DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
 Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 13:06 |
 
|
Some will not like these ideas maybe, but wanted to get everyone's views.
1) A division where any team applying for a game would be automatically matched with another team within 10 TR and 10 STR.
Teams waiting would be hidden so you could not see who was there, and If after say 10 minutes no team was found it would stretch to 12/12 etc ...
Teams needing recovery would be matched against teams in a similar poistion, it would need to be stated that stars/wizards/freebooters be hired before applying for the game, as recovery teams would be matched on STR.
At first I think there would be a few bashy teams, but over time i think the agile teams would get more wins and the recovery games would be there for them too.
2) Coach statistics on tournament played / finished.
I am getting frustrated with entering tourneys where coaches, as soon as they cannot win a tourney, of lose a catcher stop playing their game.
I like many play on even if it's 7 mostly linemen against a full roster, and would like to play in leagues with similar minded coaches.
3) Coach tournament rankings.
Ok, many (read most) will hate this one.
Many would say it is open to fixing, others would say rankings destroyed [R], but I think tournaments are possibly the best and fairest area for this kind of thing, and if the formula was a good one, might be a nice addition.
Okay, sorry it's such a long post, but if you got this far, please feel free to berate me for the above ideas / comments. |
|
|
xen7ric
Joined: Jan 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 13:19 |
|
1) I like the idea of applying for games blind. But do we need another league ?? Don't know how easy it would be to implement and I don't really see any reason you should get soft games programmed in for some arbitrary level which says you need a recovery game.
2) Totally true, it is frustrating having the lower end of a tournament stop playing half way through. Especially If I haven't had the chance to beat them yet 
3) Ranked is fine. Change it if people stop playing, the flaws it has don't seem to bother most people. Anyone mind if I join Sk8bcn and praise Ladder for being a much underused competative league... |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 13:25 |
|
| xen7ric wrote: | 1) I like the idea of applying for games blind. But do we need another league ?? Don't know how easy it would be to implement and I don't really see any reason you should get soft games programmed in for some arbitrary level which says you need a recovery game.
3) Ranked is fine. Change it if people stop playing, the flaws it has don't seem to bother most people. Anyone mind if I join Sk8bcn and praise Ladder for being a much underused competative league... |
1) i was referring to a team of TR 150 / Str 110, would be matched to a team of TR (140-160) - Str (100-120), both would be I guess recovery sides.
3) Ranked is fine and I like the ranked system, what i was trying to suggest was a second ranking system for tournament games only, so I would perhaps have a ranked rating of 160.33 and a tourney ranking of maybe 158.95 as an example. |
|
|
Wotfudboy
Joined: Feb 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 13:36 |
|
1) I love the idea of "blind date" format for games... the gamefinder for ranked is good, but up to a point... I'm getting tired of getting 1 in 10 accepts for games in ranked... although I can understand the reasons sometimes. This idea is brilliant and I for one would love it!
2) Oh yes... tournament drop outs are VERY frustrating... they hold up and sometimes ruin tournaments for others. It seems a reasonable idea... I don't know how it is possible to implement though.
3) I'm one of the people that hate this idea... you already have the ability to see how many tournaments a coach has won. As for a tournament ranking system, I think it will damage tournaments, because people will start cherrypicking tournaments - but mainly I think people approach tournaments in a much more fun way than ranked games for example. It's an arena to try out different teams you wouldn't normally play. Rubbish idea... a definite no to this one! |
_________________
See my blog: https://wotfudboy.blogspot.com/.
WIL. |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 13:36 |
|
| Wotfudboy wrote: | | 1) I love the idea of "blind date" format for games... the gamefinder for ranked is good, but up to a point... I'm getting tired of getting 1 in 10 accepts for games in ranked... although I can understand the reasons sometimes. This idea is brilliant and I for one would love it! |
So I guess your woodelves only wait to play my orcs? They are exactly within the "blind date range". And with only 3 DPs and 5 MB, you will have your fun...
1) Has been discussed a dozend times... This format will be crowded with orcs, dwarves and chaos just trying to kill each other off. And after the 7th game in a row against Khemri with 10 DPs, dwarves with MB all over the place and chaos with 3 claw/RSC-players all coaches who prefer soft teams will retreat from this division. Then all the bashers will only face each other, but as true team-killer fear each other (as it takes quite a while to build such a killing team), those teams will slowly stop playing and the division is dead. |
Last edited by CircularLogic on %b %27, %2005 - %14:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
R_Spiskit
Joined: Nov 24, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 14:09 |
|
He's not called circularlogic for nothing. He's got it in one.
