Gatts
Joined: Jun 18, 2004
|
 Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 23:04 |
 
|
(now with the added power of alcohol)
@janmattys and hogshine Yes i kind of realise that that is the intended use of the BBr but i question the efficency (as i believe hoghshine also kind of does, what does the 4 mummy all dp team care that it plays +25 ts, not at all. What does the legitimate bashing team care that it get panalized for playing the way it is supposed to, quite a lot since it actually cares about winning.
What we do by using BBR is that we punnish the regular users of bashy teams while missing the intendede targets almost completly, and even if this meassure hit the nonwinning bashers as much as the win oriented bashers itd still be bad since i firmly believe that the "good" bashers putnumber the psychos by far.
My point is that the bashy team doesnt care about their slight increase in difficulity int heir matchup they werent out to win anyway, av doesnt increase as TS icnreases they can still cause as many cas as they always could, but we do hurt the legitmate bashers.
Bashing is not different from passing dodging or running with the ball its a means to an end, why do we punnish one means to an end and not the others.
We cannot compromise the rules of an otherwise very promising division to make it able to deal with evry percieved problem, the problems caused by introducing a BBR that actually affects the matches people are given outweigh the benefits (yes this is just an opinion) |
_________________
Players die, touchdowns are forever! |
|
Shrap
Joined: Sep 18, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 23:15 |
|
Gatts: Not that I have an opinion yet one way or the other....BUT....I think what ppl don't want is 500 dwarf, orc and khemri teams and no light teams at all except a handful of beat up low TS teams. |
|
|
Gatts
Joined: Jun 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 23:29 |
|
(still ethanoly induced)
@shrap and, is penalizing bashing teams the way to do it, I personally doubt it.
I dont believe bashing teams are more likely to win an even ts match between bashers and ag teams. Do we really still want to build these tr 500 elf teams that need constant nurturing to even get by. Well I was udner the impression that the main incentyive of adding the BBr was to stop teams that cared nothing about winning and evrything about killing other teams and I seriously cant see it working. Do you really think that the tr 350 dwarves you would be drawn against if BBR was included is going to hurt you less than the tr 400 dwarves you'd face otherwise? AV 7 teams wont stay at tr 500 in an environment where you face a little bit of evrything the BB world has to offer you, and i personally am very fine with that.
Why do we without even first seeing how the division will end up include a means to panlize bashers, and even further hear screams about increasing this measures potency.
To summarize, I dont think that making it ahrder for dwarves orcs and khemri to win their games will make the fact that av 7 teams wont last as long in the >tr400 regions as av 9 teams and even if it did I dont believe it's worth the sacrifice. I want to play fair BB games with orcs and khemri aswell as skaven and proelfs and i hoped B was the place for me. Do i really have to get a handiap i do not want evry time I play an orc coach, and if so where can i find a division that doesnt grant me this handicap? |
_________________
Players die, touchdowns are forever! |
|
Hogshine
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 23:33 |
|
Gatts, I agree with your first post. I would also question how efficient the BBR is. I suggested in another thread about having BBR normalized for each race... I think I explained it quite well there (at least better than I would here...) so I'll try to find that for you (all). |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 23:43 |
|
| Gatts wrote: | (now with the added power of alcohol)
@janmattys and hogshine Yes i kind of realise that that is the intended use of the BBr but i question the efficency (as i believe hoghshine also kind of does, what does the 4 mummy all dp team care that it plays +25 ts, not at all. What does the legitimate bashing team care that it get panalized for playing the way it is supposed to, quite a lot since it actually cares about winning. |
Pass the beer... 
Your points could be debated, but this thread isn't about whether BBR should exist, it's about whether BR and BBR should be by team rather than by coach. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
Gatts
Joined: Jun 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 23:43 |
|
@ hogshine I dont think you fully agree with my first post, since i want BBR abolished compeltly. If you find a more bashy way to sucseed with your orcs than morwe power to you! No need for rules to hamper your individual approach!
@westerner
point taken, but with the short life and high interest of these BBR threads i thought it was for the best to keep evrything related to BBR in the same place, my misstake probably. |
_________________
Players die, touchdowns are forever! |
|
Hogshine
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 05, 2008 - 00:25 |
|
| Gatts wrote: | | @ hogshine I dont think you fully agree with my first post, since i want BBR abolished compeltly. If you find a more bashy way to sucseed with your orcs than morwe power to you! No need for rules to hamper your individual approach! |
Firstly, I do think [B] would be better without BBR in any form. However, I can see that there are many other viewpoints. Of these, the only that really (imo at least) stands up is to prevent heavy foulers who ignore the ball etc from playing against other teams/coaches who are there to win. I can't find the other post, maybe someone remembers where it was. Either way, I'm not searching through the pages of [B]-themed flame again 
But the reason for my team based, normalised BBR is that compromise is a powerful tool |
|
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 05, 2008 - 00:33 |
|
| nin wrote: | | pac wrote: | | The good point worth discussing that did emerge out of the other thread: basing (B)BR by team and not by coach. This would be an invisible and non-restrictive change that would address quite a few concerns. I'm still not convinced it's necessary as such, but it warrants its own separate discussion. |
1) Why invisible? |
I mean it's a non-intrusive change. Coaches who are not paying attention to the discussion would probably not even notice it had happened.
