JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 16:00 |
|
treborius wrote: | JanMattys wrote: | It makes no sense to weight handicaps in TS terms. They vary too much in power and ingame effects, and the "average hc value" would always be unaccurate.
Average is not a synonym of fair.
Personally I'd love to match teams by TS, putting a max limit of +/- 5% ts in blackbox pairings, and I would eliminate handicaps at all. |
I think most players would like that, but it's just not realistic to find a reasonable amount of matchups every 30mins in Black-Box when you have to not only match TS, but also TR (for avoiding HCs). |
You don't calculate TR. You just make it so that TR is irrelevant and handicaps are not present at all, no matter the TRs involved. |
_________________
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 16:07 |
|
The "perfect" matchup in terms of TR/TS is not likely to exist in any given round so the best you can do is compromise by using a good-faith valuation of handicaps. |
_________________ \x/es |
|
Ash
Joined: Feb 03, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 16:08 |
|
NONE!!! 0 TS. |
_________________ Ash |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 16:10 |
|
Do you mean there should be no handicaps at all, or they should be used but valued at 0TS? |
_________________ \x/es |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 16:18 |
|
westerner wrote: | The "perfect" matchup in terms of TR/TS is not likely to exist in any given round so the best you can do is compromise by using a good-faith valuation of handicaps. |
re-read what I wrote.
Do NOT consider TR. Let the client NOT create handicaps no matter what the TR involved. Only use TS for the pairings.
This way you don't have to weight TRs |
_________________
|
|
Fama
Joined: Feb 09, 2005
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 16:29 |
|
JanMattys wrote: |
Do NOT consider TR. Let the client NOT create handicaps no matter what the TR involved. Only use TS for the pairings.
This way you don't have to weight TRs |
That would bring problems with winnings since it depends on TR. But I guess the site code could be reworked to roll winnings serverside and ignore what the match report says. |
_________________ I love deadlines. I like the wooshing sound they make when they fly by. -Douglas Adams
Side step this! |
|
Eddy
Joined: Aug 04, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 16:41 |
|
Huh? You just need to turn off handicaps in the client. Winnings would still use TR and everything'd be as Jan said. I'm not saying it's good or bad, i'm saying it's possible. |
_________________ 'The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.'
Robert R. Coveyou |
|
treborius
Joined: Apr 05, 2008
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:11 |
|
JanMattys wrote: | westerner wrote: | The "perfect" matchup in terms of TR/TS is not likely to exist in any given round so the best you can do is compromise by using a good-faith valuation of handicaps. |
re-read what I wrote.
Do NOT consider TR. Let the client NOT create handicaps no matter what the TR involved. Only use TS for the pairings.
This way you don't have to weight TRs |
Eddy wrote: | Huh? You just need to turn off handicaps in the client. Winnings would still use TR and everything'd be as Jan said. I'm not saying it's good or bad, i'm saying it's possible. |
I see what Jan was aiming at, now (didn't get it right away) - didn't know this was so easy...
...I would favor that solution over random HCs as well |
|
|
Rijssiej
Joined: Jan 04, 2005
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:24 |
|
westerner wrote: | BRIBE THE REF 2TS (almost useless, prevents IGMEOY on 1st foul only) |
Bribe the ref is far more powerful than 2 TS. Being able to foul without risk till you get spotted once is a very usefull handi and more like 5TS. |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:27 |
|
I'm not terribly fond of handis but it is part of LRB4. One side effect of eliminating Virus would probably be more keeping of nigglers. |
_________________ \x/es |
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:27 |
|
Iron Man has been massively underrated.
It's one of the best handicaps out there and often the best you can get. |
|
|
treborius
Joined: Apr 05, 2008
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:32 |
|
westerner wrote: | I'm not terribly fond of handis but it is part of LRB4. One side effect of eliminating Virus would probably be more keeping of nigglers. |
this is true - it's especially those teams with high TR, not so high TS, that give handicaps and have lots of nigglers, usually - Virus makes the coaches cut back on the roster and rebuild (part of) the team.
(That's good, I think ) |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:33 |
|
Rijssiej wrote: | westerner wrote: | BRIBE THE REF 2TS (almost useless, prevents IGMEOY on 1st foul only) |
Bribe the ref is far more powerful than 2 TS. Being able to foul without risk till you get spotted once is a very usefull handi and more like 5TS. |
I'm confused about this one then. I initially thought it provided immunity from being sent off until the ref called a penalty (ie you failed IGMEOY), in which case it would indeed be quite powerful. But in my experience it seems like it only allows you to ignore the first IGMEOY roll only. 2nd and subsequent rolls have the usual chances of being sent off. Perhaps someone can confirm? |
_________________ \x/es |
|
Eddy
Joined: Aug 04, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 18:06 |
|
It allows you to ignore the ref when he sends you off for the first time.
You foul a first time, the ref doesnt see you, you foul a second time, the ref spots you, but you don't have to argue the call and can stay on the field. You foul again after that and the ref spots you, you're sent off as normal. |
_________________ 'The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.'
Robert R. Coveyou |
|
Fallen00
Joined: Oct 16, 2008
|
  Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 18:45 |
|
Very unrealistic of you, Janmattys. Do you think everyone will have 5+ blackbox team? the current trend is one per coach. the scheduler would need 20 Coaches to schedule 2-4 matches.
I hope BigC is wiser than you Jan. It would be dreadful to see your system implemented |
|
|
|