67 coaches online • Server time: 19:15
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Does Ranked have to ...goto Post Humans and Redraftgoto Post WIL 2020 poll
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Sep 27, 2021 - 21:56 Reply with quote Back to top

MattDakka wrote:

Also, a private league forces to play according to a schedule, which is not always comfortable, not to mention people not showing up to the game or being late.


Private leagues do not necessarily force you to play to schedule. Though it is unlikely that you will be able play as many matches at any time.

_________________
Image
[SL]2020 Rookie Rumble - New teams ONLY - Always recruiting!
Tesifonte



Joined: Sep 06, 2004

Post   Posted: Sep 27, 2021 - 22:00 Reply with quote Back to top

koadah wrote:
Balls. Wink



+1

Also, bad mechanics.

_________________
TaChIkOmA! \o/
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 27, 2021 - 22:03 Reply with quote Back to top

1)I like to play Blood Bowl (highest priority reason);
2)I favour using an automatic scheduler in order to play Blood Bowl if possible;
3)I don't like to use GF if I can avoid it (it's a bad system as explained above and it should be never used in a competitive division);
4)If I'm forced to choose between playing Blood Bowl using the GF in a Competitive division and not playing Blood Bowl at all (due to temporary lack of the Box in Competitive division) I will accept to use the flawed GF (because playing BB has higher priority over accepting to play with flawed GF), although I don't think it's a good way to arrange matches. I accept it because there is no real alternative to play Blood Bowl atm (I would play in League division with SL20 teams but it's hard to find games);
5)To be on an even ground when you are in a Competitive division with GF as ONLY way to find games you have to judge the offers you receive, also, most coaches are going to offer bad games, so filtering the offers is just to be competitive. If nobody can offer/decline in a division then I will do the same. If just one coach in the division where I play can pick I will assume that everybody can pick and I behave accordingly, filtering the offers. Actually I don't even bother to challenge people (statistically most people don't accept, this would mean useless mouse wear and tear), I just passively accept the offers I think that are fair, I don't decline bad offers because this would be, again, useless mouse wear and tear. Most offers are blatantly unfair anyway.
This way I can do something else (playing music, watching TV etc.) without being very close to the PC to click the mouse to send offers and without getting bored. In the unlikely occurrance there is a good offer (it takes on average hours) I will accept it.
mrt1212



Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Post   Posted: Sep 27, 2021 - 22:44 Reply with quote Back to top

Matt, the imaginary competitive space in your head only contains you and nobody is even accidentally joining you there. Why can't you accept you're the weirdo who uses Fumbbl as some kind of contrite self-validating skinner box, which we all see you using it as? I would use more lurid terms like 'masturbatory' but that presumes you're familiar with the concept of pleasure.

Okay, now that the trash has been taken out:

If we're going to wind up having a lot of teams, I would like to have a way to pare down the amount for selection. Only through naming convention am I able to easily pick my teams for Competitive to throw into the pool of LFG. Basically, I wish I could hide all my league teams because they simply aren't for gamefinder and never would be. So a flag on the team, maybe?
MercutioT



Joined: Mar 19, 2015

Post   Posted: Sep 27, 2021 - 23:50 Reply with quote Back to top

MattDakka wrote:
If I'm forced to play with GF only I reserve myself the right to assess the game offers because everybody does the same.
If I didn't filter the offers (like other coaches in the same division do) I would be at a disadvantage.
The expert coaches just offer bad match-ups (or don't offer games at all), fyi.
If I wanted to pick I would have played in Ranked, but I played in Box only, as you well know, and I'm saying that GF is a bad system. If I wanted to pick I would suggest to use it and not the scheduler.
That said, I often spotted you on GF but you never offered me a game. Feel free to do it.
In the mean time, our match record, since you dared to bother me:
https://fumbbl.com/p/matches?c=MercutioT&coach2=MattDakka

Looks like it's a positive record for me!

I would have challenged you but I suspect you would have not accepted, judging by the list on your About page: https://fumbbl.com/p/about?c=MercutioT
I mean, if you don't like me, why should I bother you with an offer? This is what I thought.


MattDakka wrote:
I became Legend by playing only in the Box, I have nothing to prove.
https://fumbbl.com/p/match?id=4092703
Have you ever had 181 CR by playing in the Box only? No? then think about improving yourself before talking about me.


Dude, first of all, your and my vs record is an irrelevant non-sequitor, and—as others have pointed out—bringing it up just makes you look bad. You're just flailing because you have no good defense of your 'picking'.

