shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
 Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 15:54 |
 
|
| PurpleChest wrote: | | And surely your endless attempts to stifle debate must be wearing you down as it seems the debate will continue regardless. |
there's a large difference between trying to end debate(in fact, if you look at other threads, i've actively encouraged it), and pointing out obvious hypocritical statements such as "there's too many orcs!!!...but i'll go ahead and make another one!!"...
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 16:18 |
|
| CircularLogic wrote: | | A flaw is only exploitable, if it gives you an unfair advantage. A flaw that causes an option to be less viable cannot be proven via exploit. |
The same principle applies. Go and generate the data which proves your contention (or wait for it to develop). Then make the case.
Saying, 'I think this will happen so we should do this ...'? Worthless. As a designer I am not going to act on anything along those lines I get from a tester. |
|
|
medaloffairness
Joined: Nov 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 16:22 |
|
Circular Logic wrote
BR implementation is hated by low CR coaches, too.
[medaloffairness-mode on]
On the other hand I could claim that only low CR coaches object the removal of BR from the formula and those just want to have their victory against a stronger coach handed to them on a silver plate if they just suck badly enough for a long enough time.
[medaloffairness-mode off[
It is not a claim... go and look to the petition of the TS preference system. You will see, that most of the coaches who signed this petition has CR 165+... ah, you signed it as well, I see...
http://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=14859
Very well.. ahm...
See you in Black |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 17:22 |
|
| shadow46x2 wrote: | there are 812 active teams in [B] with at least 1 game played...sorted by the total amount of teams per race....
orc 94
dwarf 78
chaos 72
khemri 72
dark elf 50
skaven 45
human 41
ogre 41
wood elf 37
lizardmen 35
undead 35
chaos dwarf 33
high elf 31
norse 25
necromantic 24
nurgle's rotters 21
amazon 20
goblin 17
elf 14
vampire 14
halfling 13
and wow....those 5 races total up 357 of 812 teams....43% of the total teams in the league...
but then again, you also picked out 5 of the most popular "bash" teams....so it's not surprising at all that the % is so high...
but maybe you're talking about games played...
chaos 587
dwarf 557
orc 518
khemri 508
ogre 354
dark elf 269
chaos dwarf 248
human 244
skaven 235
undead 224
wood elf 212
lizardmen 150
nurgle's rotters 143
halfling 140
norse 134
amazon 134
high elf 133
necromantic 121
elf 80
goblin 76
vampire 49
2524 out of 5116 games played by those 5 races...49% of the total games played involve those races.... |
Thanks for the data. Would be interesting to see how that compares to [R]. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 17:42 |
|
| westerner wrote: | | Thanks for the data. Would be interesting to see how that compares to [R]. |
This is the main roster stats page.
That page includes all divisions together. However, we can say that Ranked has accounted for well over 50% of games and teams over all, so it is probably at least an approximate representation of the typical distribution in Ranked. |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 18:00 |
|
| medaloffairness wrote: | Circular Logic wrote
BR implementation is hated by low CR coaches, too.
[medaloffairness-mode on]
On the other hand I could claim that only low CR coaches object the removal of BR from the formula and those just want to have their victory against a stronger coach handed to them on a silver plate if they just suck badly enough for a long enough time.
[medaloffairness-mode off[
It is not a claim... go and look to the petition of the TS preference system. You will see, that most of the coaches who signed this petition has CR 165+... ah, you signed it as well, I see...
http://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=14859
Very well.. ahm...
See you in Black |
Damn... I actually did go to the thread now and checked the CR of each coach. And you are wrong. At the moment 49 coaches have signed and 26 of those are below 165. 5 of those are below 155 and we even have 2 coaches below 145.
Counter experiment.. how many of those who argue for the current state are above 165 and how many are below.. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 18:03 |
|
Bah - I so hate the fact I can't get FUMBBL at work.
The chances of me reading 5 pages or so of 'debate' over 2+ threads full of super quoted posts after a long day is about nil. 
I'll say I agree with pac, just as a normal fallback position! 
/spam over. |
|
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 18:21 |
|
| pac wrote: | | PurpleChest wrote: | | And surely your endless attempts to stifle debate must be wearing you down as it seems the debate will continue regardless. |
shadow can lock threads. If he really wanted to 'stifle debate', he could do so quite thoroughly. |
You know perfectly well he wont do that because if he did he would keep his mod position for about 7 seconds.
Shadow does shut down debate, whether he means to or not... and often it looks like he means to. What annoys me is when people say "we cant possibly discuss this, we dont have enough data" rather than "we dont know if this is necessary yet, feel free to discuss options but you may well be wasting your time". You arent doing this but shadow sometimes is.
Edit: I'd agree that there seem to be far too many duplicate threads, all arguing the same thing over and over... I've stopped bothering to read them because they are so dull tbh. What I would really like is to start a thread where people could propose solutions to make the blackbox do particular things without any discussion over what it should do, just what it could do. Perhaps I'll speak to a friendly mod and see if I can get a thread like that protected from spam  |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced."
Last edited by SillySod on %b %20, %2008 - %18:%Nov; edited 2 times in total |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 18:23 |
|
| pac wrote: | | westerner wrote: | | Thanks for the data. Would be interesting to see how that compares to [R]. |
This is the main roster stats page.
That page includes all divisions together. However, we can say that Ranked has accounted for well over 50% of games and teams over all, so it is probably at least an approximate representation of the typical distribution in Ranked. |
Thanks. Where did you find that link, btw? I can't locate it in via the Statistics menus.
Anyways, here is the result of the merged data referenced above. Caveat that this is all highly preliminary and makes several assumptions.
