Squaq
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 19:54 |
 
|
Give me a fair TS matchup and let my opponent kick my ass if he got the skill. I will be happy to loose to a better coach.
Likevice give me noob at equal TS and ill gladly show him how the game is played.
Coachrating consideration when pairing matches are unnessesary nursing!
| JanMattys wrote: | | That way, in the long run my W/T/L record will have a meaning... |
You still lack randomness of race to make that conclusion. |
|
|
Hogshine
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 19:57 |
|
| Squaq wrote: | | JanMattys wrote: | | That way, in the long run my W/T/L record will have a meaning... |
You still lack randomness of race to make that conclusion. |
I disagree. The racial relative strengths/weaknesses are taken into account (rightly so) and because the teams are assigned randomly, it is likely that you will play a representative set of races, so your W/T/L record will have a meaning. You may well not play each race the same number of time, but that is perfectly fine, as the races are not all equally popular.
Edit: But (as you might've guessed) I do agree with the rest of your post. Just don't bully Jan!  |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 20:20 |
|
| westerner wrote: | | CircularLogic wrote: | | I`m curious.. how do you think I define cherrypicking? And how do you think that this so defined cherrypicking is solved by [B] matchmaking. |
Why don't you tell me? Since you brought it up first?
Thanks |
How on earth shall I know what you think that my definition of cherrypicking is? You may have given clues what your idea of cherrypicking is (something that only higher CR coaches can do) but not really anything conclusive about what you think my definition is... |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 20:24 |
|
| JanMattys wrote: | | I just stated *I* am not interested in what *you* think of a random pairing system because *I* don't think your opinion is worth anything at all on the subject. Personal view and all. |
| JanMattys wrote: | 1- Your woodies never
2- Your only elf vs khemri
3- Why everyone always brings up
4- Do you know that
5- You ARE a cherrypicker |
You've already stated my opinion is worthless. You're just repeating yourself now.
From another thread:
http://www.fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=343338&highlight=cool#343338
| JanMattys wrote: | Look at the last 30 gamesof my humans. Seriously, do it. Then call me a picker...The "everybody picks" is a R legend. The cool guys don't do it, and there are more cool guys in R than you can count.
|
That about sums up your attitude. "Cool" guys play my way. Well, I don't give a fling for what you think is cool. Perhaps you have a need to feel "cool" in fumbbl, but I do not. This isn't high school.
Fumbbl now is a very different place from when you joined over 4 years ago. Are you saying in your 1000+ games you've never, ever, cherrypicked? Or just in your last 30?
I've not advocated anything that Christer hasn't already considered. Yet, my posts have been met mainly by disparging personal remarks. Easier than to debate the substance, I suppose. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 20:32 |
|
1- Of course I have picked. A lot. But I knew it was a bit lame.
2- I don't think you're *wrong* in what you're doing. Nor that you're a horrible person, or whatever. I respect your right to play the game the way you like (even if I object you seem to prey on people without them being really aware you're picking them, which is what pisses me off about cherrypickers... but anyway... someone writing in his profile that is a n00b, but with a 60% win record and 2.3 cas inflicted per game vs only 1.7 received strikes me as odd to say the least). But again, I've heard "takes two to tango" arguments enough times to know it's not all your fault, and if you can find people who will joyfully play the cherry role, good for you then.
3- The thing is that, while you have every right to play your way, you seem to be concerned about a random pairing system we are trying to make work. Now... if you are picky about your games, you don't really belong to a discussion about a random pairing generator. What you want is a quickgame feature that lets you pick the game you want *in less time*. Blackbox idea was born to COUNTER your approach to Ranked, by those who don't like the way you play. But you come in and state your opinions like Blackbox is something you could be interested in, *if it served your purposes*.
It's not about being cool or not being cool. I think you're not cool, but I'm totally aware it's just MY opinion. But your attitude about the game simply doesn't match with a discussion about a Blackbox thing, because your picky approach is completely, totally and utterly divergent from the spirit Blackbox was born from.
I hope my limited english is good enough for you to understand my reasons. |
_________________
Last edited by JanMattys on %b %17, %2008 - %20:%Nov; edited 1 time in total |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 20:34 |
|
| CircularLogic wrote: | | How on earth shall I know what you think that my definition of cherrypicking is? You may have given clues what your idea of cherrypicking is (something that only higher CR coaches can do) but not really anything conclusive about what you think my definition is... |
I was annoyed when you responded to two of my posts with 1-line straw man type questions.
Let's back up a bit. Why don't you tell me your definition of cherrypicking, and we can go from there. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
Tinkywinky
Joined: Aug 25, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 20:41 |
|
Stopp feeding the troll.  |
_________________
Do you play ranked and wonder where all the good coaches are? Are you also from Sweden? Then join the Swedish league! |
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 20:43 |
|
anything circular posts about B is useless since he has "gone back to R"....
| westerner wrote: | | Let's back up a bit. Why don't you tell me your definition of cherrypicking, and we can go from there. |
here, let me help...
this is cherrypicking...
any questions?
