MightyQuinn
Joined: Jan 13, 2004
|
 Posted:
Oct 23, 2006 - 20:52 |
 
|
Any reason each team doesnt have a ranking instead of the coach having an overall ranking ???
I have seen certain tournaments have coach ranking requirements, like for instance in the Fumbbl Cup, one tournament is listed as High CR Coaches...
For example the XFL Ogre tournament is coming up... I have been looking at other peoples Ogre teams and noticed that there are alot of coaches with low CR's with better records then those of higher cr...
I have noticed people now playing in certain tournaments building NAF style teams (Low FF, like 1) just for the tournaments, raising their CR, then retiring the teams...
In the past I have heard people saying they were going to play a certain race to lower their Coach Ranking for some odd reason...
I think it would be much better if each team had a ranking then the coach having an overall one...
Thoughts ? |
Last edited by MightyQuinn on %b %23, %2006 - %20:%Oct; edited 2 times in total |
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 23, 2006 - 20:54 |
|
Um.... Because there is a team rating? You can learn success with one team (or have it due to great skill rolls), and not be a great over-all Coach. I think what I get from you is that you want CR to mean something different, in which case you have much support from people not me! |
_________________
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 |
|
GuitarHero
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 23, 2006 - 20:58 |
|
Well, the reality of it is, the teams record is it's coach rating. CR takes into account whether you win or lose, and ts. The only difference is the teams record doesn't account for playing teams with lower/higher TS, but looking at the teams match record would. |
|
|
Arktoris
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 23, 2006 - 21:10 |
|
it used to be called "ladder points", but that wasn't received too well. |
_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
MightyQuinn
Joined: Jan 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 23, 2006 - 21:10 |
|
I changed the wording from rating to ranking not to get confused with the teams tr...
I guess I am looking at it like the NAF does it where each coach has a ranking for each race they play... Some coaches play certain races better then other races...
It just seems odd when you have a coach ranking of 170 and your goblin's record is like 0/0/16. (just an example) It seems a coach is getting credit for being better because of other teams/races he plays...
I guess I am looking at it a bit differently... |
|
|
BusterXXXL
Joined: Jul 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 23, 2006 - 21:12 |
|
| MightyQuinn wrote: |
I have noticed people now playing in certain tournaments building NAF style teams (Low FF, like 1) just for the tournaments, raising their CR, then retiring the teams...
Thoughts ? |
In other tournaments there are TR requirements. If you manage to push a team to TR 200 with a starting FF of 1 you deserve it.
And when the tournament is actually about low-ratied or even noob teams the coach who doesnt build frontloaded is a fool.
I think winning in a tournament is a big reward per se for many coaches, so no tweeking the CR could change them from trying as hard as possible. And yes, thats BloodBowl. It sounds like someting unmoralic to do, the way you describe it |
|
|
freak_in_a_frock
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 23, 2006 - 21:12 |
|
We did used to have this system when 'Ranked' was called 'Open'. I can't remember why it was taken away, but i am sure there was a good reason behind it. |
|
|
MightyQuinn
Joined: Jan 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2006 - 10:46 |
|
Well heres one reason I think a team ranking instead of the coach having an overall ranking, I just played a 177 coach and his dwarfs in RRR, I was 152 with my necromantics... Thanks to his previous opponent killing 3 of his players, he only had 8 players for the game, even though they had more skills then me... I won 2-0 my CR went up 5 points to 157 and his dropped to 172... Had he had 11 players, even 10, it would have been a totally different game... So my overall coach ranking got a big boosts due to this game and its not a true reflection of his coaching or mine, I just got lucky... Hopefully all my future opponents have 8 players  |
|
|
spelledaren
Joined: Mar 06, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2006 - 10:54 |
|
If you want to know how good a coach is with a race, look at win record for teams with that race.
Easy enough? |
_________________
FUMBBL! |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2006 - 11:00 |
|
| freak_in_a_frock wrote: | | We did used to have this system when 'Ranked' was called 'Open'. I can't remember why it was taken away, but i am sure there was a good reason behind it. |
We had it taken away because it led to mighty cherrypicking with the flag teams of certain coaches, who did their best to make their team the most successful in terms of rating. |
_________________
 |
|
Panda_
Joined: Jul 14, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2006 - 11:30 |
|
No |
_________________
"Rien ne sert de partir a point, il vaut mieux courir." |
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2006 - 11:37 |
|
| JanMattys wrote: | | freak_in_a_frock wrote: | | We did used to have this system when 'Ranked' was called 'Open'. I can't remember why it was taken away, but i am sure there was a good reason behind it. |
We had it taken away because it led to mighty cherrypicking with the flag teams of certain coaches, who did their best to make their team the most successful in terms of rating. |
really ^^
I don't remember there was any reason given. As far as I remember, it just disappeared as did recently the unranked won tournaments in profile and the faction medals.
And actually, I also think that sucks.
So some (spelledaren for exemple) says that W/D/L says how good you play with that race? Then if you agree to that, why should we have a CR at all? Win percentage should be enough either. That's just the same principe.
I'd like to have a way to compare myself among the players of my favourite race. if I love trying vampire (e.g. Heinz) my CR won't probably be as high as if I played norse low TR all the time or orcs. I still think that that kind of coach deserves credit.
If his team CR is 160 (what would be his CR if he only played this team as his only R team) he would be average/good in usual ranking but if he is 5th among vampires, that's a neat achievement.
So far, the system just reward "powergaming", IMO. |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
pizzamogul
Joined: Jun 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2006 - 17:33 |
|
How about a monthy team-based championship much like the FUMBBL championship for coaches?
Instead of comparing CR, a strength-of-schedule is factored into the standings such that towards the end of the month highly rated teams will have to search out and beat other highly rated teams to have a chance to move up the standings.
Reset the standings at the beginning of each month and start anew. |
_________________
"Don't expect mercy."
-Woodstock |
|
Lishi
Joined: Oct 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2006 - 21:25 |
|
CR sucks anyway...
...my CR is at the moment 175, because I am on a incredible luck streak... ...but me is dumb and stupid anyway.
In my Eyes, everybody with a CR over 158 is a big cherrypicker!  |
|
|
Arcon
Joined: Mar 01, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2006 - 23:11 |
|
| spelledaren wrote: | If you want to know how good a coach is with a race, look at win record for teams with that race.
Easy enough? |
That´s for a team only, and not for a race.
Also, it does not include TS vs TS of games played.
Besides this, I have to say: Don´t care too much for CR.
Only when you get above 170 you start to worry how not to drop, but that is another story... |
|
|
|
|
Gnomes are trash
Search