Secondly, the idea that you would think flexing your Blackbox record makes you worth something is absurd, and a great argument for why CR should be eliminated entirely. You play Skaven, Dwarves, Wood Elves, Dark Elves and Undead. I play Goblins and Ogres and 3BG Chaos Pact and 2016 Underworld. You talk big, but you play the game on easy mode. You love talking about how CDwarves are an imbalanced roster, but you have no qualms about using them to beat up rookie Pro Elves with green coaches. Your CR is worthless. A good chunk of it was just gained from coaches who conceded in the first drive to avoid spending another minute with you. You have everything to prove.

Lastly, of course I will not play a game against you. For obvious reasons, including self-respect and an healthy aversion to toxicity. You brag about how much you win, but somehow you still complain and whine and make games unpleasant more than any other coach on this site. Why would anyone willingly subject themselves to that? (Actually, that question has an answer, as you've proven: Because they don't know you yet.) It's too bad that you seem incapable of shame or self-reflection, because otherwise you might realize why such a large number of coaches concede rather than play against you, and you would see that this is definitely not a thing to be proud of.


Okay, now that the trash has been taken out:

mrt1212 wrote:
If we're going to wind up having a lot of teams, I would like to have a way to pare down the amount for selection. Only through naming convention am I able to easily pick my teams for Competitive to throw into the pool of LFG. Basically, I wish I could hide all my league teams because they simply aren't for gamefinder and never would be. So a flag on the team, maybe?



Totally agree with this. Perhaps each individual team page could have a "Add this team to Gamefinder" tick box..?
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 00:03 Reply with quote Back to top

If the chat is a problem for you I can play without chatting at all (I call it "Phoenix Guard mode").
Not my fault if good coaches like you don't want to play vs me using the toxicity as an excuse.
Grow a pair, thin skinned sweetheart. If you don't want to play vs me, don't dare to claim that I'm a coward or you will look like a hypocrite. I don't know what to do to prove that I have no fear of playing a game, I have been playing vs super high TV cpomb teams in the Box for years.

I would play other teams, not just the 3 ones I created in the C division (I have many teams in the Box) and I'm waiting for the migration, because I hate to find new team names and I don't like to use random silly names like many coaches on the site do because they don't care about the naming policy and fluff.
As soon as I will have my Box teams available I will activate them in the C Box, so, don't worry, I will not play just DE, CD and Orcs. I get bored if I play only 3 races.

About our match record, let's check the races you used:
Norse vs Skaven (tier 1 vs tier 1)
Lizardmen vs DE (tier 1 vs tier 1)
Lizardmen vs Chorf (tier 1 vs tier 1)
Lizardmen vs WE (tier 1 vs tier 1)
Lizardmen vs Necro (tier 1 vs tier 1)
Lizardmen vs Slann (tier 1 vs tier 1,5)
UW vs Amazons (tier 1,5 vs tier 1)

You never used Goblins, Pact, Ogres vs me. Don't digress claiming that I played easy mode (unless you want to admit that you are easy mode coach).
Don't shift the focus saying that you play tier 3. Let's focus on our match record, where you never played a tier 3 vs me.
I played my share of Vampires and Slann games in the Box, I stopped playing tier 3 because the risk/CR reward is not fair, but I didn't play just the top 1 tier teams.
Blame those coaches playing ONLY tier 1 teams strong at low TV cycling them after 10 games, if you want to blame somebody. I never cycled my teams in the Box.

And by the way I played way more races than you and mostly in the Box. Thousands of games, not 10 games.
4787 Box games, a too big sample to dismiss me as picker.
asteflix



Joined: Jan 20, 2014

Post   Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 02:07 Reply with quote Back to top

https://fumbbl.com/p/matches?c=MattDakka&coach2=asteflix

I think i win the head to head thus stop talking dakka

_________________
''How do you get a cat out of a blow-up doll its stuck''
SideshowBob



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 08:13 Reply with quote Back to top

This was a fun thread. All I see is a guy with 0 won tournaments claiming that he is a "legend" in a game designed for playing tournaments.
Christer



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 10:28
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

MattDakka wrote:
GF (which requires a degree of experience of the game, knowledge of the different tiers and skills of the teams and mutual willingness of both coaches to play a balanced and fair game)


For some reason, I find this section of your post very funny. It strikes me as very contrasting to your general position that a gamefinder system can not be competitive.

The thing here is that you're saying that choosing which games you play takes experience and knowledge. This is, at its core, what a ranking system is designed to measure, and also shows that you don't fully understand how the ranking system works.

