MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
 Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 14:11 |
 
|
I suggested this tweak for the Trophy in another post:
The current point system is: "A win gives 1 point, a tie gives 0.5 points and a loss gives 0 points." This point system is nice but doesn't work well with tier 3 teams.
It could be modified like this: "A win with a tier 3 team gives 3 points, a tie gives 1.5 points and a loss gives 0 points" or something along this, it could be 4 for win, 2 for tie, 0 for loss, the idea is providing a bonus to make tier 3 teams more appealing.
This point system would apply ONLY to tier 3 teams, the other teams would continue to use the 1/0.5/0 point system.
It's unlikely to win with tier 3 teams therefore they should earn more points when they win.
The other suggestion is reducing the number of Trophy games, because, as far as I know by reading on the forums and by talking to coaches taking part to the Trophy, 200 games require great committment and time. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %29, %2018 - %14:%Aug; edited 2 times in total |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 14:19 |
|
|
Verminardo
Joined: Sep 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 14:35 |
|
@ MattDakka, I think your suggestion changes the dynamic of the whole thing completely, not sure that's a good idea. |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 14:47 |
|
I would probably make it 30 games each race for a total of 150 games rather than 200. This isn't a large tweak, but it does make finishing a racial group more likely for the poor sods (and candlejack) who have multiple stunty races, as well as widening your pool of actual overall finishers.
I would absolutely not use this as a testing ground for redrafting - these teams are not outwith the general box, and can draw anyone with any team in box now after they have played 30+ games. With a re-draft system you either really, really increase the likelihood that someone's freshly reset team gets fed to a 2m tv shark, or you end up with effectively minmaxed teams playing vs teams that are still growing - this is absolutely not a fair situation for a supposed contest. |
_________________
 |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 14:57 |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 14:59 |
|
The last time you played in B with any regularity I wasn't even on the site Koadah 
[edit] And you misunderstand what I'm saying anyway - the re-draft system is going to make some teams very strong for their tv. This is just how it is - some races are going to end up on sweetspots, some are going to end up at points where they are underdeveloped, some teams will be simply better off restarted. But within that, you're going to get teams who simply are in a prime position - eg. a necro team could easily redraft and end up with a blodge mb wolf at 1300tv or so, with some skilled wights and fleshies. This team is now absolutely primed to not only start off in much easier fashion than it would be to build a new necro team, but also to take points off every team around it and slightly under it - which includes any new (box trophy or not) teams coming through. This is't minmaxing, it's just how re-drafting works. The environment isn't suited to it in my opinion.
The box is actually now at a point where people are growing teams again in general rather than perennially hovering around 1400-1500 because 1600+ is cpomb land. Do we really want to introduce a mechanic that actually reverts that for a large segment of the population? |
_________________
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 15:06 |
|
|
happygrue
Joined: Oct 15, 2010
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 15:19 |
|
Personally, I think 30 or 35 games would be great, as that keeps a lot of teams going but also prevents having a team or two shattered being quite as painful. It's a long slog to finish 40 if your team is wrecked. However, doing that does hamper teams like Nurgle and Chaos and other slow developing teams... and those are already not chosen much for this. So it's kind of tricky, too. |
_________________
Come join us in #metabox, the Discord channel for HLP, ARR, and E.L.F. in the box!
 |
|
SzieberthAdam
Joined: Aug 31, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 16:11 |
|
I was not even considered to participate in the trophy because I was sure I am not active enough for that. However, the concept is great, the format is fine, and I hope we will see more seasons to come. I did some analysis of the current standings focusing on the race costs/tiers.
