westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
 Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 23:57 |
 
|
| Mr_Foulscumm wrote: | Sorry I disagree with this. The fact that people pick Example C isn't because it's the most competitive, it's because most "ballers" are wuzzy, pixel hugging, wimps. So the fact that the "market" says this is the most common match up doesn't mean it's the fairest, because, people pick games where the potential gains are bigger then the dangers.
EDIT: What you are suggesting is that it's ok for elfballers to cherry pick games but not ok for bashers? oh, and that and actual even game is out of the question? |
Hey! Bashers can be wuzzy, pixel hugging wimps, too! 
Example C may not be even-TS, but it isn't cherrypicking because no coach is offering a match he himself would decline.
| Westerner wrote: | "My 140TS Bashers vs your 150TS elfballers"? / "My 150TS elfballers vs your 140TS Bashers?"
Coach A: Yes/Yes
Coach B: Yes/Yes
Coach C: No/No
Coach D: Yes/Yes
|
|
_________________
\x/es |
|
Hogshine
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 00:01 |
|
Depending on the teams, I would not accept a match with, say, my 140TS Khemri against someone else's 150TS Dark Elves. His team will be full of dodge, I'll be unlikely to have more than one tackle, and probably not tackle/MB. Maybe a few DPs, but if I can't get them down it'll make no difference. And with av8, they're really not going to break that easily even if I can.
edit: however, I would accept the matchup the other way round. |
Last edited by Hogshine on %b %18, %2008 - %00:%Nov; edited 1 time in total |
|
Plorg
Joined: May 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 00:01 |
|
In Alpha Centauri, if I set my Economic model to Free Market, then Economy goes up a little but in the meantime it destroys the Planet and the rampant deregulation and corruption greatly limits the effectiveness of Police since nobody is held accountable. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 00:07 |
|
| Plorg wrote: | | In Alpha Centauri, if I set my Economic model to Free Market, then Economy goes up a little but in the meantime it destroys the Planet and the rampant deregulation and corruption greatly limits the effectiveness of Police since nobody is held accountable. |
He wants BR to influence the scheduler. He must be a communist and a hippy. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 00:20 |
|
| Hogshine wrote: | | westerner wrote: | | Hogshine wrote: | | With TS, the "average" matchup is going to be with equal TS teams... you do see this, right? |
Not necessarily. Suppose, for the sake of argument, the bashy premium is 5 TS in B, i.e. Bashy teams play an average of 5 TS up vs non-bashers. Then, the average match may have a TS differential to the extent that bashers get paired against non bashers. Does that make sense? |
No. If I play a game where I have a 5TS advantage, my opponent is playing a game with a 5TS disadvantage. So the average of the two game situations taking place is 0TS. |
Yes, naturally. But that's not very meaningful. I think the significant piece of data would be how often / how much TS a bashier team had to give up in order to get a match.
| Hogshine wrote: | | Edit: Just to clarify, I don't care for the difference between bashers and non-bashers. Racial strengths are taken care of, as we agreed already. I see no good reason why non-bashy teams should be somehow rewarded. Elves tend to win more against bashers. |
I've read that it is very hard to beat elves with bashers in a single game. Elves tradeoff is lack of durability over time. But that's a factor for many coaches. Especially if B becomes a new entry point for majors and people start developing teams to that end.
| Hogshine wrote: | | westerner wrote: | | I believe the guiding principle for B should be matches that a majority of coaches would be happy to play as either team. |
As Shadow points out, you would play 109TS humans against 136TS undead? |
No. And I don't believe the majority of coaches would be willing to play as either team. Therefore, I don't believe it should be part of the guiding principle for B. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 00:23 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | He wants BR to influence the scheduler. He must be a communist and a hippy. |
| Reisender wrote: | yeah the market knows it. the market knows all. this is why pure capitalism is so great, has always worked and will always..... wait.....  |
I think that balances out nicely!! |
_________________
\x/es |
|
Hogshine
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 00:35 |
|
| westerner wrote: | | Hogshine wrote: | | Edit: Just to clarify, I don't care for the difference between bashers and non-bashers. Racial strengths are taken care of, as we agreed already. I see no good reason why non-bashy teams should be somehow rewarded. Elves tend to win more against bashers. |
I've read that it is very hard to beat elves with bashers in a single game. Elves tradeoff is lack of durability over time. But that's a factor for many coaches. Especially if B becomes a new entry point for majors and people start developing teams to that end. |
I understand this, but my point (and I think the point of Jan and Mr_Foulscumm as well) is that [B] is not the place for you if this is what you want. [B] should be for one-off games where you go all out for the win, and if that means your team drops a load of TS and spends a while "recovering", then so be it. I understand fully that this is not going to appeal to everyone, and so [R] is still going to be (probably) the main division for tournaments etc, and I fully expect that I will continue to play in [R] as well, but I will probably play more in [B].
Furthermore, there are coaches (such as Synn, to choose the most prominent example to my mind) who coach elf teams and regularly take on bashy teams, win and keep their team as well. It is not hard, as you've already said, to beat bashy teams with elves. The difficulty comes with beating them and keeping your team relatively alive 
(for the record, I'm not good at playing elves, either against elves or non-elves. I think G_Force has a blog about this...)
Edit: Damn Synn and his meta-picking. It was just too subtle for me to notice... |
Last edited by Hogshine on %b %18, %2008 - %14:%Nov; edited 1 time in total |
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 00:52 |
|
Leave me out of this. It is well documented that i am a meta-picker. I will gladly challenge the bashiest teams because they tend to have as many (or one or two more) tacklers than I have DPs. I am experienced enough to know that baring absurd luck, you will not walk out of half one with two of those tacklers.
__Synn |
|
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 00:56 |
|
| westerner wrote: | Hey! Bashers can be wuzzy, pixel hugging wimps, too!
