Rennigeb
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Oct 15, 2003 - 11:51 |
 
|
If you want playoffs for entry into the premier then let bottom side be autodemoted (with top side in 2nd Div autopromoted) and the playoff be between 7th place and 2nd.
As for the point system. I prefer the 3 points for a win, 1 for a draw. TD difference separating equal points. Casualities should not be have an influence on team placement. Casualities should be a means towards victory, not a mode for gaining extra points. |
|
|
Tath
Joined: Oct 01, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 15, 2003 - 12:07 |
|
I like the divisions set up sounds cool. I also understand your relagation set up if a team retires  .
I personally dont like the points system though that has been suggested. Personally i like the simple 3, 1, 0 system. Everything in the game is relative ... yes scoring is its own reward, ie its more SPP's than casualties, BUT casualties are also its own reward in that it weakens the oppoenets team affecting their next game ... and think of this ... consider a supposed "scoring" team, if they lose whats the odds of them actually getting many points ? ie they havent won the TD's point, and very unlikely to have won the Cas point; BUT consider the supposed non-scoring, cas team, if they lose whats the odds of them getting points ? certainly a lot more than the non cas teams as its quite likely for them to "win" the cas point even if they dont win the TD point. It will skew thw results towards scoring teams getting beaten on a larger scale more often than cas teams.
either way the ability to cause casualities inevitably results in the ability to score more likely heance win more likely, you have to at least entertain the fact that all teams (with few exceptions) are moe or less balanced towards pureyl winning in their own right, so to base a points system on the teams impolies that the simple win/loss/draw point schedule is the most "balanced/fair".
..... cheers |
|
|
ClayInfinity
Joined: Aug 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 15, 2003 - 12:13 |
|
Twahn,
It is your league, your idea and you are the Commish... I am happy to abide by whatever rules are provided. I have read Cataphracts detailed post and I agree with him. I have also read the 3-1-0 theorists (of which I am one) and I can also see the logic and believe it to be fair.
Therefore, both are fair, both get my vote.
Besides, I bet you my last Norse Lineman that not a single one of the players in the Oceania League will "quit" due to a points system they may perceive to be biased. We will all play, we will all strive to win.
May the best team win... (which will be me, but I have to acknowledge the competition) |
|
|
vigil
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 15, 2003 - 17:39 |
|
As for half points under the Seven Point System, that only happens when the scores are tied. To keep away from messy decimal points simply times everything by ten - the Seventy point system with five points awarded for the cas victory.
Like cata said, if the orcs decide to bash the elves to get points in a hypothetical game and ignore the ball that's great if there game plan involves them getting a (2-5) major loss. It doesn't matter how many casualties you score if you got out touchdowned by more than one (ie. 3-1 or whatver) then the elves still kick your green ass. |
|
|
Twahn
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 01:32 |
|
Cat,
I'm willing to go with the bonus point for the most Casualties, but to award a win to the team with the most Casualties in the case of a tie seems very unjust. It basically means that Bashy teams need only draw to win and Elfy teams lose whenever they draw. There's no justice there.
Elves are good at winning by a huge margin and Orcs are good at beating the snot out of pansies. All teams, however, should be equally capable of actually winning the game using whichever style of play that they choose.
In reference to players inevitably dying. That's right! If anyone's scared of their players dying, remember you're their coach, not their mother. Get over it, there's plenty more where they came from...
Neverborn,
Ahhh... Of course. I'm so stupid. Surely though, in your example, 4, 7, & 8 should all be replaced in the Premier and the 3 up, 2 down shuffle should begin in Div 1? I can't see why 7th should escape relegation and the shuffle be delayed by a Division...
Renni,
I think just auto promotion and relegation between the divisions is best. The only playoffs I was thinking of were for the Premiership Title.
I agree with the awarding of points for Casualties issue.
At the end of the day, it's about scoring Touchdowns, beating people should just be a means to an end.