Whether or not coaches can see (B)BR (whether the value is by team or by coach) is a separate question.
| Quote: | 2) There could still be Coach BR/BBR, no need to have only one thing or the other.
(we allready have team records, win%, cas. ratios...)
(teams could start with Coach BR/BBR attached and then grow their onw... I supose that this is close to what you meant with the average thing) |
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. |
|
|
somertown
Joined: Aug 26, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 05, 2008 - 01:01 |
|
If there has to be BBR in the blackbox, it should be at the coach level. Reward those willing to feed the box elves and other AV7 delights with a greater chance of feeding on such pixels with their bashers than basher-only coaches who contribute nothing to the racial diversity of the division. |
|
|
Reisender
Joined: Sep 29, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 05, 2008 - 01:10 |
|
Gatts is right. (edit: imho)
That problem is that BBR as it is now makes it even harder to win for bashers and gives elves easier games - but it doesnt save them from playing lots of bashers in the box (just bashers with a tendency to have a lower TS)
as official spokesman of elves in the box (i just elected myself and noone was here to protest - you gotta love democracy) i demand to implement BBR as an independent factor in suitability - not giving elves and the like TS advantadge, but making it more probable that bashers play bashers and soft teams soft teams - so everybody has an equal chance to hug his pixels
(obviously i do not demand but suggest, but that way it sounds more official )
Sincerely yours
Reisender
Official Spokesman of the Brave Elves in the Box
PS: (on a sidenote, i would also prefer to have BBR teamwise and not coachwise - if that is statistically impossible it should better be abolished. Why should my new khemri team (if i had one) get easier or softer games to honour the cheesy elfbowliness of my darkies???) |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 05, 2008 - 04:30 |
|
| Reisender wrote: | as official spokesman of elves in the box (i just elected myself and noone was here to protest - you gotta love democracy) i demand to implement BBR as an independent factor in suitability - not giving elves and the like TS advantadge, but making it more probable that bashers play bashers and soft teams soft teams - so everybody has an equal chance to hug his pixels
Sincerely yours
Reisender
Official Spokesman of the Brave Elves in the Box |
Nobody complained because you were the only one left alive - the bashers spared you so that you could persuade others to let them bash even more. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 05, 2008 - 10:11 |
|
I must say I would rather choose those rankings to be "per team". And the idea to start them at your "current rating" is a good one too.
I did always prefer rankings per team, anyway, as any "ranking" is dependent to the team you play anyway. |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
Unstoffe
Joined: Aug 22, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 05, 2008 - 14:00 |
|
My thoughts on this one :
In theory, there shouldn't be a need for per team (B)BR. Both ratings would take racial factors into account, the factors being different for the two ratings. A racial bash % factor could be derived from statistics just as well as the existing win % factor used in CR, and presumably BR calculation, is.
As such just playing a Khemri team wouldn't be enough to give you a high BBR - you would need to be especially bashy, <i>even for Khemri</i>.
But... I wonder if there in fact is a need for this, since in [B] there's a possibility of coaches exploiting the system.
The idea that a coach might create a 'BR dropping' team with which they deliberately play badly has already been discussed. It would also be possible to create a BBR dropping team, simply having a team that never fouls would probably be enough, as things stand that would tend to reduce the bashiness of the opposition faced by your teams overrall.
Will many people actually do this? I doubt it to be honest, maybe alpha testing will throw up a few examples. Still, I think it may be worth making the change to per team ratings, just to ensure that this abuse isn't possible. Provided of course that the change is indeed 'non-intrusive', and I reckon that with the suggested 'starting teams have their (B)BR initialised with the Coach's (average) (B)BR', then it is. |
_________________
British or thereabouts? Check out the White Isle League |
|
Reisender
Joined: Sep 29, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2008 - 00:26 |
|
| westerner wrote: | | Reisender wrote: | as official spokesman of elves in the box (i just elected myself and noone was here to protest - you gotta love democracy) i demand to implement BBR as an independent factor in suitability - not giving elves and the like TS advantadge, but making it more probable that bashers play bashers and soft teams soft teams - so everybody has an equal chance to hug his pixels
Sincerely yours
Reisender
Official Spokesman of the Brave Elves in the Box |
Nobody complained because you were the only one left alive - the bashers spared you so that you could persuade others to let them bash even more. |
hmmm wicked, but smart - but bashers in the box dont expect the power of blodge |
|
|
nin
Joined: May 27, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2008 - 19:18 |
|
I just see a little problem about redundant effect of this "team based rankings" and the "racial factors" allready in use.
Example:
Ogres with a poor win%, high cas. ratio doesn't necesarily meant the coach is not trying to win as hard as he can. |
|
|
|
|
| |
BB2020 - Kick team m...
Search
