18 coaches online • Server time: 06:17
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post NA Blackbox go go go...goto Post ARR Sprint results O...goto Post FUMBBLer of the Year...
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic

Joined: Oct 25, 2003

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 17:43 Reply with quote Back to top


Apparently i once said this:
<i>My goal is to game in a way that makes me happy, and to try not to even imply, let alone state, that anyone else's choices of how to game are in any way lesser than mine.</i>

Now, I'm not sure i actually did say it, but i wish i had, so from now on i'm going to pretend i did. I also stand by it. But 'gaming' and 'meta-gaming' are entirely different things. And thats even more true for 'meta-(non)gaming'. I feel the B rankings suffer from this.

Theoretical non-existant coach 'JimBeam' might decide to play B, get himself a decent ranking on the top 10, then stop playing entirely. I feel this brings stagnation to the only ranking/stats in B and have for a long time stood by and said nothing. Well, enough. I am going to stick my neck out and say coaches like 'JimBeam' ought not to be on the top 10 list. It's throtling B and killing the only incentivising stat B curently has.

We have one coach on the B top ten that hasn't played a game in B since early april 2009. Their ranking is historical, and entirely nonsense. We have others that play the 'occasional' game in B, pretty much once every few months, probably in the mistaken idea that, like in R, if they don't their ranking will dissapear.

Now, i am sure some of you, if you have bothered to read this far, are thinking 'PC just wants to remove barriers to him being rated higher', to which i say ''pshaw, I have been there and done that. Got the T-Shirt.' But it does occur to me that the reason B players are asking for all the R Toys, is that their only toy is crappy and meaningless.

So, i think we need more toys, and better toys. And that coaches like entirely fictional non-real coach 'JimBeam' who use the rankings as fodder to feed their E-Penii Ego need to be weeded out of the system. B , if it truely is to be a 'competitive' division, has the right to list and laud only coaches actually competing, and not ones that did so once, and now no longer do.

So i have brainstormed some ideas that would hopefully refresh B, but i have no idea if they are practical, as i'm not smart enough to work stuff like that out. Also some of these are very bad ideas that i havn't thought through at all, but i am trying to generate debate.

1: Can we have a B rankings system that is meaningfull please. At the very least lets drop coaches not playing B for 3 months. To be honest i think we could drop coaches that havnt played in 3-4 weeks. That allows plenty of time for even the poshest of holidays. And by drop i don't mean 'not show the ranking' i mean reduce their ranking to 150, so they can't just come back and play one game before dissapearing again. I was here on fumbbl many moons ago when the CR sytem was reset, and know what? the same people floated very quickly to the top. thats the beauty of an ELO based system, if your rating is way too low for your ability, it doesnt take long for the system to sort that out.

2: Lets allow the 'measuring my self worth by looking at a list of numbers and seeing my name high up' guys have their thrill with an 'all time top BWR' list. showing the BWR peak for each coach. Alterantively we could have a 'most games whilst staying rated No.1 list. But personally i think that would be dull.

3: Why not a 'biggest 5 BWR winners/losers in the last week/month' list. IF people truely think BWR is a decent measure of their playing, a list showing who is moving up and who is on a bad streak might be fun.

4: A 'Who is clean and who is mean' list. we have a BBR stat, so why not a top 5 for high BBR and for Low BBR. OF course some people would seek only to build their BBR, but then, some think that happens anyway.

5: Where is the list for BWR below 10th place? is there any reason we cant have a click button to show the entire list? of at least to show the 5 above and below your own place? Might be fun to see that after years of trying you are only as good as entirely fictional non-existant coach WillWasky.

6: Why doesnt BWR decay back towards 150. i don't much care what people did 6 months ago, wouldn't it be nice if BWR shows what you are up to now?If games in the last month were worth 12/12 of the BWR points gained, then after a month 11/12, then 10/12 then 9/12 etc etc, wouldn't we have a more real table?

7: If we accept the concerns about lack of diversity in B have any validity, then maybe a list somewhere public showing coaches that have used the most races in the last month would be fun and incentivise people to play more races. Would you try to score the perfect 21 in a month? to be honest i probably wouldn't, but i know people that would.

One probelm with ALL these ideas is that the minute any list of any kind exists, people will just meta-game, or indeed meta-(non)game, just to be on it/stay on it/top it etc etc. and maybe that would make B less competitive and less true to its ideals. But as no one seems entirely sure what that ideal is, or rather everyone is sure but no agrees with anyone else, I am not sure we'd lose much.

One thing i am sure of, every time i activate, and see coaches like entirely fictional non-existant coach 'jimBeam' on the rankings, i shake my head, and lose respect for what otherwise i might consider decent BB players.

Surely that can be sorted, somehow?

Barbarus hic ego sum quia non intelligor ulli
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone

Joined: Nov 28, 2005

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 18:02 Reply with quote Back to top

Yes, it would be nice if BWR decayed over time.. I counted 3 guys in top10 that haven't played this year. iZ saD I saiZ

ps. and remove orcses from fumbbl too kk plZ thX ! <3

Joined: Mar 07, 2006

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 18:10 Reply with quote Back to top



i didn't read it all, but I agree.

maybe remove coaches from the list who haven't played in a month, etc?


