Frydaddy
-
Content Count
27 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Frydaddy
-
-
it'd be one thing if the players lost and we're boohooing about not making the cut but players who could have made it because they won didn't make it because the the other 4 tables said nah we aren't gonna have any lisers here and let anyone jump into the top 8Here's the answer: WIN all your games and you don't have to worry about it. Sounds like a lot of Boohooing from the players that were almost there. NEWS FLASH: Not everyone gets a trophy.
Another point: You can ID into a Top Cut, but you can't ID after that.
They should have WON their earlier games.
arkhamssaber and Rawling reacted to this -
Here's the answer: WIN all your games and you don't have to worry about it. Sounds like a lot of Boohooing from the players that were almost there. NEWS FLASH: Not everyone gets a trophy.
Another point: You can ID into a Top Cut, but you can't ID after that.arkhamssaber reacted to this -
Moving on...my point has been made, MOV sucks.
"Peace Out!" (Drops mic)
-
Are you sure you understand it? Here let me spell it out.I think it's becoming painfully clear that we're not actually discussing the same things here.
Most of us are considering the merits of X-wing's SoS-based tournament system and X-wing's MoV-based tournament system.
Frydaddy is at least in the ballpark of X-wing's MoV-based tournament system, if an excessively pessimistic view of it... but I'm not convinced he's ever even read X-wing's SoS-based tournament system, because he has yet to describe anything remotely like it.
At six pages in, if someone hasn't bothered to educate themselves to even the most basic familiarity with the topic at hand, they're obviously uninterested in doing so.
I am 2-1 going in to the final round. and my loss was due to bad dice rolling vs a 1-2 turtling opponent in the second round( we were both undefeated going into the second round) He killed 65 points and I killed 50, diff of 15. So I get an 85 and he gets 115 and 5 points for the match win. Now going into the last round I get paired down to an "easy" opponent. I crush this guy's hopes and dream and wipe him off the table, I kill all 100 pts. He got in a few lucky shots and killed 30 points. Diff of 70, so I walk away with 170 and the match points of 5. and he walks away with 30. Now at Table 1 the two undefeated guys are going at it and it was a close game. Undefeated guyA kills 55 and undefeated guyB destroys40, which is a diff of 15. guyB and I now have the same record, 3-1. We were close in MOV all day. But because I got paired down, I took advantage of smashing a novice player and with my MOV points of170 of that game my MOV total is higher than guyB. Thank god I got paired down because 2nd place paid out $40 and 3rd place got $10.
-
Vorpal:
With MOV, what type of player do you want to get matched up against, to further yourself in the standings. Weak or strong?
With SOS, what type of player do you want to get matched up against, to further yourself in the standings. Weak or strong?
In SOS, When a player drops, do the rounds after they drop count against them? Or does their SOS rating stay the same?
With MOV, are you rewarded for smashing a newb?
With MOV, are you rewarded for turtling against a good player?
With MOV, are you punished for playing a better opponent?
IMHO MOV should be used to calculate SOS. it is a great metric to figure SOS, but a lousy first tie break.
-
Holy cow! The amount of misinformation about byes, SOS, and how a swiss tournament is suppose to be ran is mind blowing.
MOV is easier, simpler, understandable, linear, basic, straight forward, elementary, uncomplicated...and that is why people like it.
MOV can be manipulated, rewards smashing newbs, promotes turtling when playing good opponents, punishes you when you play a good game against a good opponent.
I can agree that MOV can work if, all the opponents are the same quality and all opponents are playing to win. But that is what we call a mythical unicorn when it comes to tournament play at the local level.
-
At our Imdaar alpha tourney we had:
1 undeafted
And 4 guys with a record of 3-1(or maybe it was 4-1, but it doesn't matter-4 guys each with one loss)
So when we broke to the top 4, one of the one loss guys wasn't going to make it. And the guy who didn't make it had his loss against a player who was not in the top 4. His loss was against a player who went on to lose. The other 3 guys w one loss each all lost against one of the other top 4 players. When we broke to the top four, the leftout 4-1 player was wondering why he didn't make it, with strength of schedule it was very easy to answer this player, "You lost to someone that had a worse record than you." And with that response the talking under the breath of "I went 4-1. I should be in the top 4." And all the other crying Ended.
Now with MOV this will not be the case. I don't know what to tell them, except, "it's easier to calculate."
