Forum rules
Please stay on topic at all times in this board.
Please be respectful to other members and administrators.
No spam.
Author |
Message |
jtothepowerof8
|
Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:19 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:28 am Posts: 264
|
Gold medals are incredibly simple to get. So much so that they are a worthless accolade. A person doesn't even have to spend money to get one. If you live in your mother's basement and have no friends, you could get a gold medal every week with some half-assed build that only wins 60% of the time.
The weekly tournament rewards quantity, not quality and the pool of people who like to brag about how much time they spend on their computer isn't nearly as large as the pool of people who would like to be able to brag about their win-rate for a week.
Let's have a 64-player bracket-style tournament where you enter a single setup. You can replenish your kits between matches but not change their type. And you can't touch anything else about your setup. Then we'd have an accolade worth fighting for. I'd play this without even a reward.
|
|
Top |
|
Fang456
|
Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament Posted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 1:17 am |
|
News Team |
![News Team News Team](./images/ranks/rank14.png) |
|
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 9:40 am Posts: 242 Location: England Gender: male
|
Nice idea J^8
_________________ Fang456! -300 Subs + COUNTING! -SUPERMECHS GOALS: 1) Reach 1 Gold Medal 2) Reach 1 Silver Medal 3) Reach 1 Bronze Medal 4) Get Into The Top Clan 5) Reach 100 Mythicals ![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif) 6) Spend $1000
|
|
Top |
|
bestplayerintheworld
|
Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament Posted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 11:15 am |
|
Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 11:16 am Posts: 1421
|
_________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/RnoI8GT.jpg?1) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Top |
|
malicewolf
|
Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament Posted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:01 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 11:02 pm Posts: 1622
|
Regardless of who's got the better ratio here, both are quite fantastic.
But overall, I believe J^8 was trying to get at the fact that some people can actually physically be at their computer longer to put in more matches, but it doesn't necessarily mean they actually have a better mech.
With the results shown, we can't see who you lost those 32 matches with. For all we know, that could be 32 losses against J^8, which would make it seem like he's the better player, but you could log in more hours (I am NOT saying this is actually the case, just putting the scenario up there).
The tournament style would eliminate the quantity aspect and make it purely about the quality of the mech and a tad bit of luck.
If we calculate everyone's Win/Lose ratios they come out to the following: Best - 38.03 CocodiJoco - 5.57 Dewah77 - 8.26 r1234 - 12.71 Nic - 17.47 grosbite - 11.15 crash - 10.91 Dottore - 8.24 j^8 - 29.47 DongNiYu - 9.13
Just looking at the example you put up Best, sure you deserve 1st with your win ratio, but CocodiJoco's ratio is 5.57. It's the WORST out of the top 10 there. While the fact that he played so much more should be attributed, the fact that his ratio is so low should also be factored in. j^8's ratio is VERY good. He SHOULD be 2nd based on that ratio determination, but he can't log in the hours like you do.
I dunno what the current system calculates exactly, but it should be point based in my opinion. Wins = x pts Losses = loss of x pts
So if Winning were +2 pts and losing was -5 or something, then we'd have a better system for determining those who deserve rewards. It still rewards quantity, but puts more emphasis on quality (better ratios).
New rankings based on above would be 1. Best - 2594 2. Dewah - 1428 3. Coco - 1228 4. r1234 - 1123 5. j^8 - 1025 6. Nic - 1018 7. grosbite - 951 8. crash - 908 9. DongNuYu - 809 10. Dottore - 804
_________________
![Image](http://i66.tinypic.com/2ljq4yf.jpg) Gettin' real tired of your shi...
|
|
Top |
|
bestplayerintheworld
|
Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament Posted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:20 pm |
|
Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 11:16 am Posts: 1421
|
|
Top |
|
malicewolf
|
Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament Posted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 1:11 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 11:02 pm Posts: 1622
|
ah, my mistake, fixed the 3.
Point being once again. Those who commit more time should not be burdened just because they have the time. But those who cannot commit quite as much shouldn't be burdened either when they no doubt DO have considerably better mechs as seen by the stats.
There is no doubt, you should be on the top in all the scenarios above. But, Coco having the WORST W/L ratio of the group (and by a large gap too), should be factored in as well in my opinion. Coco's got quantity, but not quality. My altered version would reward j^8 for his superior mech with his great win/lose ratio, but not so much that it overshadow's the time dedicated by Coco.
And I do have to agree with the quantity of medals, vs. quality issue. BD has a similar issue going on. There are indeed a good many who deserve the medals they have and the medals are a good representation of THEIR specific achievements. Then we have other's who have simply gotten away with farming medals on noncompetitive worlds, yet they have more medals than some of the best players in the game.
It's not to say your achievements aren't earned, but that not everyone's are.
_________________
![Image](http://i66.tinypic.com/2ljq4yf.jpg) Gettin' real tired of your shi...
|
|
Top |
|
bestplayerintheworld
|
Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament Posted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 4:04 pm |
|
Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 11:16 am Posts: 1421
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
![cron](./cron.php?cron_type=tidy_cache&battlegate_prod_sid=e488ac140f5674b467576feebfee53b7)
|