| Poll |
| Compared to playing with somewhat skilled up teams, playing a single new TV 1000 matchup is.... |
| Pretty much the worst test of coaching skill |
|
6% |
[ 6 ] |
| A pretty bad test of coaching skill |
|
40% |
[ 40 ] |
| A similar test of coaching skill |
|
16% |
[ 16 ] |
| A pretty good test of coaching skill |
|
16% |
[ 16 ] |
| Pretty much the best test of coaching skill |
|
5% |
[ 5 ] |
| Pie |
|
17% |
[ 17 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 100 |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
 Posted:
Feb 18, 2016 - 17:07 |
 
|
I seem to remember clicking on a thing linking the prizes, and at least some of them being in the form of computing equipment?
I am not in the field of advertising, but 35 k Euro doesn't sound a lot to me to have X thousand, invested computer nerds covet and peruse your kit. If one to two of them go on to buy a proper gaming rig and a few more keep you in mind... Job done? Again, not an expert, but it doesn't seem like a huge investment.
Off topic ahoy!  |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 18, 2016 - 17:31 |
|
While I don't participate in the FUMBBL majors (or any tournaments here) I think those kinds of tournaments are the 'best test' as they allow for each coach to (usually) bring exactly what they think they need to win it. There are essentially no restrictions and the teams are (mostly) maxed out versions of any particular coaches 'best' build.
I strongly dislike resurrection style as it simply feels false to me, the game should be about the luck of the build as much as it is about the luck of the CAS dice, however, that's not to say those kinds of tournaments are without their own merits, they simply do not appeal to me and I think they are a false test of ability, or at least a limited test of ability.
What Cyanide is doing isn't really about 'the best' anyway, everyone knows that, even if they are obviously going to market it as 'find the best BB coach in the world', because that's just marketing, why would anyone spin any gears over that?
As dode pointed out, the format for their WC is restricted due to the limitations of their tournament building in the client, but, as with any tournament, the rules are clearly defined and the winner will lay claim to being the 'best' out of that meta. Already it's interesting to see the shifts in popular teams running in the open ladder qualifier. Started with so many DE you wanted to puke, but now it seems to be all about AV9 orcs, dwarfs, and lizards. So the internal meta game of how to approach the shifting numbers in terms of likely matchups becomes quite interesting, even if you aren't completely concerned about trying for an 18+ win team.
But that's a bit of a digression from the OP question.
What's the best way to determine coaching skill?
Duh, there isn't one.
Different coaches will have different skill levels at different places in the meta. The catch all that is XFL is also false though closer to a 'truth' perhaps since it's all the same races, and the XFL masters is simply too small to be interesting.
I've maintained that B should be about proving your ability to play multiple different teams with that scheduler, then the cream would truly rise to the top, but that's over 10s if not 100s of game per coach. Can't have that for a 3 month qualifier into a 64 team KO. |
|
|
Verminardo
Joined: Sep 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 18, 2016 - 17:57 |
|
| licker wrote: | | While I don't participate in the FUMBBL majors (or any tournaments here) I think those kinds of tournaments are the 'best test' as they allow for each coach to (usually) bring exactly what they think they need to win it. There are essentially no restrictions and the teams are (mostly) maxed out versions of any particular coaches 'best' build. |
That's assuming that all participants have the ability (and willingness) to play infinite prep games, which is true (or close enough) for some but certainly not the majority. I've never entered a team in a Major that was anywhere near my "ideal" team. If you look at this year's Warpstone Open you'll see several of Fumbbls best brought underdeveloped or battered teams. I'm currently scheduled in the CoS against PeteW and his team is this. (He's probably gonna kick my ass anyway.) |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 18, 2016 - 18:12 |
|
It's the theory, not the practice 
Might apply less to B majors than R majors, but generally it's more true than it is false |
|
|
the_Sage
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 19, 2016 - 12:24 |
|
Well I have to agree with Licker there; the only time I won a R major, my wood elves peaked at TV 2910 during their run.
As for the prize money, that was my bad. There's "$35k worth of prizes" announced, but a lot of that 'value' is the software publisher giving packs of (old?) games away, and counting them at full retail value, I suspect. It's actually $10k in cash (across the top 8, with most going to the top 4), 3 game PCs (for the top 3), and an assorted bunch of digital game codes. More info here. |
_________________
Content: Twitch / Youtube ; Updates: Facebook / Twitter
(because big banners are compensating) |
|
DarthPhysicist
Joined: Jun 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Apr 16, 2016 - 00:23 |
|
At 1000 TV, you really are at the mercy of the dice/RNG, unless of course you play it safe and go dorfs. As choosing dorfs doesn't really speak to your skill but rather your ability to recognize that block is good, tackle is good, and sure hands is good, winning with them at 1000 TV just shows that you don't totally blow as a coach. Good coaches build players that make the team better and manage their TV appropriately and don't spam worthless skills (oh I don't know, shadowing on dorf longbeards for example). Its not the worst of course, because every once in awhile, someone just can't bowl their way out of a box of cereal with dorfs.
Now that I've already voted though... I can't help wondering what kind of test of coaching skill would be worse... |
_________________
Using derivative humor since 2005.
 |
|
Elyoukey
Joined: Nov 30, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 19, 2016 - 00:48 |
|
if it was for me i would say the best way to find the best coach would be to force a specific roster and humans is the team i think would fit the bill for risk management and positionning.
No uber AG4 player, no uber +ST players and only standard skills, few st access, a few ag access.
The format would be 100 to 110 TV with 4 to 6 skills, no double no champion. |
_________________
 |
|
|
|
| |
Jump up on a tree?
Search
