xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
 Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 00:02 |
 
|
| huff wrote: | | With all that said... The Box is supposed to be a TV based matchmaker. |
"Supposed" according to who? That isn't mentioned in the description of B.
Plus "TV-based" does not mean "guaranteed equal TV". TV is still used as the main basis for making matches. |
_________________
 Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
huff
Joined: Dec 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 00:12 |
|
It does state "random fair matches" |
|
|
xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 00:18 |
|
Which still doesn't mean TV-based. But they are random, except for being TV-based. And they are fair, at least as much as even TV matches are fair.
So really, if you're going to complain about the games not being what B is "supposed" to be, you should be asking for the TV-basis to be removed and the randomness to be emphasised. As we've just been discussing, TV difference has very little effect on fairness. It's at least 4th on the list after racial bias, coach skill, and dice (not in that order). |
_________________
Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
huff
Joined: Dec 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 00:40 |
|
Interpet it how you will brotha, but the more we see these 220 vs 150 matches, the more this will become apparent and 'fixed' accordingly.
The fact that these big TV matchups happen now is just a residule effect from the efforts against min/max. So, while the description of the box hasn't changed over the past 2 months, the way teams get paired has.
You wanna go all rules lawyer on me, but just ask anyone else how teams are matched. It's gonna be 'TV-Based matchmaker' and in a intuitional sense, 'TV-Based' wouldn't allow a 600+ difference. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 00:47 |
|
| rikdon wrote: | | I like the idea of tht, i've been awy for 4 years and just came back. I have noticed already the over -abundence of blokki monster teams in box but i m yet to discover another way of playing. so t the moment i play with any of my teams in the box and take what i am given. the only team i never want to ply as or aginst is dorf as they are just so so dull. i will keep playing box with ny teams and see what happen. hopefully a few more people will try that and we are all more likely to get better gme |
Welcome back, look forward to blowing you to bits with Dirty Tricks in Box  |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 03:50 |
|
| huff wrote: | Interpet it how you will brotha, but the more we see these 220 vs 150 matches, the more this will become apparent and 'fixed' accordingly.
The fact that these big TV matchups happen now is just a residule effect from the efforts against min/max. So, while the description of the box hasn't changed over the past 2 months, the way teams get paired has.
You wanna go all rules lawyer on me, but just ask anyone else how teams are matched. It's gonna be 'TV-Based matchmaker' and in a intuitional sense, 'TV-Based' wouldn't allow a 600+ difference. |
TV based if there is another team in there with similar TV.
But if there are only 4 coaches in the Box are you saying that no one should get a game? That is what the added restriction would give us.
People need to be sharpening their claws and trimming the WMDs down a bit. 
Of course, if it were down to me we'd be tweaking the rules so that CPOMB & big TV gaps would be less of an issue.
But hey. We ain't doin that. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 07:46 |
|
| xnoelx wrote: | Which still doesn't mean TV-based. But they are random, except for being TV-based. And they are fair, at least as much as even TV matches are fair.
TV difference has very little effect on fairness. It's at least 4th on the list after racial bias, coach skill, and dice (not in that order). |
Well it's using a criteria for making fair match ups. Unfortunately players 'game' the system. You can't blame box for that.
TV is fine for gauging changes, it's also fine for making new teams. However the potential disparity between 2 200 TV teams, makes TV a weak match maker in a perpetual environment.
Would team success whip dice, TV, coach skill and racial bias hands down? After all winning is the objective, isn't it? |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 08:18 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: | | After all winning is the objective, isn't it? |
Well no. Not the objective. An objective.
If it was only (or even mainly) about winning there would be way more elf teams dodging to victory.
As far as I can tell the No. 1 objective in the Box is to get a game quickly.
Punishing people for winning games wasn't popular in the past and won't be popular in the future. Box isn't a league. Some people like playing it as if it were a league (hence Sprints) but I guess that many (most?) don't.
The current system gives young teams some protection. People mainly seem to start crying when their protection starts coming to an end.
Using your system I suspect (I can't remember what it was ) that the Wild Dragons would be worse off than they are now.
As it stands if my elves were in there the Dragons would probaly get them. Would you be giving them the WMDs every time? |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 08:33 |
|
Hello, thanks for that. I had written a fuller reply that got eaten by the Internet, but essentially, I'm happy to accept the answer when looking at numbers alone is 50 / 35. I would have expected it to be a bit wider, but even if it is not, that's still very significant in a competitive division where you're playing one off pickup games.
So, I'm satisfied. Fin.
(Typo edited) |
Last edited by Purplegoo on %b %03, %2014 - %09:%Dec; edited 1 time in total |
|
Dunenzed
Joined: Oct 28, 2011
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 08:44 |
|
Koadah's race v race stats have Lizardmen v Orcs at 51/19/30 from about 1100 games.
Should this pairing fall into the same unacceptable category as the result bias the comes from large TV gaps? |
_________________
Join the Human League Premiership! |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 08:49 |
|
| Dunenzed wrote: | Koadah's race v race stats have Lizardmen v Orcs at 51/19/30 from about 1100 games.
Should this pairing fall into the same unacceptable category as the result bias the comes from large TV gaps? |
Yes! I hates lizardmen more than I hates the CPOMBers. 
Not sure if Cameronhawkins should take that personally or not. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 08:51 |
|
| Dunenzed wrote: | Koadah's race v race stats have Lizardmen v Orcs at 51/19/30 from about 1100 games.
