Melonhead
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
|
 Posted:
May 28, 2005 - 22:50 |
 
|
The biggest cherrypicking you see is with teams that exclusively play against elves, amazons and humans (and sometimes even skaven- ooh, scary).These (usually elf or skaven) coaches skill their teams with this in mind, taking tackle, and mighty blow when they can, all around. It sucks when my nurgles, who are "bashy" but concentrate on winning the game (with a -12 cas difference) can't get games vs any elves, while my own elves get more challenges from these people than I can possibly respond to. I know this is an open division, but some coaches just can't help but take advantage of that and abuse it to stroke their powergaming egos. It does take away from the fun of the game.
Of course the answer is to simply not play these coaches. I check teams' match records before I accept games now, and tell the challenger if their teams look like they've already played their share of elves, offering them a game with one of my other teams. I've yet to have someone accept. I don't understand this, as I take all comers with my elves, and I haven't been mauled too severely.
P.S....... I do still take challenges from EMU teams though...those bastards need to be put in their place!...  |
|
|
Britnoth
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 28, 2005 - 22:52 |
|
| MattDFan wrote: | | I, like many coaches play for the fun and the challenge not the ranking. |
I suspect the vast majority of coaches do, which begs the questions:
If most coaches dont care about coach ranking, why is it enforced?
If coaches play games for fun and not an abstract number that they don't consider a true measure of their skill, doesn't that breed a small group of coaches that can cherry pick easy games from them and inflate their CR to high levels, which make more and more people consider CR to be totally inaccurate, giving more and more coaches able to be cherry picked...
Maybe the solution here, is to enforce anti-cherry picking rules against such coaches, and that will revalidate the coach ranking in the eyes of everyone else and make them take it a little more seriously.
Or, bring back the opt-out. |
|
|
SpIkEdDeAmOn
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 28, 2005 - 22:57 |
|
You dont have to play if someone challanges you, so you dont like it, dont play it. Very simple. Stick to what you enjoy and just avoid the bits you dont enjoy. Sometimes you got to put up with it but thats just life |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 28, 2005 - 23:28 |
|
Hidden your CR!
I will then probably cherry pick more on weaker team: that chaos is perhaps played by a good coach.
Restart R teams, move it all to Open, let CR players plays between themself, work on ladder |
|
|
roos
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 28, 2005 - 23:30 |
|
I think we have a serious problem with all the debates on this subject. Every time someone brings up the subject there are loads of people posting arguments on how good Ranked is today or trying to recrute people to faction. And they are both right both divisions are good for a lot of people and we shouldnt be trying to take that away by changing ranked into something they wouldnt like or starting a league that takes the players away from faction.
We should focus on what we are really missing and think about how it can be implemented. From my own point of view that is:
A division where one can be fairly competative as a coach and as a team without putting the big effort and maintaining the continuety that faction forces upon You. No division provides that today. Ranked have become something else, and that something else is good too, but we need either a framework on top of ranked or a new division that fixis our problem. This is ofcourse completely my point of view and I'd like to ask others, what are You missing, I declare the list complete and thus before starting to sort out what is possible and what would be bad.
I'll simply start the brain torrent here and hope others fill in their view before we start the critisism of the ideas.
A div where people actually play to win their games, rather than other motives.
Get team ranking back, working this time.
No absololute demands on playing a specific number of games or specific ops to keep your rankings.
/roos |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 28, 2005 - 23:39 |
|
Isn't that exactely what I propose? |
|
|
hunter
Joined: Aug 11, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 29, 2005 - 00:02 |
|
| Quote: |
I honestly believe the best solutions are simple ones. My solution would to make coach ranking public or private. Everyone would still have a coach ranking which was taken into account when a game is played. However, with a private coach ranking only the coach himself can see his actual CR but for public CR everyone can see it. This way people can opt out of ranking and still enjoy the open format. Perhaps even the total win % and games could be hidden also.
It would make cherrypicking harder since not everyone would have a visible coach ranking and people would have to judge on team records rather than CR. It makes it less competative for people with private CR and harder to cherrypick for people who enjoy their CR.
Opinions?
|
I like these ideas- essentially give the option to make the "Coach Statistics" information presented on the info page, plus CR, hidden or viewable. The coach would always be able to see his or her own statististics and CR, but could keep others in the dark a bit. Of course, other coaches could still view someone's match record, development, and result stats, although I'd argue for the ability to hide development and result stats.