Tath,
That's right. All teams should be equally suited to winning the game, no matter how they actually achieve this. They should all be equally rewarded for it too. At present, we're giving more points for big victories, but we shouldn't be as it is to the advantage of the fast teams who can score 5 TDs in a game.
I'm liking the simple old soccer style scoring more and more...
Clay,
That's right, I'm the boss.
PS Nobody wants your smelly Norse Linemen... 
Vigil,
Yep. But the problem is that if the Orcs try to tie it up, it will most likely count as a Major Loss (5 points for the Orcs (3 for the Win (A draw with more Cas counting as a win), 1 for Playing, 1 for more Cas, 1 for the Elves (for Playing), and 1... I can only assume that this extra point must go to the Commish?)
Nope, I think the fairest is looking like ignoring the method completely and just cutting to the heart of the matter. Who won? You did? Okay, 3 points for you then. |
|
|
ClayInfinity
Joined: Aug 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 01:39 |
|
Twahn,
I read your response and gather that the 3-1-0 theorists have gained your support... then it is settled!
And if anybody quits as a result, a smelly Norseman will be paying Twahn a visit... |
|
|
ClayInfinity
Joined: Aug 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 01:42 |
|
Twahn,
As an aside, how are teams split when the points table is tied. At the moment, I have a team in the Fumbbl Open who is tied on 4pts with 3 other teams. I am leading this pack simply because my team name starts with "D" and is alphabetically superior...
Since we go with 3-1-0, can the tourney system then rank tied teams based on TR? Or will it be For-and-Against on TD's then CAS's??
Can the fumbbl system do this? |
|
|
neverborn
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 02:37 |
|
Twahn
your model works fine mate, i just didnt want to add confusion unless entirely necessary, i assume though that most of the time the team retiring will finish in 7th or 8th.
So assuming it is team 7, rather than team 4 that retires, then 2 will go down to div 2 and three will come up from div 3 to div 2 (because only one actual team has been relegated).
I thought that by making a retired team one of the relegation spots, we could try to avoid relegating more than 2 teams wherever possible.
For instance, if team 4 and team 5 retire, then 4 teams are relegated from the premier, and this means a lot of teams moving (not that there is anything wrong with that) but thats just my reason for my model.
Again, yours works fine, so which ever you prefer will make the league work well.
As for the scoring system
as an elf i obviously have to favour simple systems that allow me to get the most points.
A 7 point system is a very good option (i prefer 8 points myself)
The 8 point system is the same except that you get 1 point each for turning up (6 left)
2.5 each for a draw
4 points for the winner if by only one TD and one for the loser
5 points for the winner if by 2 tds of greater (1 point left)
and a point to the winner of the cas count.
So this gives you the spread:
7-1 (slaughtered)
6-2 (elves ran away with it, but the orcs managed to win cas)
5-3 (good win by the elves, but the orcs got the cas and kept them close)
3.5-4.5 (draw with one team winning the cas)
4-4 (draw in all senses of the word)
While it has the same structure as the 7 point system, it advantages the teams that score touchdowns and win games, in the structure of a league, winning 2-1 and losing the cas (as agility teams often do) will get them a 5-3 win. I think that is a fair representation of the game, the elves won and deserve to get rewarded, but the slow team held them and managed to do what they do best.
Also, it gives elf teams a reason to be a bit bashy, if you want 7 points you need to win cas, or to get the ball out of that dwarven cage so that they can win 3-1 and get the extra point.
I think this system keeps games interesting right to the end.
Even if you prefer the 7 point model (which this is clearly ripped off from) then you are seeing the blood in bloodbowl as an important part of the game. A skaven team won it at the last tourney, and because push outs and fouls count on your cas count, we are trying to include all aspects of the game.
I think its the best system. |
|
|
Twahn
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 02:57 |
|
| Clay wrote: | | Can the fumbbl system do this? |
No. No, it can't...
