NSL: Scoring System

Moderator: klifsnider

Sebek
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 10:56 pm

Re: New Skirmish League (NSL): Discussion Thread

Post by Sebek » Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:16 am

Just once again: who the fuck gives a fuck about the score at the moment? I do NOT, as long as the league does not end in a tie having 2 or 3 teams with the same points. THEN the score decides. And THEN I give a fuck. Not now. Let it be two random teams, I don't care whoever this will be. Just the way the final winner will be decided is what I care about. And that way is not sportsmanship like. It's like "oh your strikers are good, they scored many goals, you win, I don't care how bad your goal keeper and your defense was"

If we would want to change it the way we win, we would've made two different 29th teams, not two about equal teams.

joethepro36
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 10:25 am

Re: New Skirmish League (NSL): Discussion Thread

Post by joethepro36 » Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:21 am

Original system:
BOT -> 7190
The Real 29th -> 3865
29th -> 3620
42nd -> 2870
Suggah Cult -> 2075
Aladdin -> 1570
Apparently 29th prefers:
BOT -> 5620
29TH -> 1545
THE R 29TH -> 995
42ND -> -995
SUGGAH CULT -> -1545
ALADDIN -> -5620
Now why might I take such offense to this that I might embark on personal attacks? Well I'll show you using basic mathematics:

In the original system:
The difference with 42nd is 750. We have a chance at making up the score by doing well in the next match.

In the 29th system:
42nd's difference with 29th is 2540

Gee thats only a 1790 point difference. Yeah we'll just make that up in a single match. :roll:

But lets compare with the "real 29th":

Original:
995 difference

29th System:
1990 difference

Sure, doesn't seem selfish and self serving here! :lol:

But lets not stop there ladies and gents and do a proper rundown comparing those who stand to lose the most:

Aladdin vs 29th
Original:

2050 difference

29th system:
7165 difference

Aladdin vs real 29th
Original:

2295

29th System:
6615

Shock and horror 29th are in favour of a system that makes it even more biased towards them! :o

So much glory in rigging the system eh gents?

roob
Site Admin
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 12:14 pm

Re: New Skirmish League (NSL): Discussion Thread

Post by roob » Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:28 am

Yes you may be close in points in the current system but you're still one win behind!

The only way you will be able to equal 29th on points is if they lose a match (and you win all the rest of yours), this will cause them to lose points and you to gain points.

Edit:
Points difference rewards winning by a larger margin over the over team.
Points gained encourages teams to get as many points as possible.

Imagine this:

Team A loses 10,000-5,000
Team B loses 4,000 - 3,000

Under the current system Team A (which got beaten by 5,00 points) is better off than Team B (which only lost by 1,00 points).

Do you see that as fair?
Do you cant read me ? Not read ..
Not like whot i write ? not read too ...
Where is the problem ?

joethepro36
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 10:25 am

NSL: Scoring System

Post by joethepro36 » Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:50 am

Imagine this:

Team A loses 10,000-5,000
Team B loses 4,000 - 3,000

Under the current system Team A (which got beaten by 5,00 points) is better off than Team B (which only lost by 1,00 points).

Do you see that as fair?
100% Yes. Team A did far, far better than team B almost doubling their score.

Under 29th's system team A would be -5000 and team B on -1000. This means team A apparently did 5 times worse while almost doing twice as well as Team B.

Sebek
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 10:56 pm

Re: New Skirmish League (NSL): Discussion Thread

Post by Sebek » Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:54 am

The way it is now
BOT -> 7190
The Real 29th -> 3865
29th -> 3620
42nd -> 2870
Suggah Cult -> 2075
Aladdin -> 1570

The way it would be with the change
BOT -> 5620
29TH -> 1545
THE R 29TH -> 995
42ND -> -995
SUGGAH CULT -> -1545
ALADDIN -> -5620

And now the second match gets played.
The real 29th loose against whoever it is 2200 - 3000
42nd win against whoever it is 2800 - 1500

The way it is now
BOT -> ?
The Real 29th -> 6065
29th -> ?
42nd -> 5670
Suggah Cult -> ?
Aladdin -> ?

The way it would be with the change
BOT -> ?
29TH -> ?
THE R 29TH -> 195
42ND -> 305
SUGGAH CULT -> ?
ALADDIN -> ?


It's a kind of magic ... And like Roob said, the score is irrelevant if not two teams have the same amount of points.

Edit:
Team A loses 10,000-5,000
Team B loses 4,000 - 3,000

Team A managed to get more score, thats correct. But team A also managed to get beaten quite hard as well. Whilst team B did not get that high amount of score, but also managed to not get beaten that hard by far.

roob
Site Admin
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 12:14 pm

Re: New Skirmish League (NSL): Discussion Thread

Post by roob » Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:02 am

This will be my last post on this subject. It's obvious nothing is going to change your opinion and I think the main issue here is you have something against 29th.

