Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
 Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 17:27 |
 
|
I don't think you're ever going to please all of the people all of the time. For instance, I'd like to include things like TR as well as TS and the racial factor table with my magic wand of FUMBBL changeness.
I suppose I sign up to the ideal of not playing up a whole bunch of TS, mainly becuase it's not my idea of fun. But then, I can just go off to [R] and do that... |
|
|
Ehlers
Joined: Jun 26, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 17:36 |
|
|
geff
Joined: Jan 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 17:41 |
|
|
rostern
Joined: Jun 12, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 17:43 |
|
|
Rijssiej
Joined: Jan 04, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 17:50 |
|
|
clarkin
Joined: Oct 15, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 17:50 |
|
/signed
though I do enjoy the current [b] implementation I would like it even more if it were matching on TS + racial factors only. |
|
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 17:59 |
|
no...
simply for the fact that most anyone who knows anything about this site, knows that TS is not the end-all-be-all of matchup systems...
and since you're obviously not proposing a TS revamp(which would be the logical first step), there has to be more to evaluate than a straight up TS comparison...
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 18:00 |
|
| shadow46x2 wrote: | no...
simply for the fact that most anyone who knows anything about this site, knows that TS is not the end-all-be-all of matchup systems...
and since you're obviously not proposing a TS revamp(which would be the logical first step), there has to be more to evaluate than a straight up TS comparison...
--j |
That's kinda the Shadow version of my point! 
Edit: But I agree with Rizzle too... Conflicted.  |
Last edited by Purplegoo on %b %19, %2008 - %18:%Nov; edited 2 times in total |
|
Rijssiej
Joined: Jan 04, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 18:05 |
|
Sure TS needs more work and I think racial factors should be taken into account for the match. But as was made clear after pacs questions it is a matter of principle and I prefer the coaches and playstyle not be a factor in the matchup.
edit: added racial factors link |
Last edited by Rijssiej on %b %19, %2008 - %18:%Nov; edited 1 time in total |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 18:09 |
|
| shadow46x2 wrote: | no...
simply for the fact that most anyone who knows anything about this site, knows that TS is not the end-all-be-all of matchup systems...
and since you're obviously not proposing a TS revamp(which would be the logical first step), there has to be more to evaluate than a straight up TS comparison...
--j |
no...
TS is not perfect but it's what we have.
We *don't* want a coach ranking of any kind to pollute matchups. If TS needs fixes, we will work on TS fixes. But stating that "Ts is not perfect so it's pointless to ask for such a thing" is kinda... stupid?
Christer is ALREADY using TS as a more or less indicative factor for team strenght. The rest (racial matchup, mirror games, BR and BBR) are different indicators.
For teams, Christer already uses ts. And since I dream of teams being the *only* factor in pairings, then ts is fine for what's my concern.
I have a feeling you have troubles understanding my point, really. I expected "hey, coaches skills in the formula makes sense for A, B, C, reasons" arguments, not "TS doesn't work well" ones.
TS is what we have. We're talking about Blackbox principles here... not math.
EDIT: Rij beat me to it, with better english and fewer words. |
_________________
 |
|
Askrum
Joined: Jan 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 18:13 |
|
|
UberEvil
Joined: Oct 20, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 18:22 |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 18:27 |
|
Its not that i think TS should be the only factor in determining the matches. I think racial modifications, repeat opponents, and rookie team status are important considerations as well. I also know two of those are factored into the current formula.
CR/BR DOES have a place within the matching mechanism.... but only as a "last pass" type action. If two matches are identical to me, with one coach having a lower BR/CR and the other having a higher BR/CR... i would prefer to play the coach with the CR/BR closer to mine.
Also, I think Christer has done an amazing job with the whole [B] roll out. He has really outdone himself this time.
None the less.....
/signed
__Synn |
|
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 18:34 |
|
| Synn wrote: | Its not that i think TS should be the only factor in determining the matches. I think racial modifications, repeat opponents, and rookie team status are important considerations as well. I also know two of those are factored into the current formula.
CR/BR DOES have a place within the matching mechanism.... but only as a "last pass" type action. If two matches are identical to me, with one coach having a lower BR/CR and the other having a higher BR/CR... i would prefer to play the coach with the CR/BR closer to mine.
Also, I think Christer has done an amazing job with the whole [B] roll out. He has really outdone himself this time.
None the less.....
/signed
__Synn |
Yes.
I just preferred to address the issue more directly and turn it into a "use br in the formula" or "use not br in the formula", but you points are good to me and I 100% agree. |
_________________
|
|
aerofool
Joined: Jun 11, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 19, 2008 - 19:12 |
|
I know I'm probably going to get my face bashed in for this one, but what-ever..
Two teams with equal TR/TS in itself seems balanced. I agree that there does need to be some tweaking in how TR/TS are calculated. However, I can't see a CR 180 coach playing a CR 143 coach with identical teams anywhere near a fair and even match. The coach with the more experience and better win ratio will still decimate the lesser guy with equal teams nine out of 10 times just because he/she is a more skilled coach. I understand there are some people who have found ways to pump up their CR with devious actions, but I'm going upon the basis that the system is fair from the start, like intended. I for one don't want to play any coaches who's CR is ten points or more higher than mine. Implementing a TS only system will leave all like-minded coaches never wanting into such an inspired system.
Christer is doing his best to try to come up with a fair draw system that not only takes teams strengths into account, but how well they perform and how skilled the coach is with that team. He's far from a perfect formula, but I feel he's getting there. Leaving it at TS alone is not the answer! Like Pac said, give it time and let us see how this eventually hits or misses Christer's goal. |
_________________
Scott |
|
|
|
killing by fun?
Search