And this is the main argument against a simple scoring system like the old 3-1-0. FUMBBL needs all the factors to be wrapped up in one number that it can rank the teams by. It can't have a score and then break ties based on this on that.
You guys could be on the money with your 7/8 point system... |
_________________
Founder of the Southern Wastes League
DonTwahn's Dungeon = Cheap Miniatures! Check it out... |
|
RIPNE1
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 03:03 |
|
| Quote: |
Yep. But the problem is that if the Orcs try to tie it up, it will most likely count as a Major Loss (5 points for the Orcs (3 for the Win (A draw with more Cas counting as a win), 1 for Playing, 1 for more Cas, 1 for the Elves (for Playing), and 1... I can only assume that this extra point must go to the Commish?)
Nope, I think the fairest is looking like ignoring the method completely and just cutting to the heart of the matter. Who won? You did? Okay, 3 points for you then.
|
in this example, scores are tied but orcs win casualty count it is 4-3 to the orcs... a narrow win |
|
|
FLo711
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 04:13 |
|
Does it realy matter if the fumbbl system can't handle it? Im mean the commish does al the relegating, and any playoffs are considered a seperate tournament anywasy right? So all u have to do is add up for F-A if you are tied and then u know who is first and who is second.
I play a bashy team in the league (CD) but I still prefer the 3-1 method. Winning as they is everything |
_________________
(Ex-Tyrant) Clay's Blog: Lime Kettles |
|
pharaoh
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 04:49 |
|
I presume the new FACTION division should help us achieve our goal here?? |
|
|
ClayInfinity
Joined: Aug 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 04:57 |
|
I understand Faction is an entire Open div style league... but one team per coach...
The ladders are over the entire fumbbl population, and i don't think you can have an "Oceania Specific" faction...
Simply the first 20 coaches in are Faction 1 and the next are in Faction 2 and the promotion relegation begins... |
|
|
whitey
Joined: Sep 19, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 05:02 |
|
Well 3-1-0 is great as well, especially for simplicity. Its your call Twahn. |
|
|
Tath
Joined: Oct 01, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 16, 2003 - 05:27 |
|
| Twahn wrote: | Tath,
That's right. All teams should be equally suited to winning the game, no matter how they actually achieve this. They should all be equally rewarded for it too. At present, we're giving more points for big victories, but we shouldn't be as it is to the advantage of the fast teams who can score 5 TDs in a game.
I'm liking the simple old soccer style scoring more and more... |
ditto. it appears the only system that essentially gives no advantage to any "style" of play. though i do see the issue of ranking, just not sure its the worast issue though (as compared to the imbalance of other scoring systems).
| neverborn wrote: | So this gives you the spread:
7-1 (slaughtered)
6-2 (elves ran away with it, but the orcs managed to win cas)
5-3 (good win by the elves, but the orcs got the cas and kept them close)
3.5-4.5 (draw with one team winning the cas)
4-4 (draw in all senses of the word)
|
think of it in the reverse though ... orcs win ...
7-1 (yes orcs slaughtered the elves ...)
6-2 (orcs ran away with bit but didnt win cas seems unlikely, more likely to be a 7-1)
5-3 (good win by orcs, elves got the cas, but kept it close ... again how likely a scneario ?)
3.5-4.5 (draw with one team winning cas ... likely to be bashy team or dodgy team ?)
4-4 (draw in all sense of the word)
perhaps im missing something but it simply seems that when a bashy team wins they will likely win big 7-1, 6-2. whereas a dodgy team has a harder time winning bigger. and given that both teams at least have an even chance of winning (regardless if dodgy teams can score more TD's), it appears biased towards bashy teams. if a bashy team and dodgy team have won equal games it is most likely going to be the bashy team on more points due to the better chance of winning more cas counts. Let winning be the important thing, by whatever style best suits your team. |
Last edited by Tath on %b %16, %2003 - %05:%Oct; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
| |
Pact/Renegades meta
Search
