origami
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
|
 Posted:
Apr 29, 2004 - 14:54 |
 
|
Exactly what I was trying to say. Nobody is forced to use team strength or coach rating, neither of which are, as pointed out above, in the LRB. Therefore, why worry about it? |
|
|
AsperonThorn
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 29, 2004 - 17:06 |
|
| Gibbering_Gambits wrote: | | Team Rating does not track potency of a team on a game by game basis, it is a blanket figure or average if every player on your roster were to play every game that is aproximately how Team Rating rates a team. To conclude, in order to keep score of coaching ability and nothing else the Str formula almost works perfectly, it is not a part of the game it is a part of the (R) division and fundamental to the scoring in it. |
Team Rating doesn not only track potency it also tracks a coaches off pitch skill. Coaches that take gambles like retiring a MNG player in order to prevent people from cherry picking thier team in an injured state, making sure that thier cash is spent instead of sitting there, and making sure that the system in place to encourage player turnover is being used are all a part of the skill of playing BB in a league. Need I remind you that even in the open format Fumbbl IS a league and as such, follows league rules.
STR only rewards people for not caring about thier team. A TR 550 team of str 167 can very likely beat a TR 160 of STR 161 team, even if only 5 players show up.
Coaches that do take care of their injuries, manage thier money well, and make sure that thier spp's are evenly distributed have a right to "cherry pick" teams that don't. Like you have all said the ranking system should be a telling of how good the coach is, but on pitch playing is not the only part of coaching, there is also team management, and game arrangement (choosing thier matches). If I am good at all three I should be able to have that reflected on my coaches ranking. Coaches ranking should not be pased purely on my Uber massively injured team that when half of it shows up, can decimate an equal Str team because they don't even have a skill on all of thier guys yet.
| origami wrote: | | Exactly what I was trying to say. Nobody is forced to use team strength or coach rating, neither of which are, as pointed out above, in the LRB. Therefore, why worry about it? |
Actually, that is exactly what is happening. My favorite teams are ranked. They have always been in open. I play competitively with those teams. And now I am forced to A) Not play some opponents I wish to play, or wish to play me. or B) Move my team into a Division in which it doesn't belong.
Asperon Thorn |
|
|
Mezir
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 29, 2004 - 17:12 |
|
AsperonThorn: If your opponent manages TR so badly his TR is far higher than his STR, while yours isn't, you will get rewarded for it. You'll get handicaps. |
_________________
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day; set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. |
|
AsperonThorn
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 29, 2004 - 18:02 |
|
| Mezir wrote: | | AsperonThorn: If your opponent manages TR so badly his TR is far higher than his STR, while yours isn't, you will get rewarded for it. You'll get handicaps. |
What if I want to play a game without handicaps? What if I want to play a game of equal TR? What is so wrong with allowing me to even in ranked matches? What if someone on this board reading my comments wants to prove to me that keeping niggles on thier team is far superior then replacing them?
The point I am trying to make is people shouldn't hide behind the str formula to avoid the fact that they play a violent game with violent consequences. Yes they may have players out for the next game, but thats the way the cookie crumbles, learn to deal with it. Good Coaches learn to deal with it. Coaches that hide behind STR to avoid "Cherry picking" aren't good, they are coaches that just try and play one aspect of the game and then only on thier terms. This is coming from someone that plays elves, so don't use my comments as another bashy coach trying to distract you from the fact that his players are tougher, thats not the case at all. I play down, I play hurt, I play to win no matter the cost.
Asperon Thorn |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 29, 2004 - 19:53 |
|
| AsperonThorn wrote: | | ...My favorite teams are ranked. They have always been in open. I play competitively with those teams. And now I am forced to A) Not play some opponents I wish to play, or wish to play me. or B) Move my team into a Division in which it doesn't belong. |
Well, you've agreed to the rules which said you have to play 'close' games. The Commissioner's/Admins' definition of "close" has been defined since then as an 80 STR spread (+ or - 40 points). Being forbidden from playing teams that are within 100 and 200 STR and more than 40 STR away from your own team is really just a quantified version of what was already the rules which you already agreed to. It's just been clarified.
Now, I know. Please don't say it. STR is an imaginary number that's being inflicted upon your teams, right? Yes. It is an entirely arbitrary, imaginary number used for league purposes. Yes. I agree with that. Entirely arbitrary like Faction 2a or 27 Ladder points, right? Nothing to do with Bloodbowl, just has to do with FUMBBL. See the difference?
You don't think it should be used to determine matches. Sure. No problem with that. Ignore it. Just double-check it to make sure your match is valid in the eyes of the admins and the rules. Is this really such an enormous cross to bear?
As far as Ranked being the new Open and the only place where your teams belong, how's this? Unranked is actually the new open. You can play LRB-only teams if you like and you can play whomever you like, whenever you like. That was what Open was, right?