-
It'
It's almost like you're not paying attention to anything anyone is saying at all.MOV PROS AND CONS
PROS:
Easy to calculate
CONS:
Rewards playing lesser opponents.
Promotes stalling when you play better opponents.
Promotes power players to crush the hopes and dreams of newbs.
Oh wait, no almost. That's EXACTLY what it's like.
<sigh>
I generally try not to take joy in the discomfort of others... but you? Yeah, schaudenfreude is in full effect. The change has happened, it's real, it's not going anywhere any time soon, and I am actively enjoying your distress about it from here on.
Ditto, but back at you.
I can hardly wait to hear about how you got eliminated from the prize pool, just because you had to play a better opponent.
-
MOV PROS AND CONS
PROS:
Easy to calculate
CONS:
Rewards playing lesser opponents.
Promotes stalling when you play better opponents.
Promotes power players to crush the hopes and dreams of newbs.
-
"How is it different than all his remaining matches are losses?" Really? Hmmm lets see. A player goes 1&3 and then drops. This player has a 33.33% win percentage. If he keeps playing and loses again his win percentage is 25%. I'd rather have an opponent with a 33.33% than a 25%.So how would you calculate an SoS where one of the players drop?
If an opponent drops, his score ends… how is it different than all his remaining matches are losses?
-
WRONG! Let's break this down.
The SoS is by definition the sum of a player's scores. If a player drops, he cannot win more games and all his opponents will have a weaker SoS than if he had continued to play.
That's why SoS is so unpopular: your ranking depends on the score of others…
"SOS is the sum of a player's scores." The player's scores end when they drop.
"If a player drops, he cannot win more games..." He also can't lose anymore as well.
" and all his opponents will have a weaker SoS than if he had continued to play." You assume the dropped player was going to win. Dropping DOES NOT mean the dropped player will get losses for the rest of the tourney.
"That's why SoS is so unpopular:" I too would hate SOS if this is the way it was calculated, good thing it is not.
-
A good SOS system should not penalize other players for a player who drops. The dropped player's SOS rating would just stay the same, because the dropped player is not playing anyone else anymore. Therefore their SOS rating doesn't go down nor up.
What software were all these places using that it penalized players who stopped playing?
-
How would stalling in the last round, when I know I just need Xpts, going to make me last.
I like turtles.
-
My guess is those who protest against this likes to play hit and run a lot - kill opponents ship and spend rest of time running around, and this strategy is dead with new system
If anything you will see more of it. If a player knows they just need (pick a #) points to make the prize pool, then stalling will become more of a thing, especially in the later/last round(s). Especially if they are going up against the best player. If I went against a better player or a better list, it would behoove me to stall. 88 points is better than 30 points. Power players will abuse this to no end.
-
I used MOV to calculate SOS. MOV is a great way to measure how well a player is playing, and would be agreat way to figure SOS. Without a piece of software, like what MTG has, these calculations would take time in between rounds to calculate.Under straight SoS, all 3 of the players with 10 points have the same SoS of 25, you literally have a 3 way tie in your "example".
So even with SoS as the first tiebreaker, the event places out the exact same way as it would with MoV as the first tiebreaker.
-
Not to mention this is allot easier to calculate, which
I actually dont think he is grasping at straws. Heres a quote to why it was changed by FFG themselves *cough*
"...we’ve retired the strength of schedule tiebreaker in favor of a new system, margin of victory. This will make it easier for tournament organizers to resolve tiebreakers..."
Not to mention this is allot easier to calculate, which means its easier/possible to catch mistakes...
And this is why I think it was changed. People couldn't grasp how strength of schedule works and this is a lot easier.
Oh that is a load of bull. People can't grasp SoS, which most gaming systems use as a tiebreaker of some sort? Including even some professional sports. And every other FFG game, some with more complicate scoring systems then X-wing. You are grasping at straws with that one.
I actually dont think he is grasping at straws. Heres a quote to why it was changed by FFG themselves *cough*
"...we’ve retired the strength of schedule tiebreaker in favor of a new system, margin of victory. This will make it easier for tournament organizers to resolve tiebreakers..."
Thank you.
-
I am using MOV as a way to calculate SOS. First averaging each player's MOV after each round. Then by that average you have a way to rank each player, higher the average the better the player. Then you add up all the MOV averages of the players that a certain player played against and the higher the number equals a tougher schedule.You've got to be kidding me with this napkin math of yours. How do you expect anyone to follow that?
