BeeRTRuCK
Joined: Sep 09, 2007
|
 Posted:
Mar 06, 2010 - 15:28 |
 
|
i like the idea of badges etc for playing more teams, but i also like the idea of bonus' based on number of races activated. |
|
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 15:06 |
|
as for today, the first four blackbox coaches are inactive for at least a couple of months and of course haven't played a single box game with the new client. |
_________________
 |
|
clarkin
Joined: Oct 15, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 15:28 |
|
I too would like to see the current 'top coaches' list moved to a separate page (but kept), and what's shown on the B page be a 'top active coaches' list where you need to have played 1+ game in the previous month. |
|
|
ultwe
Joined: Dec 25, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 15:53 |
|
To be Fair to Soultoken, he posted a blog/forum (can't remember which, and his blog is empty), a while back, stating that he would stop playing in the box untill someone else had overtaken JD, as he did not wand JD to remain at the top of the list, after declaring that he wasn't interrested in carrrying on playing after making it to the top |
_________________
Yeah, Nuffle sucks... That's because I play crap 
π is aproximately 3.142 times better than any other food |
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 15:55 |
|
| ultwe wrote: | | To be Fair to Soultoken, he posted a blog/forum (can't remember which, and his blog is empty), a while back, stating that he would stop playing in the box untill someone else had overtaken JD, as he did not wand JD to remain at the top of the list, after declaring that he wasn't interrested in carrrying on playing after making it to the top |
does that make him any better than JD? |
|
|
Calthor
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 15:56 |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 15:58 |
|
| zakatan wrote: | | ultwe wrote: | | To be Fair to Soultoken, he posted a blog/forum (can't remember which, and his blog is empty), a while back, stating that he would stop playing in the box untill someone else had overtaken JD, as he did not wand JD to remain at the top of the list, after declaring that he wasn't interrested in carrrying on playing after making it to the top |
does that make him any better than JD? |
Or any worse?
There is nothing wrong with getting to the top then sitting on your rating in my opinion.
I do think there should be an overall and monthly rating, but I think decaying ratings is an absolutely appalling idea. |
|
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 16:02 |
|
| jimmyfantastic wrote: | | zakatan wrote: | | ultwe wrote: | | To be Fair to Soultoken, he posted a blog/forum (can't remember which, and his blog is empty), a while back, stating that he would stop playing in the box untill someone else had overtaken JD, as he did not wand JD to remain at the top of the list, after declaring that he wasn't interrested in carrrying on playing after making it to the top |
does that make him any better than JD? |
Or any worse?
There is nothing wrong with getting to the top then sitting on your rating in my opinion.
I do think there should be an overall and monthly rating, but I think decaying ratings is an absolutely appalling idea. |
by the way he said it, Soultoken just didn't want JD to be on top so he just overtook him and did exactly the same. I see a lack of consistency in this move.
The problem here is the same as in the "active players list", crowded with inactive players that never died or retired. But well i presume all was said in the previous 5 pages of this thread i didn't read. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 17:50 |
|
Or - you could just wait for some sort of rejig until the stats are going to mean anything?
We've got 3 new races that won't be factored in yet, races that have been changed (so the racial factors will take a while to settle down), a bunch of coaches new to the division, and as such, inaccurately ranked, games counting before the 4 game threshold, it's a bit of a mess atm, but the main point is that the client and the division beds in. All of this stuff can wait in my view, the admins have more important things to be doing, like fighting bugs and rolling the client out. If you give it a couple of months, I’ve no doubt that the formula will be fixed up, the tables sorted, and some sort of retro-active cleanup will take place, perhaps even of the inactive few, if they annoy you so much. I don't ever put stock in numbers as it is (perhaps bar W/D/L of teams depending on their schedule), but if you're chasing one in this division currently, you're really not chasing much!
Anyway, if I had the button, I'd only make #1 and yourself visible, sod an open top 10. And the #1 would have to have played within a fortnight, or he's hidden. Hidden numbers are nice, the more hidden, the more people are just encouraged to get on and play, and not wait for an easy looking round to get that next 0.5 of a point, or get to a number and then stop, or lame it up any other way. Don't tell me you can't lame it up in [B] - if you're lame, you can be lame anywhere if you try hard enough. |
Last edited by Purplegoo on %b %24, %2011 - %17:%Jan; edited 1 time in total |
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 17:52 |
|
how do you wait for an easy round?? |
_________________
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 17:55 |
|
I think it would be an error to drag yet another thread into [B] purity, etc, but use your imagination. |
|
|
maysrill
Joined: Dec 29, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 18:25 |
|
| zakatan wrote: | | how do you wait for an easy round?? |
You can generally see who is online, and most of the better players are well known. You can either wait for those better player to be offline, or wait until they are in games to activate. You can also wait for particular bad coaches to be online and looking for a Box game. Either way, you'll ensure yourself a weaker batch of potential opponents.
Like many things of this nature, it would only work if you did it systemically over a long enough period to iron over the anomolies (i.e. horrible coach dices you, good coach logs in just before activating and schools you, etc.).
I wouldn't have the patience for that kinda crap. I just hope for 4+ coaches and preferably an even number of them. |
|
|
Calthor
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 18:40 |
|
Also, it's more or less impossible to do with a busy box like it is these days. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 18:43 |
|
You think? I think you underestimate the lengths some people will go to, tbh. If I can have a 20 second glance and check no idiots I've played thus far in the new box are over 80% on the game they're playing (and easily enough make a cup of tea for 15 minutes), I'm pretty confident if someone really wanted a few points they could grease the wheels easily enough.
But let's not get sidetracked by one possible form of lameness (of course there are others) from a wider post in a thread about something else entirely! My bad (ish), I suppose. |
|
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 24, 2011 - 18:50 |
|
Well, I can't believe I'm posting seriously again, so soon, but here it is:
Make a monthly championship. Because the problem with decay is me. Ignoring my long absence, I still only play a certain amount, mostly dependent on my wife's varying work schedule, but it amounts, in little spurts, to just over a game a week, at most times. I can go longer, certainly. So, let's say I richly deserve a rating of 175 (I doubt it, but deal with it for the example). Then I have a week I can't play, JanMattys comes back, and I renew our Ranked Human rivalry, miss the next week, and get sucked into a tourney the 4th. I've missed a month in Box! My rating goes down. No bother to me, since we all know the only ratings that matter are the top ten lists, but, theoretically, I could lose ranking a bit, depending on interests and schedule. I know plans are for it to be minimal, but it would happen.
Now you, hypothetical coach, are getting pretty good, you probably are at a 168 level, but have had some luck and are at 175 yourself, and I've decayed down to 155 (number chosen for effect). As a measure of coach ability, you losing to me shouldn't be a big deal. If we both played all the time, I'd average out almost 10 points of rating higher than you. But since I've decayed, your rating will be punished for losing to me. I'm sure this could have been said more succinctly, but hopefully the point is made. If decaying irregular players is meant to help those who are eager to try and bring their rating up, this type of situation could make it do the opposite.
P.S. I believe that the OP did not mean to insult JackDaniels or question his motivation on a personal level. Please nobody else do it, either. There is nothing wrong with running a team, or running in a division towards achieving a particular purpose, and stopping when it is achieved. Period. |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
|
|
| |
FUMBBL HAIKU'S
Search