Should this pairing fall into the same unacceptable category as the result bias the comes from large TV gaps? |
Nope. People can choose what race they use and how they spend their TV. |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 08:55 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | harvestmouse wrote: | | After all winning is the objective, isn't it? |
Well no. Not the objective. An objective.
If it was only (or even mainly) about winning there would be way more elf teams dodging to victory.
As far as I can tell the No. 1 objective in the Box is to get a game quickly.
Punishing people for winning games wasn't popular in the past and won't be popular in the future. Box isn't a league. Some people like playing it as if it were a league (hence Sprints) but I guess that many (most?) don't.
The current system gives young teams some protection. People mainly seem to start crying when their protection starts coming to an end.
Using your system I suspect (I can't remember what it was ) that the Wild Dragons would be worse off than they are now.
As it stands if my elves were in there the Dragons would probaly get them. Would you be giving them the WMDs every time? |
Well if you want to be pedantic about it, you're right.......we could make our aims and objectives anything we want. However the overall objective laid out is to win things. Winning 'eventually' and winning today though, need different aims and short-term objectives.
Short term objective (like getting a game quickly) are not so different to your aims. The objective of launching to get a game quickly, would be to win, or another aim (build a team to win something in the future).
Well I and many others had no sympathy for Duke and this team's plight. My system would indeed not favour him and until he started losing. However if/when that happened, he should then get a recovery, unlike now where there is no safety net at all. Winning games is the objective. However it needs to be an objective that is rewarding.
I'm pretty sure at some points, Duke could have built his team, so that injuries had less of an impact. However he's all about winning, and we all know that. He's lost team security for team wins.
I really don't see the problem with that team. If he was losing games and not being able to recover, then yes. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 11:00 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: |
Well if you want to be pedantic about it, you're right.......we could make our aims and objectives anything we want. However the overall objective laid out is to win things. Winning 'eventually' and winning today though, need different aims and short-term objectives. |
I don't know what you mean by pedantic in this context.
The more important goal for me is to enjoy my time playing. Winning may add to the enjoyment but it is not necessarily a big part of it. Sometimes it is. Sometimes it isn't.
I don't 'play Majors or official tournaments mainly because winning and progressing to the next round is not enough compensation for having to schedule matches late at night or early in the morning.
Winning vs the WMDs may be a great buzz even if your team gets destroyed. But if the next team and the next is a WMD clone then... pfft.
You need four coaches for a draw to run. Making it too hardcore for the more casual coach means slow (or maybe quick) death.
| harvestmouse wrote: | | Short term objective (like getting a game quickly) are not so different to your aims. The objective of launching to get a game quickly, would be to win, or another aim (build a team to win something in the future). |
It it all about winning then I am not sure why you are so against min/maxing.
When you say 'something' what do you mean? Matches? Currently there is no official 'something'
| harvestmouse wrote: |
Well I and many others had no sympathy for Duke and this team's plight. My system would indeed not favour him and until he started losing. However if/when that happened, he should then get a recovery, unlike now where there is no safety net at all. Winning games is the objective. However it needs to be an objective that is rewarding.
I'm pretty sure at some points, Duke could have built his team, so that injuries had less of an impact. However he's all about winning, and we all know that. He's lost team security for team wins.
I really don't see the problem with that team. If he was losing games and not being able to recover, then yes. |
I don't have much sympathy for the team either but I can see why he might not want to use it.
And if he prefers to use the Slime Barons then that may well help discourage some people from playing at all. So more "not enough teams" draws.
So sure, I might use your idea in a league. But not the Box.
The Box still lives because it is bit of a compromise. Without the casual boys & girls to make up the numbers it's doomed. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 03, 2014 - 12:36 |
|
Ok by, pedantic I meant you're nit picking at small details. However maybe we are on crossed wave lengths, so I'll explain what I mean.
I think 'having fun' is an aim of 'the game'. It is also an objective as well of course, but they are not connected. Let me explain.
"I will have fun (aim) by 'insert your objectives'". Completing your objectives, also means you will have had fun. Finishing a game, is of course completing an objective.
There are 3 areas that cover objectives, these objectives are totally different. Our objectives and the game's (by game I don't mean the game we are playing, but the fantasy game the icons/lead figures are playing) objectives are not the same. So yeah, I see your points, I also agree with your points.
So we could break it down into 3 areas of main areas of objectives
Ours
Main
To have fun
Minor
To win the game
To make progress with our team
Individual and irregular objectives (complete a larson, raise a zombie etc)
Game (GW board game)
To provide a balanced game
To be fun to play
To have depth so that the players return
Game (Fantasy game played by the team)
To win the game.
To progress to win games in the future.
We could even add more categories; like the players objectives:
To survive the game.
To put food on the table for the family.
To reap skulls for the blood god.
Having fun objective, has absolutely nothing to do with the game the figures are playing. They're getting killed out there!!! They aren't having fun! I hope my meaning is clearer now.
So you aren't playing Majors! Can we bring back traits?
Well, nobody can be sure what's going on in Duke's head on this one. Winning is very important to him of course.
I think part of it is making a point. If you won't let me play elves how I wish to, so be it, I'll make everybody's environment a living hell.
That said, I can understand the frustration of this happening to a team. However that's a different fix. I'd like to put into place such fixes, however I'm not sure they'd make box a more popular environment.
Thinking about it, I think might fix may have favoured Duke's team (obviously depending on the exact formula of course). Remembering that teams that lose TV, get a more favourable match up next game. So he's been on a downward spiral for a while. If, the first game back recovery was against a less bashy team, he may never have got into the problems he now has. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