Would this solve the cherrypicking concern? Probably not, although it would make it a bit more difficult for the cherrypickers to select easy prey very quickly. As I see it, the only way to effectively reduce cherrypicking as much as possible would be to eliminate the ability for coaches to view the CR and game history of other coaches. That way, we would have to choose our matchups based only on TR/TS, race, and team composition.
I also liked the idea from a few days ago or last week, when someone mentioned forcing new coaches to make his or her first team in U. This would allow time to acclimate to the online version of the game, learn more of the rules and races, play matches that won't affect CR, and (theoretically) reduce the likelihood of getting cherrypicked.
Regards,
~hunter |
_________________
Stunty Leeg Central - For ALL your Stunty needs!  |
|
Trif
Joined: Jun 10, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 29, 2005 - 01:33 |
|
THE PROBLEM IS THAT MOST PEOPLE DONT WANT TO BE RANKED, THEY JUST WANT TO PLAY. BUT BECAUSE THERE ARE MORE TEAMS IN RANKED, YOU HAVE TO PLAY IN RANKED IF YOU WANT TO PLAY AT ALL
I think what we need to realise is that the number of people that play ranked for the coach ranking is miniscule compared to the number of people that play ranked because it's the best place to get games.....
i think it's wrong that so many people start playing in ranked, with coaches trickling to the other divisions when they figure out how the site works, and what they prefer.
i think that we should have a new division that has all the basic qualities of ranked without CR, and it should be promoted as the main division on FUMBBL. it should have all the official tournaments and maintain the "official LRB teams only" rules, etc. perhaps it could be called the OPEN division, with ranked remaining as it is, but as a secondary division. all coaches would be able to move their current ranked teams to this division, allowing them to maintain some continuity while playing in a much more relaxed and fun environment.
I just feel that CR is made to be such a large part of the FUMBBL site, which goes totally against everything i have found to be true; that a broader, more balanced experience can be achieved in the other divisions. |
_________________
"no overgrown dog-monkey pulls an uzi on my family in the middle of a strip joint and gets away with it!"
"Now that's an esophagous!" |
|
Trif
Joined: Jun 10, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 29, 2005 - 01:34 |
|
oh yeah, and i like the idea of medals too =) |
_________________
"no overgrown dog-monkey pulls an uzi on my family in the middle of a strip joint and gets away with it!"
"Now that's an esophagous!" |
|
vanGorn
Joined: Feb 24, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 29, 2005 - 01:48 |
|
It is a vicious circle.
More matches are played in ranked.
-> It gets easier to find matches in ranked than in unranked.
-> Coaches who hardly find matches in unranked switch to ranked
-> More matches are played in ranked |
_________________
Gimme a pint of fungus beer!
Then we will climb the ladder.
 |
|
Captain1821
Joined: Jun 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 29, 2005 - 02:50 |
|
I believe that [R] is the hardest/most competitive division. No matter how many times I tried to take a good place at the championship of a month I failed. I tried to take a good place by cheerypicking and failed because I lost a simple game and had low "difficulty". I tried to take a good place by playing with stronger teams (so I can have a high "difficulty") and failed too.
[R] is more competitive than faction (faction 1 is 60% cheerypicking) and it is harder than unranked tournaments.
Why?
Because the best coaches are in [R]! Many of the best coaches don't have time for faction and tournaments. They come to play a ranked game one or two times per week and they kick your ass with their less stronger team. They have low CR because a)they don't care and b)they need those one or two games per week to be hard and chalenging.
If those coaches are taken out of [R] (by taking most teams in [U]), then [R] will become something like faction or unranked tourney and we will lose the most competitive part of FUMBBL.
-----------------------------
As it has been said, teams can be categorized in 2 or 3 or 4 groups.
A mesure against cheerypicking could be to force every team to play at least a team from each group in every 10 games.
----------------------------
Another thing against cheerypicking could be to force the coaches to have a "difficulty" of atleast 0.95 (or better 0.97) after every month with a penalty of -2 (or something) CR points if they fail.
Also the penalty could change depending on how low is the "difficulty" at the end of the month.
Official tournament games should not count for this, since you don't pick your opponent. |
_________________
STATUS: CLOWN |
|
Mezir
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 29, 2005 - 12:17 |
|
Since the Championship is part of Ranked, I'd like to bring that up here.
I just checked the Championship for the last two months, and saw a coach who had won all of his Ranked matches for the last two months. Around 30 of them. Finding this amazing I went back and checked those matches. The average Coach Ranking played against was 137. For a coach with CR 166, that's no challenge at all.