In a system where you are allowed to pick your opponents, your ability to know which matches to take and which ones not to is of course a part of your ranking, but how it interacts with the ranking is something I get a feeling you don't fully understand. The actual formula used here (which is Elo based), is designed to reward you more if you win against someone who's "better" than you which balances out how much you can "farm" weaker opponents.

Let's say someone plays only games where there's a 90% probability of winning. They play 10 of those and get 9 wins and 1 loss. At this point, their ranking will be the same as where they started (give or take, the system looks at matches individually rather than per group). If you instead play against opponents much higher than you, where your estimated win probability is 10%, you only need to win 1 games out of the 10 to maintain your starting CR.

The way to increase in ranking is to get better results than what the CR and TV differences mathematically would estimate. This takes skill, both on and off the pitch, and this is what CR measures for divisions where you are able to choose your opponent.

Now, you clearly prefer the blackbox type of scheduling and that's fine. We have maintained the system for a long time, and will continue to do so as long as it's being used (currently there are virtually no box games due to the 2020 transition, which is something I need to get around to fixing). In my opinion, though, it's a bit silly to sit on a high horse and proclaim that "my way is better" and that there is zero merit to the alternative which is the position you have taken here.

It's easier to just accept that perhaps your way isn't necessarily the only way and accept that other people have equally valid opinions as well. And perhaps people have been thinking about the CR system, the math of it, what it represents, and spent countless hours on analyzing statistics and movement of CR for different play styles.

If you want to claim that the ability to choose your opponent completely invalidates CR, you better bring forward math and statistics as evidence. The truth is that the blackbox and ranked CRs are incredibly strongly correlated (importantly, these two rankings are mathematically independent). If it choosing your opponent would completely break the system, this would simply not be the case.
argos_72



Joined: Mar 02, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 11:01 Reply with quote Back to top

Christer wrote:


Let's say someone plays only games where there's a 90% probability of winning. They play 10 of those and get 9 wins and 1 loss. At this point, their ranking will be the same as where they started (give or take, the system looks at matches individually rather than per group). If you instead play against opponents much higher than you, where your estimated win probability is 10%, you only need to win 1 games out of the 10 to maintain your starting CR.

The way to increase in ranking is to get better results than what the CR and TV differences mathematically would estimate. This takes skill, both on and off the pitch, and this is what CR measures for divisions where you are able to choose your opponent.


Personally, I would very much appreciate the fact that in the future there will be a single Competitive(GF) and Box division where with the same team one Coach could decide whether to play "Black box" or GF.

I agree with Christer that in fact if a Coach plays "only" on gamefinder and owns high ranking it is also because he is "good skilled in picking his opponent".
I never thought about this but it is true: a Legendary Coach knows how to choose his opponent better than others so that the gap with him is not too high (because if things go wrong - and in this game we know that one match out of ten can be VERY unlucky) he would lose maybe 3 or 4 CR points and then he would have to play 10 games to recover! So also the "way" you "pick" in GF is important and qualifies the experience of the player.

Finally, when in the future we will have the possibility to use the same team to play both in Black Box or in GF (Competitive), in my opinion it will increase the versatility of the game. For example let's imagine I have a Wood Elf team and I played the last game in BOX which I won at a very high price: two Lines dead and my best catcher and wardancer MNG. Sometime Coach just "retire" the team (and it is part also on the Strategy). But now you have one more possibility: the next game you can try to find a "easier" opponent in th GF for a more "quite" recovery game. The black box BOX doesn't always allow you to play "recovery" games because the match making matches two teams for similar TV but if you exceed a certain number of match performed you can have also 50% TV GAP . And even if you have TV 1200 and you play against someone (bash) with TV 1300 not always wandering apo or two babes are compensatory.
This is also part of the "baggage" of a coach's experience. The more experienced a Coach is the more he will be able to make these choices and therefore his ranking will reflect his experience and skills.

In short: those who are in the top CR, whether they play GF or BOX, shows that they have skills, experience that others don't have and very likely they deserve to be in such position

The only small criticism I would make of the current Coach Ranking system is that a coach can retain his position even if he doesn't play any more. It happened to see in the top 10 coaches who have a very high CR but have made their last game maybe a year ago. I don't know if you can include something related to the number of games played in the last 6 months. But anyway... at the end is not so important for me
mekutata



Joined: May 03, 2015

Post   Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 11:24 Reply with quote Back to top

argos_72 wrote:


Personally, I would very much appreciate the fact that in the future there will be a single Competitive(GF) and Box division where with the same team one Coach could decide whether to play "Black box" or GF.


Mixing Game Finder and Random Match Making leads to issues. Teambuilding is very different when you get to pick your opponents or have to face whatever you get. I'd even argue that having no "recovery" games is actually part of the box challenge.