Top Races Gaining Popularity in B
Khemri +7%
Dwarf +6%
Ogre +5%
Chaos +3%
Halfling +1% (that one was a surprise)
Top Races Losing Popularity in B
Skaven -4%
Wood Elf -3%
Dark Elf -3%
Human -2%
Necromantic -2%
High Elf -2%
Pretty much as some have theorized... that bashy teams are (so far) more popular in B. Possibly b/c they would otherwise find it hard(er) to get matches in R. Note that while agility teams are less popular in B, their drop isn't as much as the bashy teams gains.
Detailed Data (sorry, don't know how to make a nice table)
Race B_Racial_Pref All% B% All_Games B_Games
Chaos 3% 9% 11% 202197 587
Dwarf 6% 5% 11% 111244 557
Orc 0% 10% 10% 231451 518
Khemri 7% 3% 10% 68963 508
Ogre 5% 2% 7% 51747 354
Dark Elf -3% 8% 5% 178042 269
Chaos Dwarf 0% 5% 5% 104531 248
Human -2% 7% 5% 157906 244
Skaven -4% 8% 5% 186779 235
Undead 0% 5% 4% 106732 224
Wood Elf -3% 7% 4% 166355 212
Lizardmen -1% 4% 3% 90564 150
Nurgle's Rotters 0% 3% 3% 61610 143
Halfling 1% 2% 3% 36933 140
Amazon -1% 3% 3% 72453 134
Norse -1% 4% 3% 92568 134
High Elf -2% 4% 3% 98460 133
Necromantic -2% 4% 2% 101108 121
Elf -1% 3% 2% 62628 80
Goblin 0% 1% 1% 30768 76
Vampire -1% 2% 1% 46416 49
Total 0% 100% 100% 2259455 5116
Notes/assumptions:
Data for all divisions is used as a proxy for R.
All races with zero B games dropped for simplicity.
**B data is still preliminary** |
_________________
\x/es |
|
nin
Joined: May 27, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 20:33 |
|
Just a question on this percentages of races:
When you (generic you, anibody can consider the question.. but it's a bit rethoric) count [R]anked teams, elfballers, that almost play in a separate division, add up?
(nothing against elfballers or people that play in [R], just trying to point out that comparisons may be a bit biased) |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 21:03 |
|
| nin wrote: | Just a question on this percentages of races:
When you (generic you, anibody can consider the question.. but it's a bit rethoric) count [R]anked teams, elfballers, that almost play in a separate division, add up?
(nothing against elfballers or people that play in [R], just trying to point out that comparisons may be a bit biased) |
No problem.
AFAIK the comparison data includes all games from all divisions on fumbbl, but as Pac noted, that's probably a reasonable proxy for R since it has the most games played. It doesn't account for the way you pick your matches, so your personal experience may differ. For example, if you play elfball mainly, you'll find B a *much* bashier place. And if strict even-TS matches is your usual thing, you might find B arranging TS handicaps frequently. Cherrypickers may notice that they can't avoid danger.
But on average at least, I would argue that these numbers do provide some early insight into how B differs from the other divisions (i.e., bashier). |
_________________
\x/es
Last edited by westerner on %b %20, %2008 - %22:%Nov; edited 1 time in total |
|
Shivkala
Joined: Jun 07, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 21:46 |
|
Thanks for the data westender! Some very interesting points in there:
+7% for Khemri means that Khemri more then tripple their [R] popularity! (Which as a Khemri player in [R] I can fully understand b/c it's near impossible to find games...)
Necromantic (and Vampires) suffer the most, which I find a bit peculiar.
Also I wouldn't have expected for Dark Elves to lose so much in popularity as I'd think they have one of the highest winning ratios in [B]. But then, this is negated by the racial factor in the formula, so perhaps it shouldn't surprise me after all.
On pure speculation, I'd guess that the popularity of bashy teams will decrease a bit over time. All the coaches that always wanted to play their Khemri against AV7 Elf and Skaven teams now finally have the chance to do so. But after a while when the novelty wears off, I'd guess that they get back to the more traditional popularity (even if still a bit skewed towards the bashier races as there is no possibility to Elfbowl) |
|
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 22:07 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | | Shadow does shut down debate, whether he means to or not... and often it looks like he means to. What annoys me is when people say "we cant possibly discuss this, we dont have enough data" rather than "we dont know if this is necessary yet, feel free to discuss options but you may well be wasting your time". You arent doing this but shadow sometimes is. |
That's simply because shadow has a blunter posting style than me. I would have thought you knew he was really a soft fluffy kitten by now.  |
|
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 22:10 |
|
| westerner wrote: | | Thanks. Where did you find that link, btw? I can't locate it in via the Statistics menus. |
It used to be linked from there, but now (as far as I know) there is no 'official' link to it left on the site. The page itself still exists though, and I have the link on my personalised site menu bar.
I assume the link was removed for similar reasons to the removal of various Top 10s at various times - too much work for the server. So, I try to use it sparingly, but it does provide useful data.
Edit: One point I would make: I would consider it a mistake to regard those site-wide stats as a 'norm' towards which [B] stats should eventually tend if things are evolving 'correctly'.
As far as I am concerned (and I don't think I'm alone), elves are overly popular in [R]. If [B] turns out in the long term to be a place where elven teams are less popular, that is not necessarily aberrant or a bad thing. (Though it would certainly be unfortunate if they were reduced to a tiny minority.) |
|
|
Chewie
Joined: Dec 13, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 20, 2008 - 22:37 |
|
Don't worry Pac. I'll still play Elves. I think i know of one other coach who will too. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