First I tried to create an ordered plot with the average of the topN points of each races to have some visual feedback of the reacial tiers based on existing data. But after filtering the results of races which played a lot of matches already (preferably 40) I realized that there are races which has no teams yet with 40 games played. Only one Norse team get to 30 matches but no Chaos Renegades.
| Code: | Race Cost 40 30+ 20+ 10+ 1+
--------------------------------------------------
Underworld Denizens 1 8 12 17 34 98
Vampire 1 8 11 19 39 101
High Elf 2 7 10 22 34 83
Khemri Tomb Kings 2 6 12 19 33 83
Human 2 5 11 17 34 89
Elven Union 2 5 9 18 26 72
Chaos Chosen 3 5 6 9 12 23
Goblin 0 4 10 15 29 84
Ogre 0 4 7 9 23 66
Necromantic Horror 3 4 5 6 8 26
Dwarf 3 3 5 8 16 29
Lizardman 3 3 4 9 18 29
Shambling Undead 3 3 4 8 18 29
Skaven 3 3 3 8 12 29
Chaos Dwarf 3 2 4 8 17 37
Dark Elf 3 2 4 6 10 24
Halfling 0 2 3 6 19 47
Wood Elf 3 2 3 5 10 21
Orc 3 2 3 4 17 27
Slann 2 1 2 7 12 32
Amazon 3 1 2 5 8 19
Nurgle 3 1 1 4 12 19
Norse 3 0 1 4 7 17
Chaos Renegades 3 0 0 0 3 6 |
When considering the racial costs for season 2 this could be a factor, I mean how promising a race was for its cost and how many of them worth for 40 games.
Ideally I would expect less difference in applicants, as 101 Vampires against 6 Chaos Renegades seems too much.
Considering how attrition affected many of the teams I came up with an idea. Many coaches who see some of their team fail stay out from the competition. I mean a team can cripple the whole squad. Instead of starting over with a new squad I would consider to allow a mid-season replacement for one team.
I had to accept that I am not able to show the average of the top3 points of each races' teams with 40 games because the third of the races have no 3 teams with 40 games. So what I could provide is to show the top known/expected points by races:
| Code: | Race Cost TopPts Decre
-----------------------------------------
High Elf 2 32.5
Human 2 32.0 0.5
Dwarf 3 31.5 0.5
Dark Elf 3 31.0 0.5
Amazon 3 31.0 0.0
Elven Union 2 30.5 0.5
Chaos Dwarf 3 30.0 0.5
Shambling Undead 3 29.5 0.5
Skaven 3 29.5 0.0
Slann 2 29.0 0.5
Lizardman 3 29.0 0.0
Khemri Tomb Kings 2 28.0 1.0
Underworld Denizens 1 27.5 0.5
Necromantic Horror 3 27.5 0.0
Chaos Chosen 3 27.5 0.0
Wood Elf 3 26.5 1.0
Vampire 1 24.5 2.0
Orc 3 24.5 0.0
Halfling 0 23.5 1.0
Ogre 0 22.5 1.0
Nurgle 3 22.5 0.0
Goblin 0 21.5 1.0
Norse 3 20.0 1.5 |
I will refresh these tables once the season is over. |
_________________
   |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 19:19 |
|
| happygrue wrote: | | Personally, I think 30 or 35 games would be great, as that keeps a lot of teams going but also prevents having a team or two shattered being quite as painful. It's a long slog to finish 40 if your team is wrecked. However, doing that does hamper teams like Nurgle and Chaos and other slow developing teams... and those are already not chosen much for this. So it's kind of tricky, too. |
200 games are too many, so I think that any number in the 150-170 range should be a right compromise.
Chaos and Nurgle, even with 50 games, are not as strong as other teams with better starting rosters.
The way to give Chaos and Nurgle more games without increasing the number of games over 170 is decreasing the number of races from 5 to 3, but this reduces the variety. So, yes, tricky. |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 19:22 |
|
I'm pretty sure part of the original intent, or at least part of the benefits this trophy had on the box meta, was to move focus away from chaos and nurgle |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 19:24 |
|
| Sp00keh wrote: | | I'm pretty sure part of the original intent, or at least part of the benefits this trophy had on the box meta, was to move focus away from chaos and nurgle |
The meta shift was already achieved by PO removal. |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 19:45 |
|
Good things about the trophy:
Increased games in box
Increased diversity in box
Lowered mono-activation in the box
Lowered the average TV of box teams(?)