Joined: Dec 29, 2008

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 18:10 Reply with quote Back to top

5. has been a pet peeve of mine for a while. If you're not top 10, no one else sees your BWR/BBR.

Ideas for some meta-statistic top lists:

-BWR + BBR = All Around Boxer
-BWR - BBR = Most Elven
-BBR - BWR = Top Psychopath
-CR - BWR = Degree of Cherrypicking

Joined: Apr 08, 2007

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 18:25 Reply with quote Back to top

JimBeam...nice choice of name there!

Other than that, absolutely spot on, as per the discussion recently we all had in IRC #blackbox.

Any coach named after a brand of whisky should be less ANAL....


Joined: Aug 07, 2006

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 18:33 Reply with quote Back to top

I haven't played blackbox in a long time, but to hear about all these interesting plans started me considering playing in B again. I like all the suggestions.

Could we also have this in Ranked that after 3 months of not playing in R you disappear from the lists? Currently we have a top 3 coach who hasn't played in R for well over a year.

Joined: Feb 18, 2004

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 18:34 Reply with quote Back to top

I agree with almost all of the points, except for decay, which I dislike alot.

I think coaches who have not played for 4 weeks should be hidden from the list, even if they do appear again after 1 game, they would still be active and each 4 weeks, they are still risking their rating drop.

Would really love to see a list of the all time top BWR's, just to find out how high I would stand in the list.

Joined: Jun 13, 2009

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 18:53 Reply with quote Back to top

Point 6: I would wholeheartedly agree to a system where my BWR would 'decay' up to 150 Wink

In seriousness though... I like a lot of the ideas. Particularly lists that would laud diversity (because it's the only list I could ever be on, I'll admit). If BWR was made more public, I'd rather like the idea of being able to hide mine. It's not the kind of thing that would cause me to drift from the division either way, but I'm more comfortable knowing that just because I've lost my last 10 games, I won't *immediately* be thought an idiot. Maybe I'm wrong, and folks already do (shout it out), but the fact that no one can tell if my BWR is 151 or 141 at the moment makes the division more fun for me.

3DB Highlander!
Fill the Box Grid!

Joined: May 25, 2004

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 19:09 Reply with quote Back to top

It might be annoying to receive a significant BWR hit just because you had the misfortunate of playing a strong player who had been away for a while. However, a rating decay to 150 isn't necessary since all we're currently observing is a) top ten, and b) our own position. Therefore decaying very high BWR players to a BWR of "a little under the usual top 10 level but not far off" would deal with a). There also should be some drop-out due to inactivity, so that my position in the rankings is only position with respect to active coaches, dealing with b). I don't mind if a top-10 capable player who doesn't play too much is always ranked higher than me in the overall rankings, because he's clearly better than me and deserves to be ranked higher than I do.

I dislike the idea of displaying all BWRs. Or at least keep it well-hidden from me, so I only find it if I purposefully look for it. I know my own and I know my position and I know who the very best are. I don't really want to see the BWR of the people I play, that makes it less fun for me.

Joined: Sep 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 19:36 Reply with quote Back to top

I think an "eternal" list should be kept, but a list like (1) or (6) should be added, so you can see the best "overall" and the best "active".

Joined: Jan 26, 2004

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 19:36 Reply with quote Back to top

I would like a top 10 list for every race. Top 10 ogre coaches, top 10 orc coaches, etc. One for reach race.

That's as far as I want B to go to encourage diversity.

Joined: Aug 22, 2003

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 19:36 Reply with quote Back to top

1) I really agree. In fact - I can remember such a thing being proposed before.
2) Why not...
3) Would be a fun stat, but might be quite resource intense, depending on the frequency of update.
4) I would prefer not to draw too much attention to the BBR stat. It works in strange ways and is mostly influenced by the racial choice.
5) I would love to see that. I would also like to see BWR next to CR on the overview page.
6) Decay in a closed system is really bad. Timed decay as you suggest is immensely complex, as every BWR adjustment is based on your pre-match-BWR.
7) Why not. Racial BWR might be a good solution, too.

Joined: Sep 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 20:00 Reply with quote Back to top

"Spot the Scientist": Don't use the first person singular, but the passive voice Smile

Joined: Nov 05, 2004

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 20:06 Reply with quote Back to top

i agree from another perspective, i occassionally play online games at flyordie.com... the rating you get there decays by 1 per day...

perhaps the same thing could be done in [B], and let the ratings decay slowly, and when it decays to 100 (yeah, i know it starts at 150) then the team/coach etc is removed...

sort of going into Faction-


The Congregation - Always Recruiting
[url=http://igolocal.net/badge.php?user_id=1949]Image [/url]

Joined: Dec 29, 2008

Post   Posted: Mar 02, 2010 - 20:23 Reply with quote Back to top

What if you kept your rating, but not your ranking, if you were idle. Generate the rankings from everyone who's played at least 3 games in the past week. That way you'd get a ranking based on the people who have been playing lately.

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