42 coaches online • Server time: 12:43
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Gnomes are trashgoto Post Cindy is back?goto Post ramchop takes on the...
SearchSearch 
Handicaps in Black Box - Good or bad
 Goto page 1, 2  Next
FUMBBL Forum Index » Divisions » Blackbox
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
peikko



Joined: Aug 02, 2003
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 18:01 Reply with quote Back to top
There was lots of discussion about keeping or disabling handicaps in black box. Now that many have played more games I think we should again rething if we made right choice.

Following is list of latest games taken from my irc-backlog from where I removed all games that did not have handicaps. Ive also colored red the games where in my opinion handicaps hurt more than make game more balanced.

In my mind the list is pretty red....

(Orc 198/175 vs 172/159 Chaos Dwarf) @812
(Lizardmen 106/108 vs 147/124 Vampire) @841
(Dwarf 100/100 vs 113/101 Dark Elf) @870
(Vampire 100/84 vs 136/100 Ogre) @780
(Chaos 166/136 vs 152/126 Vampire) @849
(Ogre 164/135 vs 112/106 Skaven) @628
(Orc 150/152 vs 162/171 Dwarf) @746
(Human 120/121 vs 161/120 Vampire) @729
(Dwarf 100/100 vs 114/109 Orc) @853
(Lizardmen 177/150 vs 160/143 Orc) @755
(Khemri 138/133 vs 153/134 Ogre) @863
(Undead 190/170 vs 153/159 Chaos) @806
(Ogre 128/103 vs 110/102 Halfling) @761
(Chaos Dwarf 204/195 vs 254/216 Chaos) @770
(Undead 194/184 vs 159/161 Chaos) @721
(Dark Elf 143/118 vs 118/115 Chaos) @843
(Chaos Dwarf 128/123 vs 114/113 Undead) @851
(Lizardmen 100/101 vs 125/107 Halfling) @863
(Goblin 156/130 vs 118/120 High Elf) @775
(Chaos 185/171 vs 172/170 Dwarf) @847
(Orc 201/198 vs 182/184 Dwarf) @770
(Ogre 178/137 vs 122/124 Amazon) @753
(Khemri 145/147 vs 164/162 Chaos) @760
(Human 220/222 vs 253/219 Ogre) @783
(Halfling 121/103 vs 141/108 Vampire) @858
(Human 154/136 vs 121/126 Necromantic) @813
(Dwarf 125/105 vs 114/101 Chaos) @873
(Orc 190/183 vs 155/170 Dwarf) @813
(Khemri 100/100 vs 113/104 Elf) @872
(Orc 131/120 vs 148/127 Chaos Dwarf) @864
(Orc 160/134 vs 149/137 Dwarf) @832
(Ogre 119/88 vs 98/89 Nurgle's Rotters) @858
(Dwarf 211/209 vs 188/193 Human) @815
(Wood Elf 111/102 vs 100/97 Chaos) @871
(Orc 206/208 vs 257/227 Ogre) @811
(Dwarf 183/185 vs 197/192 Chaos) @863
(Wood Elf 168/180 vs 185/188 Chaos Dwarf) @848
(Chaos Dwarf 193/187 vs 208/188 Orc) @870
(Dwarf 186/212 vs 204/202 Chaos) @832
(Chaos 208/210 vs 255/224 Ogre) @820
(Elf 161/139 vs 141/138 Dwarf) @862]
(Khemri 124/115 vs 137/125 Dwarf) @821
(Dwarf 149/151 vs 207/158 Dark Elf) @802

edit: there was atleast one faulty red one


Last edited by peikko on %b %09, %2009 - %22:%Jun; edited 3 times in total
BillBrasky



Joined: Feb 15, 2005
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 18:05 Reply with quote Back to top
The handicaps are too varied to be a generic 5 ts... I often get handis that do nothing (such as virus with no nigglers or bad press). I would not get rid of them, but maybe only value them at 2 ts...
maysrill



Joined: Dec 29, 2008
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 18:12 Reply with quote Back to top
Since BB is experimental, what about assigning the handicaps based on the TS difference, not the TR difference. If you have any faith in the TS system, this would seem to make the games much more fair.

_________________
Author of Firehurler (Twinborn Trilogy Book #1), Aethersmith (Book #2), Sourcethief (Book #3)
peikko



Joined: Aug 02, 2003
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 18:13 Reply with quote Back to top
Since we are balancing game using team strenght, shouldnt handicaps be based on team strenght difference in black box instead team rating?
DukeTyrion



Joined: Feb 18, 2004
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 18:13 Reply with quote Back to top
BillBrasky wrote:
The handicaps are too varied to be a generic 5 ts... I often get handis that do nothing (such as virus with no nigglers or bad press). I would not get rid of them, but maybe only value them at 2 ts...


But, tthere is also the other extreem, sich as illegal drugs, It Wasn't Me, or Morley ... which can be worth a hell of alot more than 5 TS, but since you don't know which handicaps will come up, 5 TS is about the closest you will get overall.

As for Peikko's view, I am not overly worried either way, although, since the matcher tries to avoid handicaps it does mean that a 160 / 130 teams, is more likely to play a 158 / 128 teams than a 125 / 128 team, which I think is better from the view of a team with MNGs.
peikko



Joined: Aug 02, 2003
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 18:14 Reply with quote Back to top
maysrill wrote:
Since BB is experimental, what about assigning the handicaps based on the TS difference, not the TR difference. If you have any faith in the TS system, this would seem to make the games much more fair.