Let's forget for a moment that you have 4 separate 100-0 victories over the event, which in and of itself invalidates your example as indicative of an actual event.
How the hell did player D score a margin of victory of 260 points? 100+60 does not equal 260. Please go check player A's score since you didn't add that up correctly either.
That's suppose to prove that MOV sucks? Only thing it proves is that you didn't bother to check your math and went off half cocked.
Sorry for the one error. I should have done it in a spreadsheet, but pencil and paper was handier. In the end there are still two different results and D still is ahead of G using MOV. Even though G played better players, which is illustrated in the last image. If you like, I will use closer scores, but the result will be the same: A weaker schedule will get you more MOV points. Therefore you will want to get paired down and face weaker opponents. Using MOV will punish players who play tougher/better players. If someone can show me how this is not the case, I'd love to hear it.
I will have real world numbers once we do our tournament this Saturday.
-
Contrived? Come up with your own example of randomness and run the results. I am not screaming/trolling, I am giving example after example of why SOS should be the first tie breaker, but all I get is flamed at.Contrived example is contrived.
And rampaging troll is rampaging. Vorpal already pointed out why Swiss works better for chess than here. You don't actually want a discussion, you just want to scream and vent.
-
Not to mention this is allot easier to calculate, which means its easier/possible to catch mistakes...
And this is why I think it was changed. People couldn't grasp how strength of schedule works and this is a lot easier.
-
Here is a simple 8 man tourney of 3 rounds that I made up. Where I used MOV to calculate SOS. Just a simple average of opponents MOV.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8btUenBwzQeNTFlYXBoSjJ2dEk/preview?pli=1
Here is the placing for the top 4
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8btUenBwzQeMlZXbzJWTERfZHc/preview?pli=1
Here are the differences between players G and D and why MOV by itself SUCKS.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8btUenBwzQeMVBzTHZNaDFWSWs/preview?pli=1
if the links to the pics don't work, let me know and I'll try something different
-
Not trolling. Can't wait to hear all the crying from the people who will get beat out of the prize pool by someone who got paired down to a lesser opponent.
The chess community is the one who came up with this system and they base their tie breaks on some sort of strength of schedule. But hey, what do they know they just invented the system.
This Saturday we will have our first tourney under the new rules and I'll let you all know the results.
Forensicus reacted to this -
Happen rarely??! Really?!
The only time this won't happen is when the tournament has exactly 4, 8,16,32,64,128,256,512.... Every other time someone will be paired up or paired down.
Plus if a swiss tourney is done correctly, there will be no luck of the draw!
-
Or maybe people don't understand how swiss tournaments should be ran and calculated. Which is what I see here. I have seen people run swiss tournaments of 3 rounds with over eight players, which is totally wrong.
In swiss when you have 8 or less you play 3 rounds.
9-16 play 4 rounds
17-32 play 5 rounds
33-64 play 6 rounds
If you played somewhere that actually knew how to run a swiss tournament, then you would understand why MOV is a bad first tie breaker.
-
This system is better? How? The new way rewards people for getting paired down to lesser players. I think the real problem is that people don't understand strength of schedule. Personally I think MOV should go into figuring SOS. Just pray that you always get paired down to lesser players.According to the new rules Ron will beat Bob, which is total CRAP!
If he was within 87 points of Bob's MoV going into the final round, which is why this system is better. Both Ron and Bob's performances across the whole tournament will be what determines which of them get into the finals, not which of them had better luck in the pairings.
Another issue with MOV will be collusion, which is illegal, but very hard to prove. MOV SUCKS!
SoR Event is going to be very limited...
in Star Wars: Destiny
Posted
FFG is dropping the ball all over the place when it comes to releases. Whoever is in charge of forecasting for FFG needs to be FIRED! Whoever thought having a SUPER LIMITED prerelease was a good idea, should be FIRED! The person in charge of customer relations needs to be FIRED! This thread wouldn't be 6 pages long if FFG didn't do a "prerelease." And by having a super limited secret squirrel type prerelease gives me no indication that FFG will have their forecasting corrected in time for the SOR release. Of course no one knows what is going to happen on the release and I hope, I REALLY HOPE, FFG will, for ONCE, get it right. They have a great opportunity to break into the CCG market and have some staying power, especially since Standard MTG is in the toilet. The stars couldn't be more aligned for them to succeed. If they don't, by screwing up the forecast, they have them selves to blame.
The ball is in your court FFG, DON'T CHOKE!!!