harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
 Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 13:03 |
 
|
I don't see the retiring and restarting team scenario as much of an issue. It's a lot of work and minmaxers aren't going to benefit from doing this. Especially as a lot of the stereotypical minmaxed teams are hard to start.
Worst case scenario is a loophole is found, which allows this and skews the stats at low TV, which would then get fixed. However I doubt this would happen.
Regarding Hito, I think 'just' below a certain TV is defeating the object and would cause more 'sweet spotting', which in turn could have an adverse effect on his team when it does get beat up, if it lands in this sweetspot.
What would happen in most cases in my opinion is that the scales would slowly balance, however it probably would take more games to balance. I.e. until the said team recovered or its ff came down to the norm for the TV it is at.
Unfortunate yes, for those braving the upper echelons with difficult teams, however the positives outway the negatives by far imo. |
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 13:08 |
|
I think Sp00keh's description of the FF pricing effects is good and sound. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 13:14 |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 13:18 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | Sp00keh wrote: | "make Fan Factor count for double its normal TV when matching"
|
Horrible idea IMO. It unbalances the matching/inducements for the majority just just to deal with a small number of min/maxers.
If you are reducing the incentive to win then we may as well all just go for the super-kill-massacre teams. |
Just make it applicable below a certain threshold and it works out very well. Unlike any approach that is based on games played (the bucket idea), it selectively targets teams with:
-Low TV
-Lots of games
-Recent winning performance
Since this is for B, we don't have to worry about grandfathered LRB teams (that is a R thing).
__Synn |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 14:06 |
|
"It unbalances the matching"
basically, yes
If we've both got orc teams at around 1500, but i'm rubbish with them and you're good with them. say your TV is 1500 and FF is 10, my FF is 4 so my team would (hypothetically) be TV of 1560, you're giving away 3 skills to me. this gives me an in-game advantage that perhaps counters your better skill, making for a more even match
I think this aspect is perhaps likely to be unpopular or controversial, it rewards people who lose with an easier opponent.
"It unbalances the inducements"
no, it only affects the match making. I'm not suggesting it would have any effect after matching, so it doesn't need to have an in-client implication on the inducements we each would get |
|
|
juck101
Joined: Nov 16, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 14:38 |
|
man just play games on coach rating if you want 'equal' games that way.
You dont to have a handicap but it helps balance games for higher/lower teams. If you want to play with equal skill coaches but experience huge variance in games play in a league setting.
Honestly with challenges, leagues and random even TV games I think most tastes are catered for. In Each environment any team that plays to its most powerful potential is going to play a maximised game and I don’t think you can ultimately stop that with ANY system.
You dont have to play 'even' skilled coaches either and to some degree that is a good thing. The game would be dull for the top 10 coaches if they only played themselves, and dull for low level coaches to only face each other. You do have options and I cant see much need to change this.
(guess I should point out I don’t play here as such but am posting as any FF change the game might take on revision might affect this) |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 15:51 |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 16:15 |
|
That is the problem with CRP. The kill stack is far too powerful for its cost.
Also, not the past players section for that chaos team 
__Synn |
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 16:28 |
|
Well, Tortured-Robot should be on the coaches MIA list, as he hasn't played for a year already... |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 16:29 |
|
What synn said.
Fix the kill stack cost, and the minmax issue goes away. |
_________________
 |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 16:30 |
|
| uuni wrote: | | Well, Tortured-Robot should be on the coaches MIA list, as he hasn't played for a year already... |
You mean Cookie_Shark has just moved onto a new coach name instead? |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 16:33 |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 16:36 |
|
| pythrr wrote: |
Fix the kill stack cost, and the minmax issue goes away. |
O RLY? |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 16:41 |
|
| JimmyFantastic wrote: | | pythrr wrote: |
Fix the kill stack cost, and the minmax issue goes away. |
O RLY? |
What? You thought your B Tourney win was a result of skill? 
In all seriousness though, minmaxing is not solely the domain of clawpomb. Jimmy is right about blodge at low TV.
__Synn |
|
|
Woodstock
Joined: Dec 11, 2004
|
| Posted:
Mar 30, 2012 - 16:44 |
|
Funny thing tho... for every agility skill there is a hard counter. One or two tackles is enough to stop most blodge teams. But you can not stop one or two cpombers with... uh with what? |
|
|
|
|
Making Assassins mor...
Search