These things are all positive and should be emphasized
It was also admirably no nonsense. No tricks just play 200 games and see who is best
It has a metagame aspect regarding the racial leads and which squad you pick, which further increased diversity
Racial leads being too strong only affects those who were close to getting one but missed out. this is a small cost, maybe 10 coaches? So keep racial bonus points to maximize diversity
Downsides of trophy?
Somewhat complex
Intimidating number of games
Daunting to be forced to play bad/frustrating race for a long time
Tiers were crude, vamps and UW and khemri underpriced so overrepresented
Early casualties could wreck a team / run
Average games played was 46.4
If you ignore the 18 coaches who played 0 or 1 games, average is 49.6
============================
I suggest 3 teams, 30 games each, 6 months (15 games per month)
Tiers replaced with system based on winrate% with a max budget of 150% total
And you can't take any of the same races again in subsequent seasons
Until you've played all of them, ie 8 seasons / 4 years |
Last edited by Sp00keh on %b %29, %2018 - %19:%Aug; edited 1 time in total |
|
SzieberthAdam
Joined: Aug 31, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 19:56 |
|
For simplicity I will refer race brackets as C0-C3 based on their squad costs.
Some things came up to me from the data:
- I would push coaches to play their 200 games with some special gift. A permanent icon or a special item with a minor effect would be fine.
- To counter burnouts, I would recommend a price with a little higher value for number 2..10 places.
- I agree that extra points points should be lowered. I think it should be no more than 1.5 points.
- Looking at the points of C0 teams it seems those teams are barely worth a C2 to C3 trade.
- As there were only 2 C1 teams those races are represented massively, maybe too much. It would be nice to have at least 3 C1 races.
- I would not afraid to adjust racial costs from season to season as it would provide a new challenge for every seasons. I would surely give discount for Norse and Chaos Renegades and may rise cost of High Elves and Humans.
- Consider letting coaches to replace teams in their squads for some points. First replacement could cost 1 point, second could cost 2 and so on. Who aims for the top spot should not replace more than 1 team but who would aim for the top 10 may also risk a second replacement. Note that squad uniqueness limit options if past races are not allowed as replacement.
- I would globally limit teams for all brackets in 3. No more two teams limit on cost 3 races as they would require two zero cost teams either.
Based on the above data, I would go for the following costs for season 2:
C0: Goblin, Halfling, Ogre
C1: Chaos Renegades, Norse, Underworld Denizens, Vampire
C2: Elven Union, Human, Khemri, Nurgle, Orc, Slann, Wood Elf
Some might argue that Wood Elf is a known Tier 1 race but as I pointed out I would like to provide a new challenge for a new season. Note that the above cost table is based on non-final season 1 data. The conventional BB tiers are never tested in a blackbox environment and we would never get a real knowledge on the racial tiers if we do not adjust the costs and stick to our premises.
EDITED for clarification. |
_________________
Last edited by SzieberthAdam on %b %29, %2018 - %21:%Aug; edited 2 times in total |
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 29, 2018 - 20:04 |
|
Interesting
Personally I disagree about replacing teams now. Previously I liked it
Because, if you can swap out a team then it gives advantage to coach who can play 240 games Vs coach who can 'only' play 200 games
It also detracts from the simple gladiatorial purity of it...
If you have team reset/ replacement, it would have to be: the new team carries on the win/loss record of the old team
So if I play 17 games with Amazon and get smashed I can reset, but my replacement team only can play the remaining 23 games
I feel this gives advantage to amazons etc who are better in games 1-20 than in games 21-40, which is probably a bad thing |
|
|
|
|
| |
War Drums?
Search