Example C may not be even-TS, but it isn't cherrypicking because no coach is offering a match he himself would decline.
| Westerner wrote: | "My 140TS Bashers vs your 150TS elfballers"? / "My 150TS elfballers vs your 140TS Bashers?"
Coach A: Yes/Yes
Coach B: Yes/Yes
Coach C: No/No
Coach D: Yes/Yes
|
|
Just to point out that Coach A, Coach B, Coach C and Coach D are all made up by... you.
And they do not speak at all about if the match up is fair or not. Does the fact that you get more YES in Example C mean it's the most fair match up? Seeing as people, if given the option, will usually pick the easier one (the one with the biggest gain-vs-loss) I would say no it isn't.
A game can be a cherry even if both coaches agree to play the game. I would be more hesitant to play up 10+ts with Khemri vs Elves then playing up 10+ts with Elves vs Khemri.
The fact is that when it comes to winning games higher AG teams always have an advantage. A pair of elves vs 11 Khemri can score (and have). A pair of Mummies vs 11 Elves can't.
Funny thing that Example B is the most fair of the three examples you put forth. But this is not desirable because the gain/loss ratio is to high for some of the (made up) coaches? |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 01:05 |
|
westerner...i like how you are conveniently ducking my question....
one more time....
| shadow46x2 wrote: | westerner...
i'm curious....
if you were coaching say...109 TS humans...would you take a matchup against 136 TS undead? |
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 01:16 |
|
| Hogshine wrote: | | I understand this, but my point (and I think the point of Jan and Mr_Foulscumm as well) is that [B] is not the place for you if this is what you want. [B] should be for one-off games where you go all out for the win, and if that means your team drops a load of TS and spends a while "recovering", then so be it. I understand fully that this is not going to appeal to everyone, and so [R] is still going to be (probably) the main division for tournaments etc, and I fully expect that I will continue to play in [R] as well, but I will probably play more in [B]. |
What B should be remains to be seen. A significant number felt that BR should be part of the formula in DukeTyrion's poll.
http://www.fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=14821&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=
Although, I doubt too many are going to be coming forward to argue in favor of it, the way that my record in R was subject to scrutiny and scorn. Was I running for public office, or something? Yeesh. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 01:39 |
|
36 Thought it should be so far, while 95 thought it shouldn't be.
27% is hardly a large number that want BR included.
Only 5 said they would not play if the BR part of the calculation was removed.
That is a resounding vote for excluding BR, not 'a significant number wanting BR' |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 01:55 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: |
36 Thought it should be so far, while 95 thought it shouldn't be.
27% is hardly a large number that want BR included.
Only 5 said they would not play if the BR part of the calculation was removed.
That is a resounding vote for excluding BR, not 'a significant number wanting BR' |
23% is a significant (as in meaningful) number. I didn't say it was the majority. 44% said No, but that they'd play on regardless. Also, of those who felt strongly on the issue (those who would quit over it), over 5 to 1 are against including BR. Which partly explains why few people are posting in favor of it. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
In a stark break for site tradition, i did read the entire thread, even the very dull flame war, and it made me decide to post my thoughts, mainly as it will annoy shadow48x2, who seems to believe that not playing [B] should be a barrier to having opinions and desires for the Division. Which i think is piffle.
I was excited about [B]. I tried hard to lay aside my fears of it being a comeback free foulathon and decided that the chance of instant fair 'matches' was too great to pass up.
It turns out i had the wrong idea and Christer intends even 'games' instead.
(as previously defined a 'match' i take to be even teams, and an even game to be one i have a 50% chance of winning)
Now the reason i was excited is i can spend a LONG time on gamefinder getting solid rejections and being offered only games playing up 20+ ts, some have even explained to me that i should accept these games as they percieve me to be a better player than them and hence feel the 'game' would be balanced. They would never accpet the game offered the other way around though, nor feel that to be an appropriate offer.
Turns out if i am at all successful in [B] then thats the sort of games i can expect, though getting progressively harder, until they break my team and my spirit. Well i can get those games easily enough in R, with the added incentive that the opponent is more likely to have a sense that we are collective having a gaming experience, and less chance that they are simply there to press the foul button and giggle, endlessly.
If we take as an assumption for a second that i am often quite lucky at Bloodbowl, and hence quite likely to end with a reasonable rating under most systems. Still no one has put forward an arguement yet that i can agree with as to why i should be facing increasingly tough games, where is the upside for me? Why or how is that supposed to be fun for me? 'Cos right now it feels a lot like being cherrypicked, by Christers own definition, to play in [B] if you are at all successful as a coach. Again the coaches you face would never want the game if the teams were reversed.
Also the whole thing feels a little like a kindergarden sports day, where everyone gets a prize for 'being special'.
So i wish luck to [B], there is clearly a market for the games it is offering and a greater choice and range of options on the site is always a good thing. Also it will likely have a great and positive effect on R with some of the more 'UberFoulyMcDeathKill' coaches finding an alternative home.
But there seems to be such a strong dissincentive to better coaches (which i hope to be in time) that I'm done, and gone back to R.
And finally, while I care not if i'm called a cherrypicker, indeed i have always gladly accepted the label as i consider it largely meaningless, or lame, weak, afraid... whatever, and i am sure this will invite links to teams of mine that may have behaved less than impecably, but what is so wrong with seeking an even match? Can somebody please try to explain that one to me? |
_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 18, 2008 - 03:09 |
|
| Plorg wrote: | | In Alpha Centauri, if I set my Economic model to Free Market, then Economy goes up a little but in the meantime it destroys the Planet and the rampant deregulation and corruption greatly limits the effectiveness of Police since nobody is held accountable. |
Just like on Wall Street for the past 5 years.... spooky... |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