With the new changes, I think Ranked is now like Ladder or Factions. A league with a specific purpose - whether it's ladder points or faction grouping or team ranking. Just because people's teams happend to default into R, it's the most popular.
Like, dislike, flame or accept as you wish. It's all just another possible perspective for you. Note that this is not to say that you're wrong - simply that you are not necessarily right, either. |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
Mully
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 29, 2004 - 20:21 |
|
Mojo you plagiarizing bastard !!
You stole my points from another thread on a similar topic (New Divisions).
Either that or GREAT minds think alike. |
_________________
Owner of the REAL Larson
Come join the CCC League |
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 29, 2004 - 20:34 |
|
|
Grumbledook
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 29, 2004 - 20:35 |
|
ranked is the new open, unranked is for lamers who can't win
that should set the cat amoungst the pigeons |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 29, 2004 - 21:05 |
|
|
Gibbering_Gambits
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 29, 2004 - 21:57 |
|
| Quote: | AsperonThorn wrote:
...My favorite teams are ranked. They have always been in open. I play competitively with those teams. And now I am forced to A) Not play some opponents I wish to play, or wish to play me. or B) Move my team into a Division in which it doesn't belong.
|
How exactly are you forced? and why would your team not belong in the (U) division. The rules to the (R) division are now set-up so that it is more competative than ever. If you want to play in the ranked division, then play in it by its rules. Just like people who play in Ladder may not want to play up or down but have to by a factor which is not a part of the LRB, so too must coaches who want their ranking (which is non LRB) to be rated play by a set of non LRB factors.
If you want to play according to the LRB with no restrictions then play in (U). Do you really think the people who used to play the lopsided-according-to-STR-games won't play similar matches in (U)?!?! And yes there are non LRB teams in (U) but it doesnt mean you have to play them. I really as I said before see no argument here for complaint, Christer and the admins have done an admirable job creating any type of playing environment for any type of player, we should all be thanking them and using the tools at our disposal instead of complaining. |
|
|
AsperonThorn
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 02:07 |
|
| Grumbledook wrote: | | ranked is the new open, unranked is for lamers who can't win |
There you have it, straight from an admin. My Open teams, that are ranked. That have been ranked. That I have carefully been managed to maximize thier potential, are now FORCED to play somewhere else. OR not play against the opponents it wishes to play against. OR Both.
The people I play against with the teams that I like to play, play competitively. That means RANKED. Sometimes those teams are more then 40 STR apart. I don't go looking for games 40 below my str, but if someone lower than that challenges me, then I will oblige. I have also challenged teams well above my str, as well. If I see a team that is 50 Str above me, but has no tackle then my blodgy elves are sure the hell going to try and challenge them. That isn't cherry picking using the above definition, it is cherry picking because of a skill mismatch. But I damn well should be able to use that for my ranking. Same as some TR 100 dwarves challenging my STR 160 elves, because I was retarded enough to only put block and dodge on my team.
There are lots of leagues, but there is only one that is ranked. And it should be ranked on the total skill of the coach, not just his on-pitch playing style, or his one uber player.
| Mr. Mojo wrote: | | Well, you've agreed to the rules which said you have to play 'close' games. The Commissioner's/Admins' definition of "close" has been defined since then as an 80 STR spread (+ or - 40 points). |
"Close" may have been defined but at least it had some flexability. It allowed for people to challenge Tough teams from way low. And that was sillier then than it is now, because at least now we have a rudimentary handicap table.
Asperon Thorn |
|
|
Mnemon
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 02:18 |
|
Well you (and Grumbledook) are outright wrong to assume that people in unranked don't play competitive. But we play competitive for the sake of the game not for some superficially made up ranking number that gives people a feeling of being "superior".
-Mnemon |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 02:58 |
|
| AsperonThorn wrote: | | Grumbledook wrote: | | ranked is the new open, unranked is for lamers who can't win |
There you have it, straight from an admin. My Open teams, that are ranked. That have been ranked. |
Given Grum's proven track record of objectivity, I'm sure none would dare refute that.1
| AsperonThorn wrote: | | That I have carefully been managed to maximize thier potential, are now FORCED to play somewhere else. OR not play against the opponents it wishes to play against. OR Both. |
So you're forced to play somewhere else... yet you have options? Doesn't sound like being forced to me. Also, FORCED makes it sound as though a squad of elite FUMBBL Commandos is showing up on your doorstep and chaining you to your keyboard until you play a game against someone with 'flings named after famous used car salesmen. Try to keep some perspective here...2
| AsperonThorne wrote: | | The people I play against with the teams that I like to play, play competitively. That means RANKED. |
My evil twin Mnemon and I would disagree, as I'm sure would as well. You're implying that no one actually tries to win when playing Factions or Ladder and that's plain silly.3
| AsperonThorn wrote: | | Sometimes those teams are more then 40 STR apart. I don't go looking for games 40 below my str, but if someone lower than that challenges me, then I will oblige. I have also challenged teams well above my str, as well. If I see a team that is 50 Str above me, but has no tackle then my blodgy elves are sure the hell going to try and challenge them. That isn't cherry picking using the above definition, it is cherry picking because of a skill mismatch. But I damn well should be able to use that for my ranking. Same as some TR 100 dwarves challenging my STR 160 elves, because I was retarded enough to only put block and dodge on my team. |
So your argument is that the teams that you want to play competitively are 41 TS or more apart from yours, right? Now I know that you're talking about specific rosters compared to each other and viewing them carefully and taking things into account, but isn't this as a rule of thumb, rather than in every specific case exactly what people were whining about? And you want them overruled because you have the ability to discern whether or not you are likely to win...