But anyway.

Lets just assume that for every 1000 points there are 2 full caps (yes it's not the case, it could be more or it could be less).

So a team that gets full capped by its opponent 10 more time than it full caps itself did better than a team that only got full capped by its opponent 2 more times than itself?

I'm going to move all these posts on the scoring system to a separate thread sometime later today.
Do you cant read me ? Not read ..
Not like whot i write ? not read too ...
Where is the problem ?

joethepro36
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 10:25 am

Re: New Skirmish League (NSL): Discussion Thread

Post by joethepro36 » Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:16 am

And now the second match gets played.
The real 29th loose against whoever it is 2200 - 3000
42nd win against whoever it is 2800 - 1500
Lets just assume that for every 1000 points there are 2 full caps (yes it's not the case, it could be more or it could be less).
The mistake here is you both are using assumptions and what ifs to prove your apparent points where I've used the actual results and the system recommended by 29th.

I'm not playing an assumption game here because there's too much subjectivity.

The best way to sum up why a system that punishes losses is extremely bad is that it's winner takes all on steroids. There's no competition if you lose a match or two because you've got to earn what you've lost and then still make up the difference some more. The current system allows you to lose matches but still remain competitive whereas a system punishing losses actively just ingrains the top 2-3 clans with the rest never ever able to even approach parity with the top clans.

I have used the statistical evidence from the match results under an additive and a negative system. Please don't put forth what ifs and maybes pulled right out of your ass to try and prove something. It proves nothing.

If a league is based on a negative system that actively punishes losses my clan will never be a part of it. This isn't out of spite but out of basic morale. My clan isn't the most experienced and we can't compete with the top skirmish clans. I would never condemn my clan to fight endless battles for the ego of other clans to lord over double the amount of points for winning.
It's obvious nothing is going to change your opinion and I think the main issue here is you have something against 29th.
You say this after I've posted something including an analysis of relevant figures. Somehow this is a personal issue, I don't know how you come to this conclusion. It seems you think that unless I see the fruits of your logic I'm wrong.

The real issue here is that both of your mentalities are based more on a win/loss than mine. I see the league as based on a clan's performance in matches, specifically the score they can achieve for themselves. You guys seem to put emphasis on who wins and who loses matches. You don't care if a clan does well in a match unless they can beat the other team.

What I don't understand is why you want to actively punish and make it harder for teams to recover from a lost match. Its at the point where you think a losing team should have to make up the difference in another match AND still get more score to beat the initial winners ever increasing score. If you want newer clans to actually join the league you can't actively punish them for doing poorly.

klifsnider
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 11:02 am

Re: New Skirmish League (NSL): Discussion Thread

Post by klifsnider » Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:12 pm

JessieK wrote: in the end if two teams are drawn the winning is decided by some odd point system rather than...facing off against each other, which would be far more engaging for both teams and more of a satisfying ending for everyone
While this is certainly the more interesting option, what happens if more than 2 teams are tied for the top (is that even possible?).

I'll think about it some more later today, but this would probably be the ideal solution; a final week 'after' the schedule where any teams in a tied position have a final match to decide the ranking. Like I said though, the only issue is if more than 2 teams are tied, then we need 2 or more weeks of these matches while the others wait, not quite as fun.

I am still reading everyone's posts about the scoring system and taking in your arguments.
Can I get some opinions on Jessie's proposal? It's a far better idea than using score, in my opinion.

joethepro36
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 10:25 am

Re: NSL: Scoring System

Post by joethepro36 » Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:30 pm

I'm happy to see a tie breaking match, it does make sense.

User avatar
JessieK
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 4:46 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Re: New Skirmish League (NSL): Discussion Thread

Post by JessieK » Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:50 pm

klifsnider wrote:
JessieK wrote: in the end if two teams are drawn the winning is decided by some odd point system rather than...facing off against each other, which would be far more engaging for both teams and more of a satisfying ending for everyone
While this is certainly the more interesting option, what happens if more than 2 teams are tied for the top (is that even possible?).

I'll think about it some more later today, but this would probably be the ideal solution; a final week 'after' the schedule where any teams in a tied position have a final match to decide the ranking. Like I said though, the only issue is if more than 2 teams are tied, then we need 2 or more weeks of these matches while the others wait, not quite as fun.

I am still reading everyone's posts about the scoring system and taking in your arguments.
Can I get some opinions on Jessie's proposal? It's a far better idea than using score, in my opinion.
It's not possible for more than 2 teams to be tied for top, there just aren't enough matches and it's an odd number of matches.
Check out my webcomic at: http://tapastic.com/series/Seraphim

Post Reply