Telcontar
Joined: Nov 12, 2004
|
 Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 18:52 |
 
|
Hmm see my first post... Anyway that were my 5 cents i voted for --It might be ok if you.... (Explain below)
EDITH: And a hill gets wider if you reach the bottom --> narrow on top
Fluffwise that was meant |
_________________
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk? |
|
DonTomaso
Joined: Feb 20, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 18:57 |
|
I believe you'd get the bump-effect in Tel's suggestion too... |
_________________
====================================
Be careful, my common sense is tingling! |
|
nin
Joined: May 27, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 19:02 |
|
jumping up in rank: chalenging more than 1 rank hihger
and that leads to certain amount of cherripicking
like playing only the shoft side of a piramid
and piramid would lead to a problem: what if you challenge someone hihger and are chalenged by a lower team (the repeating matches rule don't prevent that in piramids) |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 19:07 |
|
| Macavity wrote: | Macike! THANK YOU! See how he looked at it and decided he liked Ladder better? Not just assumed that he understood without reading 
What a man!  |
I read it.
Still sounded like Ladder, I can read it again, but it will sound the same |
|
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 19:09 |
|
LOL! I guess I'll work on my language skills, then. |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
Telcontar
Joined: Nov 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 19:40 |
|
@Duke
Ladder lets you challange anyone with more ladder points ..
here you can only challange the guy straight above
Ladder has no consequence if you dont accept challenge you will loose no ladder points just challenge points
here you would drop a level
@nin
sure you will pick the guy that looks easiest to win but thats the same everywhere on fumbbl im not going round and looking for games for my Zons and pick some Dorks
If you loose cose you are challenging only soft woodies with your orcs you wont be able to challenge them again for x games
As soon as one has issued a challange the admin need to update the group page (yeah lots of work there) so you can see who is free for a challange and who is not |
_________________
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk? |
|
macike
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 19:50 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: | | Macavity wrote: | Macike! THANK YOU! See how he looked at it and decided he liked Ladder better? Not just assumed that he understood without reading
|
Still sounded like Ladder, I can read it again, but it will sound the same |
To be well understood. I fully agree with DukeTyrion that it sounds like Ladder. Furthermore I would like to add that the Ladder seems a better idea for me. |
_________________
Hold him, thrill him, kick him, kill him!!! |
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 19:58 |
|
It doesn't work as a system for many different reasons:
-hard monitoring
-TR difference: you start the tournament and reach the top quickly: you have a low TR. Another coach storms to the top quicker=> more TR.
Same problem: you played a long time, ups and down, the new coach will still be interested in beating a long cap?
-afk: coach number 6 is afk for 20 days: nobody can go over or under him
and so on... |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 20:09 |
|
@ sk8bcn To answer your points in order: -hard monitoring. I know, It scares me, but I'm willing to try.
-TR difference. Part of the fun!!! It's all about holding the crown, whether you should or not!
-AFK I would probably take Tel's advise about default wins for the challenger.
-and so on.... Yeah? You to! And your dog! |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 20:27 |
|
I kinda like the pyramid idea (on the top 5 levels) for the following reason:
It allows for a mechanism, where bashiest isn`t best and all teams make sense to chose.
You`d just have to add one rule:
You cannot ever ever play against the same team more than once. That means, that you are forced to play to win and cannot siege your way to the next level by maiming over and over again until you will eventually win.
Let me explain further:
Imagine you are coaching "Teh uba bashaz" a very mean orc team with 11 MBs and as much DPs. You are reaching lvl 3 and both lvl2s are woodies/skaven. Naturally, as you have no ball-skills (throwaz are for teh weak) you lose to both of them. Then you are essentially stuck on lvl3 and have to fight to stay there, UNTIL someone else from lvl3 manages to win against lvl2, giving you another shot to advance to lvl2. |
|
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 20:48 |
|
I could be convinced to go with the Pyramid scheme. Could one of you guys explain how you'd see it setting up, originally? I get how it runs, but I'm shaky on that. Detail it for my addled brain. |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 22:08 |
|
How I would do it:
Simply wait for the first 10 applications to come in. Match them up randomly and let them play one game, then fill them into the pyramid in the order of most TDs scored. Tiebreakers are Win/Tie/Loss, then TR (the lower the better), then cas, then cointoss.
After that you can start a new lvl every time you have 5 (+number of retired teams) newcomers, who will train on their way up.
I would limit the lvl size to five. You might think about having a bottom lvl (10?) with an unlimited amount of teams.
If a team retires, the next one to score a tie why challenging up to that lvl will make it (opposed to needing a win to go up). Obviously the king of the hill may not retire. If by retirement a whole lvl is eliminated, then the first team challenged and only making a tie goes down (without the challenger going up).
Example:
1
22
33
4444
One team retired on lvl 3. Next time one lvl 4 team challenges and only ties the lvl3 team, it will go up. If now the other 2 teams on 3rd lvl retire, then every team is moved up one lvl. Making the thing look like this:
1
22
3333
44444
Now everytime a there is a match between 3 and 4, which results in a tie, the lvl 3 is demoted until there are again 3 teams on lvl 3. That way the overhang moves down in lvls until it hits the bottom. |
|
|
Buur
Joined: Apr 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 22:17 |
|
well it seems like fun if it was with a limmited number of coaches that want to play regulary.... likke ladder with people in....
well count me in!
we could also get that goldfish vs black smurf thing settled....
-Buur |
_________________
For most people, reason is nothing but their own believes. |
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 22:24 |
|
Well, I think I'll do it! I'll sit on the exact setup for a couple of days and then launch. |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
milnestar
Joined: Oct 23, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 02, 2005 - 22:27 |
|
Forget the pyramid. This will work really well with a small number of like minded coaches. A maximum group of 10 would be sufficient. Who cares about technicalities such as TR its more about fun. If you made it last a set amount of dates - maybe two weeks and a rule that all coaches had to play at least one game every two days ( ? ) then it sound slike a hoot.
WHO's the KING ?
I'd be in - if the timescales suited. |
_________________
Milnestar proudly drinks Stella Artois ! |
|
|
|
Gnomes are trash
Search