Sorry. Still sounds like the much beleagured cherrypicking to me.4
| AsperonThorn wrote: | | There are lots of leagues, but there is only one that is ranked. And it should be ranked on the total skill of the coach, not just his on-pitch playing style, or his one uber player. |
Why not only play games against teams with an equal number of matches under their belt? That's a way to make sure that everyone is playing against equivalently experienced teams, right? No, I don't think so either. I only brought it up because there are multiple ways of trying to determine what's a fair matchup. The one that the powers that be here on FUMBBL have decided upon is TS.5
| Asperon Thorn wrote: | | "Close" may have been defined but at least it had some flexability. It allowed for people to challenge Tough teams from way low. And that was sillier then than it is now, because at least now we have a rudimentary handicap table. |
Now this seems to contradict most of what you said before. The 80 TS span that you're allowed to play in was put in place to keep lamers from taking advantage of that flexability while still allowing enough for the sake of fun. You have teams that (as of my writing this) can play any opponent from 0 to 232 ST. There are 152 teams in open that you are can't to play and 14,170 that you can. Surely you can find a game. Soon, (once those DEs get 8 more STR) you can literally play at least one of your teams against any team in Ranked.6
I know, I know. Those are the only 152 teams that you _want_ to play, right?7 |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 03:28 |
|
Idiot's Guide to post # 29043
Just because some people are sure to take the above the wrong way, here's the footnotes.
Overall. No, I'm not attacking AsperonThorn here. He just seems to be in an equally argumentative mood and I love a good debate.
1- That's sarcasm. Not to undermine Grum's infinite authority or anything, but we all know that he's a wee bit on the ... opinionated side.
2- The excessive use of the word FORCE(D) actually just reminded me of my favorite brick wall to argue with, so I must pick on that at every possible opportunity. Also, FORCED to do something or NOT is sort of an oxymoron, which is the point I was trying to make here.
3- Erm... well... Ok. It is silly. Saying that no one else dares to try to win unless they're rank whoring is just plain silly. Sorry. No excuses here.
4- Whether or not you like TS, you have to admit that it does at least approximate your team's strength (hence the catchy name) for any particular match. Just for that one match and only approximately, but can we all agree on that? Just like a TR 200 team will be _approximately_ better than a TR 100 team. Yes, there are exceptions (ie: a TR 100 team with $1Mil. in the bank, however unlikely that may be) but as a rule of thumb, one's generally better off than the other. Same thing with TS.
I was attempting to playfully pick on AT's argument that the 40 TS rule is too limiting by pointing out that matches with a greater differential are generally pretty much lopsided and violate both the spirit and the intention on the rules. In spite of joking about it some, I don't think the point is any less valid.
5- The idea of this reply is that there are multiple ways of running a league. AT's getting a little carried away, in my opinion, with the notion that his are better than everyone else's. However good they may be, he's not the one who dictates the rules and therefore such sanctimonious talk is really not beneficial.
6- There is no 6. Why? It's the idiot's guide... you think anyone proofreads these?
7- I just love throwing statistics in peoples faces. The point I was trying to raise is that he is literally a incredibly close (a rookie thrower away!) to being allowed to play his team against the remaining 1% or so teams in ranked which are currently forbidden to him (note, forbidden, not FORCED NOT TO. Sounds much better, don't you agree?). I fully respect trying to keep your TR below 200 for cash purposes and for handicaps. However, just as that is managing your team in a league environment, so is keeping your TS within range of teams you wish to play. Think of it as league-specific management.
For the record, I actually don't like the 40 TS rule either. I wish it was not necessary. However the powers that be have a right to enforce the rules how they see fit. |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
Tribble_the_Unclean
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 04:32 |
|
Again, I will restate this point.
I have no problem with a ranked division. But why are we forced to play in the ranked division if we want to play a somewhat LRB-compliant game? |
|
|
|
|
| |
Chaos Draft League R...
Search