This, again, is the problem of cherry-picking, and it makes me feel that the Championship should have another variable added other than Difficulty, or that the Difficulty variable should be changed - because obviously the Difficulty of the matches played here is closer to 70 than to its current value of 97.
My idea would be to change the formula to one of these (I've added a bit about how the forumla would affect difficulty in each one):
1) Difficulty = (Total Opponent Strength + Total Opponent Coach Rank)/(Total Your Strength + Total Your Coach Rank)
2) Difficulty = (Total Opponent Strength)/(Total Your Strength + (Total Your Coach Rank - Total Opponent Coach Rank))
2a) Difficulty = (Total Opponent Strength - (Total Your Coach Rank - Total Opponent Coach Rank))/(Total Your Strength)
3) Difficulty = (Total Opponent Coach Rank)/(Total Your Coach Rank + (Total Your Strength - Total Opponent Strength)
3a) Difficulty = (Total Opponent Coach Rank - (Total Your Strength - Total Opponent Strength))/(Total Your Coach Rank)
The first formula ranks CR and Strength equally.
The second two formulas (2 and 2a) give CR more weight than Strength. The first formula is more rewarding to a coach playing up in CR, while the second formula is more punitive to a coach playing down in CR. Personally in this case I would suggest using formula 2a since playing down in CR is what we are trying to prevent.
Formulas 3 and 3a are pretty much the same as formulas 2 and 2a, except here more weight is placed on Strength than Coach Rank. However, in this case we don't have a way of punishing coaches for playing down in CR more than they are rewarded for playing up.
My next suggestion is this formula:
Difficulty = (Total Opponent Strength - K * (Total Your Coach Rank - Total Opponent Coach Rank))/(Total Your Strength)
where K is a number smaller than one, say 0.5. (I would need to run a series of tests on this formula to see how it evaluates CR compared to formula 1 - if you want me to do so you can give me a prod). This formula would place less emphasis on CR, though depending on the value of K this may be more or less than that on Strength. It would punish coaches for playing down, and reward them somewhat if they played up. This way it would have a minimal effect on most people, but would be a heavy detergent for people who would like to abuse the system by playing down a whopping 30 Coach Rank on average.
The formula may possibly need to be edited to a normalised CR scale, so a coach at CR 180 playing a CR 150 coach is less affected than a coach at CR 165 playing a CR 135 coach.
This can be done as follows (last formula guys!):
Difficulty = (Total Opponent Strength - X * ((Total Your Coach Rank)/(Total Opponent Coach Rank) - 1))/(Total Your Strength)
Where X = K * 150
I think that CR should at least factor into the Difficulty score somewhere... The current system has shown itself open to abuse. It's just no fun seeing someone win the Championship two months running like this. |
_________________
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.
Last edited by Mezir on %b %29, %2005 - %12:%May; edited 3 times in total |
|
Funso
Joined: Apr 05, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 29, 2005 - 12:29 |
|
We already have Faction, as I mentioned, which is easily the most competetive part of Fumbbl.
Silly clown. Ranked most competetive, pff.  |
|
|
Kommando
Joined: Dec 08, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 29, 2005 - 13:34 |
|
| Trif wrote: | THE PROBLEM IS THAT MOST PEOPLE DONT WANT TO BE RANKED, THEY JUST WANT TO PLAY. BUT BECAUSE THERE ARE MORE TEAMS IN RANKED, YOU HAVE TO PLAY IN RANKED IF YOU WANT TO PLAY AT ALL
i think that we should have a new division that has all the basic qualities of ranked without CR, and it should be promoted as the main division on FUMBBL. it should have all the official tournaments and maintain the "official LRB teams only" rules, etc. perhaps it could be called the OPEN division, with ranked remaining as it is, but as a secondary division. all coaches would be able to move their current ranked teams to this division, allowing them to maintain some continuity while playing in a much more relaxed and fun environment.
|
i really couldn't agree more. |
|
|
Candlejack
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 29, 2005 - 14:40 |
|
riiight... make ANOTHER division... that will _really_ help.. NOT...
if SO many people don't want to be ranked.. why does noone then want to play divx? it's not ranked.. has the LRB-compliant teams.. you can have 5 slots.. all like ranked.. the only main difference is.. it has no ageing, about most of the people bitch and moan most of the time..
just making another divison will not help at all, it will just split up everything even more.. |
_________________
--
The Sanity Resort |
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