However Random Match Making/new Box will be interesting with the new BB 20 draft meta. Will you still be seeded against another team based on TV or would it make sense to switch to a seeding logic based on amount of played games. But this is probably part of an upcoming Blackbox improvement forum post.

_________________
Image
CrookfangRob



Joined: Jan 22, 2019

Post   Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 11:54 Reply with quote Back to top

Why is this thread about improving Gamefinder full of MattDakka posting about his winrate?
How is that relevant to anything?
argos_72



Joined: Mar 02, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 11:55 Reply with quote Back to top

mekutata wrote:


Mixing Game Finder and Random Match Making leads to issues. Teambuilding is very different when you get to pick your opponents or have to face whatever you get. I'd even argue that having no "recovery" games is actually part of the box challenge.
.


If I understood correctly some old information I read in the forum about the future Box and GF division they will be mixed/merged. That is, a team created for the Competitive division can also be used to play in Box. But maybe I misunderstood.
It would be interesting to have a clarification on this.
JanMattys



Joined: Feb 29, 2004

Post   Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 12:00 Reply with quote Back to top

Christer wrote:
MattDakka wrote:
GF (which requires a degree of experience of the game, knowledge of the different tiers and skills of the teams and mutual willingness of both coaches to play a balanced and fair game)


Long reply


I strongly suspect that for all his ramblings about CR, MattDakka's real complaint against GF is that it is slow and doesn't provide games fast enough.
It takes time to sit there and refuse challenges deemed unfair, and it takes time to find someone who accepts his fair offers.
So he tries to paint it like a crusade about a true competitive environment, but the real problem is that he wants to play his games when he wants them, and GF doesn't deliver fast and reliably enough.

Which, if it wasn't served with a side-dish of elitism, would be a reasonable stance and absolutely fair preference.

_________________
Image


Last edited by JanMattys on Sep 28, 2021 - 12:05; edited 2 times in total
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 12:03 Reply with quote Back to top

Christer wrote:

The thing here is that you're saying that choosing which games you play takes experience and knowledge. This is, at its core, what a ranking system is designed to measure, and also shows that you don't fully understand how the ranking system works.

I understand well how rankings and CR work after years of FUMBBL.
The problems are 3:

1) many coaches don't know (or don't care due to several reasons) what a fair game is, this is why it's better to use an automatic system to arrange games, because your formula, Christer, is impartial and works well most of times (I didn't like the odd super TV gaps but that's it); so, if you are a newcomer and don't know that Amazons vs Dwarf is a bad match-up, you will accept it because you ignore the racial mismatch, not because the Dwarf coach is a "super expert of the game".
With the Box formula there is a factor making less likely racial mismatches, if I'm not wrong (a racial match-up bias).
I prefer to trust in your Box formula than relying on people's fairness, given the choice.

2) Even assuming that a coach can perfectly evalue and assess matches, thus picking only the good ones for him, this process is time-consuming. As we well know most offers are not fair, so, either you accept to play a bad match-up or you waste hours waiting for a fair offer.
Both things are negative because:
- if you accept a bad match-up (even if you know it) you could lose lot of CR/have your team wrecked;
- if you want to be super-selective you play 1 or 2 games per day;

3) some coaches will not play vs other coaches for reasons not related to fairness of match-up/CR gain etc. but due to personal grudges;

So, an automatic scheduler is way better than relying on coaches' interaction to find games.

And by the way, if CR of GF and Box are strongly correlated, it's not true for the win rate.
Assuming same skill and races, a coach playing with GF only will have a higher win rate than a coach playing Box only, I have noticed that by checking many accounts.
So, that means that playing with the scheduler removes some "picking noise" from the win rate and thus is a better system for rankings.

Also you are shifting focus:

a ranking system should check how much successful a coach is at winning a match-up he could not deliberately choose.

When you say that a ranking system is a measure of being good at picking then that's not anymore a success of actual playing games, but it's the skill of picking games.
Although there is correlation between the 2 things they are not the same thing. The rankings should measure the success in the actual playing of a game, not in the picking of a game.

I could know, for example, that Amazon vs Dwarf is a bad match-up but I could not be able to play Amazons and Dwarfs.
Rankings should measure ONLY the win rate (the in-game coach's performance, to be clearer), not how good you are to pick a game in order to win it.
That's a meta factor which improves winning chances but it's not really coaching skill (in the meaning of being good at playing a BB game).
"Picking noise" should be removed from the rankings, and the scheduler is the best way.


Last edited by MattDakka on Sep 28, 2021 - 12:19; edited 3 times in total
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic