Rbthma
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
|
 Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 08:37 |
 
|
| JimmyFantastic wrote: | | Kryten wrote: | | On the flip side, one change that I feel should really be in there already is "All TV below 1000 are treated as equal to 1000." |
I don't think anyone can argue with this. Unnerf Flings and teams that have a really bad early game! |
Agreed. My Underworld team has dipped below 100TV twice in it's first 6 matches. At 880TV, will I even be able to find another match? |
|
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 08:56 |
|
So there is almost an exact thread in early 2015 and nothing has changed... I respectfully wonder how things go about changing in a large society with varying opinions.
Christer said "The chart pretty obviously implies that TV difference has very little effect on actual win rates"
Is that chart implying that a -870TV difference increases average win% for the -870 team? Surely that's reversed and should be +870?
Either way;
I think that chart only proves that variance (luck) has more of a part to play the greater the TV difference??
-450TV onwards significantly! Even between -150TV (WIZARD) and -450TV there is an effect, though less significant.
I.e. 'the competition factor' or skill of a coach becomes less important after 150TV difference, and significantly after 450TV difference, which is the main point of the thread I think. It's not that facing a high TV means an unfair game for the lower value team, but that depending on the very variable inducements one gets, it becomes an 'unfair' luck game more often for either team. The unfairness or lack of competition dictates the amount of fun because no one (amateur or expert) enjoys sitting there for an hour of 'unfair' battering. |
Last edited by Desultory on %b %31, %2016 - %09:%Aug; edited 1 time in total |
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 09:01 |
|
Getting 3 turnovers on 4 actions is unfair luck and yet we press on. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 09:04 |
|
i feel like 'unfair battering' is going to be nebulous, a matter of opinion or circular in explanation. |
|
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 09:23 |
|
| mrt1212 wrote: | Getting 3 turnovers on 4 actions is unfair luck and yet we press on.
i feel like 'unfair battering' is going to be nebulous, a matter of opinion or circular in explanation.
|
So the best solution in your mind; let's increase that luck factor more!
There is nothing nebulous about that graph if I read it correctly. It shows variance increasing with greater TV difference, which proves the point.
Greater variance means predominantly less fun games for every ability because of 'unfairness'/missmatching/whatever you want to call it, that exists from the beginning of the game.
That doesn't mean luck won't even out occasionally over the course of a game with good/bad rolls, but it means on average the games with -450 TVdifference won't be competitive.
Of course there are some people who don't care about that, or conversely even seem to want this extra variance for whatever reason, seemingly like yourself.
But personally I think 'unfair matchups' draw beginners and experts away in general, and I don't think that is an advantageous thing overall or for my personal enjoyment. There is enough dice luck in the game, without extenuating it to the point of slots or crapshoot. |
|
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 09:59 |
|
My solution offers a way for people to have some kind of control over if they get unlimited TV draws or not, while still limiting min/max rookie hunting... But whatever. |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 11:27 |
|
| Mr_Foulscumm wrote: | | My solution offers a way for people to have some kind of control over if they get unlimited TV draws or not, while still limiting min/max rookie hunting... But whatever. |
I'm not sure if you are being genuine or spam trolling like mrt.
Is 'your solution' this: ?
| Mr_Foulscumm wrote: | Have the 30+ game age cut-off apply to the oldest active player on the team and not on the team as a whole?
So a 2000+ team game wouldn't have an unlimited TV gap if all players are "younger" than 30 games?
|
I agree it would solve problems.
I expanded on that:
| Desultory wrote: |
- Instead;(2) Average quantity of games between all of your players. Making that team equivalent to a 7 game team. (though I can see an 10 man rookie team with one legend CPOMB player exploiting that.)
- So; average quantity of games between the top 2,3,4 or x SPP players on a team. That would make that specific team equivalent to playing 23.55, 19 or 16 games respectively. Jiggle the number but seems fairer to me, and overall solves the problem.
- Or maybe AV7 teams should be an exception?  |
|
|
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 11:45 |
|
I'm not trolling.
You point out the glaring exploit for your suggested idea, then come up with a solution that doesn't fix the first exploit you created. Then you suggest that Amazons, one of the most notorious min/max offenders should be exempt from the solution entirely.
Seems like I should be the one asking you if you're trolling. |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 12:21 |
|
Can you explain to me how '(2)average quantity of games between the top 2,3,4 or x SPP players on a team.' doesn't fix the first exploit.
P.s.
| Mr_Foulscumm wrote: | | the glaring exploit for your suggested idea |
is actually the same exploit that effects 'your solution', which from what I can see, is the same as solution one that I gave an exploit for.
Your last comment seemed trolly to me. At least I didn't ignore 'your solution', but whatever. |
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 12:45 |
|
| Desultory wrote: | | Christer said "The chart pretty obviously implies that TV difference has very little effect on actual win rates" |
Bingo. The real issues in Box are min/maxing and lack of racial diversity, not TV disparities. You're just as likely to get torn apart by a min/maxed team at the same TV as one 400 TV higher (except in the latter case the TV gap can be used as a scapegoat). At least with inducements, you can take stars/mercs/apos to increase your bench and help limit the damage to your own players.
| mrt1212 wrote: | | i feel like 'unfair battering' is going to be nebulous, a matter of opinion or circular in explanation. |
I like my fish to be fairly battered. Tastes better than way ..  |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!"  |
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 12:48 |
|
@Fouly: I like your suggestion about using the max. # of games the players have played rather than the team - makes a lot of sense. |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" |
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 12:49 |
|
| JellyBelly wrote: | | You're just as likely to get torn apart by a min/maxed team at the same TV as one 400 TV higher (except in the latter case the TV gap can be used as a scapegoat). |
This is not accurate or proven anywhere, and it is a separate point (addressed in the CPOMB thread) to the one the thread addresses. (Competition) |
|
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 12:52 |
|
| JellyBelly wrote: | | @Fouly: I like your suggestion about using the max. # of games the players have played rather than the team - makes a lot of sense. |
I get the sense that the forums aren't a place where anything useful gets decided, so I think I'm boycotting from here on out. Sorry for hijacking the thread mattdakka IF I haven't supported your points with my latest posts. |
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 13:02 |
|
| Desultory wrote: | | JellyBelly wrote: | | You're just as likely to get torn apart by a min/maxed team at the same TV as one 400 TV higher (except in the latter case the TV gap can be used as a scapegoat). |
This is not accurate or proven anywhere, and it is a separate point (addressed in the CPOMB thread) to the one the thread addresses. (Competition) |
So, you lose a game occasionally to a team 800TV higher than you? Big deal - losses happen, man up. Maybe one day you'll get lucky and beat down on some poor minnow 800TV lower than you ..
| Desultory wrote: | | I get the sense that the forums aren't a place where anything useful gets decided. |
I agree with this statement!  |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" |
|
Balle2000
Joined: Sep 25, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 31, 2016 - 13:17 |
|
| Desultory wrote: | | I get the sense that the forums aren't a place where anything useful gets decided. |
I was trying to figure out a way to explain this to you. Although it's not entirely accurate, Christer reads and posts the forums too, and he is the one making the decisions.
However in this particular case you will find that the more or less exact motions you've gone through in this thread, someone else went through in 2015.
And 2014.
And 2013.
And that's a sober estimate. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnome Roster - how a...
Search