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
 
Last edited by shadow46x2 on %b %17, %2008 - %20:%Nov; edited 1 time in total |
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 20:46 |
|
| westerner wrote: |
Economics suggests that if you aggregate all those agreed-to matches, you can determine the "going rate" for playing vs a bashier, higher TS, or better coach. |
westerner, this is pretty close to describing cherry picking.
As soon as you start choosing the best games for you (not the most even team match up) then you're stumbling damn close to being a picker. And yes, it is a smart strategy to use and has worked for all coaches here.
But, [B] is supposed to be a way of getting past this aspect of games on Fumbbl. So any system that you introduce to limit which coaches you get to play immediately reintroduces aspects into the equation that [B] was designed to avoid. |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 20:58 |
|
| westerner wrote: | | Let's back up a bit. Why don't you tell me your definition of cherrypicking, and we can go from there. |
Cherrypicking is taking favorable matchups over balanced ones.
| On page 2 CircularLogic wrote: |
For me a balanced game is a match, where the odds of winning are not significantly changed, if the opponents would switch their teams. |
|
|
|
vanGorn
Joined: Feb 24, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 21:00 |
|
The system looks alluring cool. Fair matches with an open outcome seem to rock. I will try them soon, too. I had already made a team, the Bear Raiders, and just need to get some spare time for using it. |
_________________
Gimme a pint of fungus beer!
Then we will climb the ladder.
 |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 21:11 |
|
| JanMattys wrote: | | 1- Of course I have picked. A lot. But I knew it was a bit lame. |
I admit the hypocrisy in offering matches you yourself would decline, while at the same time recognizing it as good powergaming. How about cutting people some slack for something that you yourself have engaged in?!?
| JanMattys wrote: | | 3- The thing is that, while you have every right to play your way, you seem to be concerned about a random pairing system we are trying to make work. Now... if you are picky about your games, you don't really belong to a discussion about a random pairing generator. What you want is a quickgame feature that lets you pick the game you want *in less time*. Blackbox idea was born to COUNTER your approach to Ranked, by those who don't like the way you play. But you come in and state your opinions like Blackbox is something you could be interested in, *if it served your purposes*. |
I don't agree with with your characterization of Blackbox as being designed solely to eliminate "pickiness". I believe Blackbox is about automating fair matchups. What is fair? What the market says it is. There should be tons of [R] data available to base this on to show that TS is not the whole story. Like I said, Christer has at least considered this. so please don't start with "if it served your purposes" business.
| JanMattys wrote: | | It's not about being cool or not being cool. I think you're not cool, but I'm totally aware it's just MY opinion. |
Jan, put-downs like that come across as bullying. Stop throwing mud.
| JanMattys wrote: | | But your attitude about the game simply doesn't match with a discussion about a Blackbox thing, because your picky approach is completely, totally and utterly divergent from the spirit Blackbox was born from. |
I've played 19 games in Blackbox, and am prepared to take my lumps under the rules of the division like everyone else. I am willing to compromise on matchups in B in order to get a match quicker. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 21:20 |
|
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 21:24 |
|
| westerner wrote: | | I don't agree with with your characterization of Blackbox as being designed solely to eliminate "pickiness". I believe Blackbox is about automating fair matchups. What is fair? What the market says it is. There should be tons of [R] data available to base this on to show that TS is not the whole story. Like I said, Christer has at least considered this. so please don't start with "if it served your purposes" business. |
disagree with it all you want, but while you are accurate that one of the intentions was to create a fair matchup system, back when blackbox was still a player run creation, another of the main intentions was to help eliminate the rash of cherrypicking that happens in R...
and tell me something....if the entire "market", as you so eloquently put it, was playing matches 40 TS down, would you consider that fair?....
(here's a hint, it's a trick question)
| westerner wrote: | | Jan, put-downs like that come across as bullying. Stop throwing mud. |
yes, because telling people their comments equate to high school antics is not throwing mud....
| westerner wrote: | | I've played 19 games in Blackbox, and am prepared to take my lumps under the rules of the division like everyone else. I am willing to compromise on matchups in B in order to get a match quicker. |
tell me, westerner...what exactly are you compromising on?...
are you compromising that you'll play a fair matchup to get a quick match?...
so, are you insinuating that you don't already play fair matchups?....
or did i miss something here.....
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 17, 2008 - 21:29 |
|
| westerner wrote: |
I don't agree with with your characterization of Blackbox as being designed solely to eliminate "pickiness". I believe Blackbox is about automating fair matchups. What is fair? What the market says it is. There should be tons of [R] data available to base this on to show that TS is not the whole story. Like I said, Christer has at least considered this. so please don't start with "if it served your purposes" business. |
So if I persuade total noobs into playing my stronger team (like some coaches do) then it is a fair matchup? And those should should be incorporated into [B] because that`s what I can get out of the 'market'? You might think that because those are the rules you are picking your R matches by, that everyone does that. But I claim, that the opposite is more likely. A new/weaker coach is more likely to accept a game where he is at a disadvantage from the start. Those who are picking (in it`s worst form) are looking for those kind of unsuspecting coaches to stomp them. That`s the market. |
|
|
|
|
| |
TSC Draft
Search