Personally, I love the idea as I am not a cherrypicker, but as circ says, it will degenerate into a bashfest for the cherrypickers. |
|
|
Wotfudboy
Joined: Feb 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 15:21 |
|
Well I suppose you are right... but any chance of suggesting an alternative as opposed to just shooting ideas down?. You know why this idea was raised (even if it has been many times before!)... it is simply boredom... av7/8 teams won't play av9 teams, so, they will only play "in-house" games... ie elves vs elves and bashy vs bashy.
I would look at ways of making the blind match up work though. Sure you always get the team killers out there. It would be nice however to pit two types of teams against each other just to see who could win the game... and not just build their skills up through casualties. Too many coaches focus in ranked on skilling their team up, and then as an after thought, winning the game... That's why these days I much prefer to play tournaments... I've played my Pro-elves vs bashy teams there, and the attitude is much different!
When does a bashy team become a team killer?... above TR 150?, 175?, 200? Could you pool all teams for a blind contest that have a TR from 0-175, then go back to Gamefinder after that?
There's got to be some smart people out there with some solution to this? |
_________________
See my blog: https://wotfudboy.blogspot.com/.
WIL. |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 15:27 |
|
If you would check the forum, you would see, that I was inspired by this thread and posted an alternative solution. I just don´t want to hijack this thread.
btw: the challenge ist still up |
|
|
Wotfudboy
Joined: Feb 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 15:42 |
|
I've checked the forum... can't say I was impressed with the idea (and it seems I'm not the only one), but yes, I'm glad you tried...
As for the challenge, ask yourself this, would you honestly play the game purely to win it, or would you play to kill every wood elf on the field?... |
_________________
See my blog: https://wotfudboy.blogspot.com/.
WIL. |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 15:50 |
|
I would honestly try to win the game by killing every woody on the field |
|
|
Wotfudboy
Joined: Feb 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 15:55 |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 16:02 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: | 2) Coach statistics on tournament played / finished.
I am getting frustrated with entering tourneys where coaches, as soon as they cannot win a tourney, of lose a catcher stop playing their game.
I like many play on even if it's 7 mostly linemen against a full roster, and would like to play in leagues with similar minded coaches.
|
Okay, what about point 2?
This is one thing that bugs me, and although not a perfect scenario, a finished tourney stats might be the push some coaches need to play their games, and any improvement would be welcomed. |
|
|
BunnyPuncher
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 16:02 |
|
Slop the races into 5 buckets...
Elves+Stunties
Mid-Range (Amazons, Humans, Norse etc.)
Killers (Orcs, Dorfs, Chaos, Khemri etc.)
Then, set rule (in code) that the type of team played in the last game will not be played in the next game.
Elfs can't play elf ball, and Orcs can't eat only elves.
Might need a few more categories, and once the "match finder" spits out a match both sides must have already agreed to play it when they clicked the "find match" button.
And while I cannot believe I am saying this... consider making DP illegal in this format (so it won't be R, but 8 linemen with DP is just retarded) |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 16:31 |
|
Point 2 is OK.
@Bunny:
Nice concept. Thought about it and want to come up with some more detail. Let´s say we have 5 categories:
Elfball
Fast Pace
Allround
Brawl
War on the Pitch
Every race starts within the one of 3 middle sections. Now we introduce a "bashscore". We add up skills neccessary for successful bashing:
Guard = 1
MB = 2
PO = 2
DP = 3
RSC = 3
Claw = 4
Now we move the team in the sections up or down according to the sum, e.g.:
0-4: move 1 up
5-11: Stay
12-20: Move one down
21-35: Move 2 down
35+: Move to "War on the pitch" |
|
|
Laviak
Joined: Jul 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2005 - 16:36 |
|
with any kind of auto-matchup / forced challenge system, the most important thing is that the teams are even. I don't think the TS formula is good enough to do an auto-matching system on. (e.g. the old dwarf vs amazon problem)
One thing that it doesn't take into account the condition that the teams are likely to be in after the game. Not really a problem in itself, but it certainly matters to the low AV teams when they are already low on numbers (e.g. 7-8 players left on the team). |
_________________
We Fink Wer Orks
--------
Help save blood bowl, foul an elf today!. |
|
|
|
| |
Finishing the 60 Gam...
Search
