koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 17:11 |
|
|
mekutata
Joined: May 03, 2015
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 17:13 |
|
maznaz wrote: |
Trying to crowbar a short league feeling into a perpetual league will never work. |
Well, the "crowbar" incoming is Re-Draft after 15 games. That's a fact. It will be there. Question is what to with it. |
_________________
|
|
maznaz
Joined: Jan 26, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 17:25 |
|
mekutata wrote: | maznaz wrote: |
Trying to crowbar a short league feeling into a perpetual league will never work. |
Well, the "crowbar" incoming is Re-Draft after 15 games. That's a fact. It will be there. Question is what to with it. |
Well we all have our feelings about what will happen when the rule is introduced. Why not wait and see though? |
|
|
commisaro
Joined: Nov 15, 2015
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 18:09 |
|
I like the idea of matchmaking being based more on games-played than TV. I think other than the first few bands, where you need it to be as close as possible, it could move to more of a "best effort". |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 18:16 |
|
Games played is a flawed criterion to match teams in a perpetual MM division.
Not all teams start with core skills, gain SPPs and lose players at the same rate.
Pairing 5-game-old Vampires with 5-game-old Dwarfs is clearly not a balanced match-up.
A 10-game-old Wood Elf team could have suffered many injuries and be way weaker than 10 games could suggest. |
|
|
maznaz
Joined: Jan 26, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 19:05 |
|
I'll be honest the more I think about it the more I am failing to understand people's obsession with the games played metric. I can think of lots of situations where I was 15+ games into a team and they were badly hurt and ended up playing a recovery game at 700ktv vs some helpful halflings. Why on earth are you so keen to match that team against a 1600tv orc team with 14 players? It makes no sense. |
|
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 19:19 |
|
I go for games played purely to try to be closer to a tabletop league. You would all redraft at the start of the season, and every given opponent would have played the same number of games as you whenever you play them throughout the season. Some would be beat to hell, some would be high tv, some would be trying to save spp for the next redraft, some would be spending petty cash on inducements. Such a tabletop league seems to be the intended purpose of the ruleset, which has nothing to do with trying to balance things or make them fair matchups, and therefore that's what I think would be the best way to implement it on FUMBBL in order to try to capture that feel. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 19:48 |
|
maznaz wrote: | I'll be honest the more I think about it the more I am failing to understand people's obsession with the games played metric. I can think of lots of situations where I was 15+ games into a team and they were badly hurt and ended up playing a recovery game at 700ktv vs some helpful halflings. Why on earth are you so keen to match that team against a 1600tv orc team with 14 players? It makes no sense. |
Maybe people are afraid of redrafting to 1350 (or lower) and being matched against a 10-15 of 15 team that is perfectly min/maxed at 1350 to hammer 1-5 of 15 teams. |
_________________
[SL] + Official Stunty teams. Progression KO. Old & new teams welcome. 29th May! |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 19:49 |
|
Nelphine wrote: | I go for games played purely to try to be closer to a tabletop league.[...] |
Yes, but when I play a one-off game in the Box I'm not looking for a private league experience.
If I want to play a scheduled private league I play it, with Season Re-Draft and scheduled games.
If I want to play just a one-off game, I play in the Box because I'm not interested in MM game with pseudo-league dynamics, which, in the end, it's not a league game nor a MM game. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %05, %2021 - %19:%Dec; edited 1 time in total |
|
maznaz
Joined: Jan 26, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 19:56 |
|
koadah wrote: | maznaz wrote: | I'll be honest the more I think about it the more I am failing to understand people's obsession with the games played metric. I can think of lots of situations where I was 15+ games into a team and they were badly hurt and ended up playing a recovery game at 700ktv vs some helpful halflings. Why on earth are you so keen to match that team against a 1600tv orc team with 14 players? It makes no sense. |
Maybe people are afraid of redrafting to 1350 (or lower) and being matched against a 10-15 of 15 team that is perfectly min/maxed at 1350 to hammer 1-5 of 15 teams. | those people who are scared of matches they deem unfair probably shouldn’t use any scheduler then. Stick to choosing their opponents in C. There really is no problem here. When seasons are in place, and B is back, and we have some data to work with maybe then people could be justified in suggesting wholesale changes. Right now it makes no sense for a ton of reasons |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 20:03 |
|
What about Box without pairing by number of games?
People who want to play vs teams with same/close number of games or with huge TV gaps can do that on Gamefinder. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 20:07 |
|
Sp00keh wrote: | That'd be collusion though | In a literal sense yes, but in open C play, you are allowed to "collude" with your opponent on the subject of whether and when to play a game, and with what teams. That's not agreeing on in-game events, it's agreeing on whether or not to have any in-game events to not collude on in the first place. |
_________________ Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
maznaz
Joined: Jan 26, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 20:15 |
|
MattDakka wrote: | What about Box without pairing by number of games?
People who want to play vs teams with same/close number of games or with huge TV gaps can do that on Gamefinder. |
I’m pretty sure that’s how it’s being implemented. That’s what I was told on discord. B will just match on TV |
|
|
Waagh
Joined: Apr 13, 2019
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 20:15 |
|
These discussions are hilarious. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
  Posted:
Dec 05, 2021 - 20:42 |
|
maznaz wrote: | MattDakka wrote: | What about Box without pairing by number of games?
People who want to play vs teams with same/close number of games or with huge TV gaps can do that on Gamefinder. |
I’m pretty sure that’s how it’s being implemented. That’s what I was told on discord. B will just match on TV |
Yes, I know, but I was suggesting the OP a compromise, i.e. Gamefinder for playing matches with close number of games played and big TV gaps, while Box for TV-MM only.
In the first post he proposed MM with potential TV gaps and matching by close number of games:
"
- An environment that does not allow cherry-picking of opponents by coaches.
- An environment that does not exclusively reward aggressive TV management (allowing more expansive exploration of team development).
Match teams exclusively by matches played (no other criteria)" |
|
|
|