Curro
Joined: Jun 07, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 21, 2005 - 13:54 |
|
| Curro wrote: | Bad coaches like me don´t need another division with points. I think it´s enough with Ladder, Faction and Unranked tournaments. Let just one division for coaches like me, taht just want to play for play, not to see how bad we are!!
Thanks! |
Yes!! we see it in every match... hehe. Don´t need to see it again when my points go down after playing against anybody.
Nothing more to say.
Hope this help
Curro |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 02, 2005 - 20:09 |
|
| Mithrilpoint wrote: | I just had a stray thought on the topic of Coach Ranking. I chose this thread (of the many possible) to post it in.
Making Coach Ranking matter.
One of the main points against CR is that it doesn´t actually show the skill of the coach, that people cherrypick weak opponents and thus it does not live up to its name. This is an idea on how to improve that.
As the emphasis is placed on CR rather than on TS in the ranking formula (Circularlogic among others has some good points about this) wouldn´t it be an idea to further limit the playable opponents by putting a restriction of maybe 10 cr points on a ranked game?
This meaning that you would be able to play and upload games against all coaches, but only matches vs. coaches within 10 CR points of your own would count for CR purposes.
As I see this it would produce both pros and cons.
Pros:
It would not be possible for the 160+ rated coach to play coaches below 150, gaining 0,35 cr per game and thus slowly rising in the CR-race without really showing any skill...ever.
Cherrypicking noobs would be made more difficult for the same reasons.
The games that matter CR-wise would be against people of roughly your own skill. And this i would conceive as good.
Cons:
It would be possible to pick games just outside the 10 cr range, strengthen your team, making it ready for the games that mattered (again, CR-wise).
More restriction on opponents in an open environment is never positive. But bear in mind that you could still upload the result of the match, gain money and skills, just not CR.
-o-
Possibly i have left out several things/consequences of this so let me hear them.
What do you say to this good people?
M |
I don`t know if I belong to the good side, but have you had a look, how many coaches there are above CR 170? Just right now there are only 71.
So I have to choose my opposition just out of 71 people? As I moved to USA now, I guess 40-50 are out of my timezone... |
|
|
Mithrilpoint
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 02, 2005 - 20:30 |
|
@CircularLogic
Yup, right now your coach ranking would only increase or decrease if you played one of those 71 coaches. But you could still play and gain skills and team development. So for further improvement CR-wise you would have to actively seek out one of those 71 coaches and win the match. So we get fewer matches that count for CR, but you get the same number of matches total. The important part is not whether it is 10, 15 or 20 CR points apart, the point is that reasonnably fair matchups will yield a change in CR.
Am i making myself clear?
M |
_________________
Stop the Whining! |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 02, 2005 - 20:55 |
|
Hmm.. I was thinking about what makes fumbbl different from the other standard situations, where ELO-based ranking works perfect:
Both players start from different positions with different teams. Now I there was a question 'What`s a fair match' somewhere around and I believe, that a fair match is a matchup, where you had the same chances of winning, if the teams would be reversed.
So let me just toss out an idea... to make a game count for ranking, you would have to play 2 consecutive games. You first play a game with the teams reversed and then 2nd game everyone plays with his own team. Of course no injuries or SPP count from the first match.
This might require a seperate division, but it would decrease any kind of teambased cherrypicking. |
|
|
SnakeSanders
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 02, 2005 - 21:02 |
|
I wouldnt mind seeing the CR on gamefinder when 2 folk are playing, you can see if 2 high ranked players are playing, they are likely not to be cherrypickers, and it will be a good game worthy of spectating and learning something, or if i see someone at CR175 playing someone at CR143, well I know what kind of game that will be and avoid speccing it.
Then again it could be 2 CR130 players then its funny to watch  |
|
|
Renegade
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 02, 2005 - 21:31 |
|
| CircularLogic wrote: | I don`t know if I belong to the good side, but have you had a look, how many coaches there are above CR 170? Just right now there are only 71.
So I have to choose my opposition just out of 71 people? As I moved to USA now, I guess 40-50 are out of my timezone... |
And there was me thinking you guys played this game out of enjoyment...
Limiting the coaches you can play based on a formula seems strange.
I think a cool idea would be to mask the coach-ranking statistic so coaches don't know how far ahead or behind they are to other players in the table. Obviously the position would still show on the table but it'd add an element of surprise every time you log on "Am I still in the top 10?" etc.
EDIT- Ignore me i'm Stoopid! |
Last edited by Renegade on %b %02, %2005 - %21:%Aug; edited 3 times in total |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 02, 2005 - 21:33 |
|
I misread it at first... like you can`t play any othergames outside the range.. |
|
|
Mithrilpoint
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 03, 2005 - 14:30 |
|
@Circularlogic
Your idea on swapping teams is interesting but not really applicable here i think. It would - for example - force coaches to play races they don´t like with skillsets they don´t like. The time factor is another one - 2 games instead of one.
M |
_________________
Stop the Whining! |
|
|
|
| |
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