I would say that great minds and so on, but I would go deaf from all the /boo:s Smile
Deatheart



Joined: Sep 18, 2007
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 18:15 Reply with quote Back to top
yet not all coaches play the same, yes palm coin is a laugh for a handi and bad press well that sucks but I dont retire all my players once they get a niggle, nah if they play put them on the line let them take a few hits, I payed for them make um play, yet i get virus and 1/3 of my team can be out that game from current missing next game and the nigglers on the roster. I guess some would say that I should manage my team rating better but its a game. I still belive that the best match up would be drop the TS, just a simple TR - missing player value and cash on hand, you got a beat up team you play a team comparable to you, but they get a handi or two for playing. If a coach goes for nothing but Claw/RSC and everyone else has dp thats thier choice, i dont see creating a calculation to make a coaches choice on skills effect the matchup, Box is supposed to be quick games with out the 30 minutes offering and getting rejections. Who cares how they built thier team just that they have put the so many spp into the team.
funnyfingers



Joined: Nov 13, 2005
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 18:16 Reply with quote Back to top
Would anyone agree that as the TS of a match increases the worth of handicaps increase as well? Example greatest or the other where someone is arrested is worth a lot more at 200 TS than 100 TS.
Astarael



Joined: Aug 14, 2005
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 18:24 Reply with quote Back to top
Handicaps are fine in [B] in my opinion, they're rarely gamebreaking (although for sure they can be, in the same way Get the Ref can be).

Adds a bit more spice to the matchups when they're pretty even but there's still a random factor Smile

_________________
Oh my.
treborius



Joined: Apr 05, 2008
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 22:11 Reply with quote Back to top
peikko wrote:
There was lots of discussion about keeping or disabling handicaps in black box. Now that many have played more games I think we should again rething if we made right choice.


i've been thinking about the exact same question...
...i once had a poll about how much people think that HCs are really worth.

during that discussion and while playing Ogre with a notoric TR-TS imbalance (TR>>TS, in general) and also playing an Orc-team which was stacking gold (TR>>TS, they had >0.5 million at one point) in the Box, i came to the conclusion, that HCs were really hurting my teams more on average (although i was being attacked on the forums alot 'cause other coaches thought i was actually gaining an advantage Wink ).

...my opinion is, that 5TS/HC is about right at TS<150, but is too little at higher TS on average.
...during the discussion / poll i also realized, that technically it would be easy to disable HCs completely.

my order of preference is:

1. have HCs only for TS-mismatches (when the scheduler couldn't find the perfect match) at maybe 5TS / HC at TS=100..150, 6TS / HC at TS=150..200, 8TS / HC at TS=200..250 (or similar)
2. have HCs only for TS-mismatches at 5TS / HC
3. not have HCs at all in the Box
4. have HCs similar as 1., but based on TR instead of TS
5. have HCs similar as 2., but based on TR instead of TS (what we have now).

in my opinion: 1 > 2 > 3 > 4 > 5

(well, not numerically, but you get my point Wink )
SillySod



Joined: Oct 10, 2006
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 22:31 Reply with quote Back to top
I'm not sure whether handicaps are a great thing for [B] or not. However, I am sure of two things:
- the number of handicaps generated should be based on TR not TS
- the handicaps arent making those games more or less favourable... the scheduler is

_________________
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."
treborius



Joined: Apr 05, 2008
Post   Posted: Jun 09, 2009 - 22:44 Reply with quote Back to top
SillySod wrote:
[...]I am sure of two things:
- the number of handicaps generated should be based on TR not TS

Silly, could you elaborate on why you think that?

SillySod wrote:
- the handicaps arent making those games more or less favourable... the scheduler is

the scheduler can only make the games as balanced as the best possible match-ups are, so the question really is for a given match-up (with a mismatch of 7 TS and 15TR, for example) whether we prefer that game to be played with that mismatch or whether we would like to have HCs assigned to one side or the other based on either TS or TR to possibly make it *more* balanced Smile
Snappy_Dresser



Joined: Feb 11, 2005
Post   Posted: Jun 10, 2009 - 06:23 Reply with quote Back to top
maysrill wrote:
Since BB is experimental, what about assigning the handicaps based on the TS difference, not the TR difference. If you have any faith in the TS system, this would seem to make the games much more fair.


What idiot has any faith in the TS system? Seriously?

Edit: treborius, I am strongly in favour of option 1, some of your other options I think are silly, but we can agree on the first one at least

_________________
<PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited

"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm

Last edited by Snappy_Dresser on %b %10, %2009 - %06:%Jun; edited 1 time in total
Balle2000



Joined: Sep 25, 2008
Post   Posted: Jun 10, 2009 - 06:27 Reply with quote Back to top
Snappy_Dresser wrote:
maysrill wrote:
Since BB is experimental, what about assigning the handicaps based on the TS difference, not the TR difference. If you have any faith in the TS system, this would seem to make the games much more fair.


What idiot has any faith in the TS system? Seriously?


Surely it is better than the TR system, no?
Astarael



Joined: Aug 14, 2005
Post   Posted: Jun 10, 2009 - 06:31 Reply with quote Back to top
treborius wrote:
SillySod wrote:
[...]I am sure of two things:
- the number of handicaps generated should be based on TR not TS

Silly, could you elaborate on why you think that?


Simple, handicaps in the rulebook go off Team Rating.

_________________
Oh my.
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 FUMBBL Forum Index » Divisions » Blackbox