| Author |
Message |
Dave |
|
Post subject: I'll be the first then! (oh yeah, about the handicap table)
 Posted: Feb 10, 2003 - 01:18 PM
|
|
da Veiz-Prez
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Netherlands
Posts: 897
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
|
|
Why use a handicap table with fixed TR difference. The difference between a TR 300 and TR 400 team will be much smaller than that between a TR 100 and TR 200 team.
Why not use the relative TR
If One TR is 10% higher than the other that other team gets 1 roll
If one TR is twice (or more) as high as the other that other team gets 4 rolls and may choose one.
etc.
I think this balances the Handicap table out much more.
Any comments?? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Christer |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 10, 2003 - 01:30 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Sweden
Posts: 99
Status: Offline
|
|
I'd say the biggest obstacle in using relative TRs is that it makes the calculations much more difficult.
For example, calculating a difference between TRs is much easier than the percentage...
Example:
Team 1: TR 165
Team 2: TR 187
Easy to see that the difference is 22.. But a quick percentage.. Hmm.. *brings out calculator* Team 2 is ~13% higher.
See what I mean?
-- Christer |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Milo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 10, 2003 - 09:58 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Switzerland
Posts: 127
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
|
|
The simple answer is: Math is hard.
I've seen enough coaches have problems with calculating Team Rating without needing to complicate the Handicap table by using percentages. Also, if the rules are working properly, teams with 400TR should be more or less a thing of the past. I don't think the advantage of switching to percentages would outweigh the disadvantages inherent in a more complex calculation system. |
_________________
Milo
Ex-BBRC Goon
Commish at Large
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Christer |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 10, 2003 - 11:01 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Sweden
Posts: 99
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 07:11 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Switzerland
Posts: 127
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
|
|
There's an exception that proves every rule. You'll note, though, that he hasn't been playing other teams that are even close to his level. If they play someone that's TR300 or less, that coach would be a fool to not choose the "Virus" handicap result, which would prevent 9 of his 16 players from participating in the game! Plus you'd get FOUR more random rolls on the Handicap table. I can't see how a TR300 team, going up against only 7 opposing players, only a couple of which are truly spectacular, with 4 rolls on the handicap table, couldn't cripple the remaining 7 players, much less pull off an easy win.
Milo |
_________________
Milo
Ex-BBRC Goon
Commish at Large
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BlanchPrez |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 08:10 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 288
Status: Offline
|
|
I have to disagree with your statement that he hasn't been playing teams near his TR. That looks like a list of his teams entire history starting at TR100, and it looks like the last couple of games were close to his TR.
Chris
Milo wrote: There's an exception that proves every rule. You'll note, though, that he hasn't been playing other teams that are even close to his level. If they play someone that's TR300 or less, that coach would be a fool to not choose the "Virus" handicap result, which would prevent 9 of his 16 players from participating in the game! Plus you'd get FOUR more random rolls on the Handicap table. I can't see how a TR300 team, going up against only 7 opposing players, only a couple of which are truly spectacular, with 4 rolls on the handicap table, couldn't cripple the remaining 7 players, much less pull off an easy win.
Milo |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Milo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 08:36 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Switzerland
Posts: 127
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
|
|
In his games since he hit 300 TR, he has played opponents on average that were 103.24 TR lower than his. The smallest TR margin was 31, and the highest was 239. Do you consider a TR 200 team playing against a TR 100 team "playing teams near his TR"? What about a TR 300 team and a TR 200 team? The difference is not that much different when you're talking TR 400 vs TR 300.
Admittedly, this may be because there's no one in his league who has as high a TR as he does. I'm not suggesting that he's intentionally picking on weaker teams. But I'd suggest he may not have played a significant challenge yet. And again, if I play a team like his and get 101+ point handicap, I'm picking Virus EVERY TIME. It would literally gut his team.
Milo |
_________________
Milo
Ex-BBRC Goon
Commish at Large
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Christer |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 09:07 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Sweden
Posts: 99
Status: Offline
|
|
Yes, the problem here is that our league doesn't play with handicaps because of them not being supported in the client we use.
And yes, choosing "Virus" is a no-brainer.
Anyhow. That's just an example of a TR 400+ team. FUMBBL has a couple of teams with near 300 rating which are in much better shape.
-- Christer |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Milo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 09:16 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Switzerland
Posts: 127
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
|
|
Ah -- well, not playing with Handicaps will certainly skew the results. Handicaps are intended to bring big teams down a couple of pegs (at least for individual games) and give lower TR teams a much needed boost. Playing without them will clearly favor the established team.
In that case, I don't think we should use teams from FUMBBL as examples for this sort of discussion. Since this team would have been hit by a virus as often as not if they were playing in a real league, they would have a) lost many more games, b) not earned as much money, c) suffered more casualties as a result of being outnumbered on the pitch and d) probably retired a player or three to reduce their TR voluntarily and get them out of the high handicap ranges. Are there any leagues using the full LRB2.0 ruleset who have experienced teams growing to this size? I'd love to see a real life example. |
_________________
Milo
Ex-BBRC Goon
Commish at Large
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
skummy |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 09:19 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 506
Status: Offline
|
|
| The highest our league has seen in about 30 games of play and using strict LRB rules is a 215. We have had tournament winners drop by as much as 50 points due to injury and aging. |
_________________
The only thing to do with good advice is pass it on. It is never any use to oneself.
-Oscar Wilde
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Milo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 09:21 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Switzerland
Posts: 127
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
|
|
| Our goal was to develop the rules to a point where an experienced team would oscillate from the 250-350 range, where a team might fall out of that range on either end for a brief period, but not for long. |
_________________
Milo
Ex-BBRC Goon
Commish at Large
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Grumbledook |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 11:20 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 922
Status: Offline
|
|
| Ok then my choas dwarfs have yet to play a match having an advantage of more than 20 tr hence no handicaps would have been given away. They are at 230ish right now, if i carry on in the same vein and get to tr400 or whatever, would you consider that as valid results? |
_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'
Jon
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Milo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 11:24 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Switzerland
Posts: 127
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
|
|
Grumble -- they would be an excellent example, if you can actually reach that level. But if you're not giving any handicap away, you're playing against other equally good teams. The rules were intended to prevent one team from running away with the league, which it doesn't sound like yours are.
Milo |
_________________
Milo
Ex-BBRC Goon
Commish at Large
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Grumbledook |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 11:30 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 922
Status: Offline
|
|
| Yer thats cause i haven't been playing much, been spending my time getting my team painted up in time for the blood bowl ;] |
_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'
Jon
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BlanchPrez |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 11, 2003 - 12:38 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 288
Status: Offline
|
|
I see... obviously I was not reading the listing right. My apologies than. 
Chris
Milo wrote: In his games since he hit 300 TR, he has played opponents on average that were 103.24 TR lower than his. The smallest TR margin was 31, and the highest was 239. Do you consider a TR 200 team playing against a TR 100 team "playing teams near his TR"? What about a TR 300 team and a TR 200 team? The difference is not that much different when you're talking TR 400 vs TR 300.
Admittedly, this may be because there's no one in his league who has as high a TR as he does. I'm not suggesting that he's intentionally picking on weaker teams. But I'd suggest he may not have played a significant challenge yet. And again, if I play a team like his and get 101+ point handicap, I'm picking Virus EVERY TIME. It would literally gut his team.
Milo |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
