WingedHuman
Joined: Aug 24, 2007
|
 Posted:
Jan 30, 2014 - 20:25 |
 
|
Yarp... So this season I've lost 2x Star Catchers so far. But we'll rebuild rest assured. MAybe next season I'll actually be able to keep a draftee around. |
_________________
 |
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 30, 2014 - 20:46 |
|
OMG. That's terrible.  Well, next week you're falling into the 30s. Sorry, man.
If we collectively see this as a bad thing, can we reset treasuries twice, so teams can induce WApos in Builders? |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
ex-convict
Joined: Jun 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 30, 2014 - 20:55 |
|
If your draftee dies against snots...maybe your scouts need to "volunteer" for foul-practice in Denver. |
_________________
Part of the NCBB and the NBFL.
Don't drop the soap. |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 30, 2014 - 21:01 |
|
It's a sign to stop drafting one turners when there are +ST dudes out there  |
|
|
Kryten
Joined: Sep 02, 2003
|
| JackassRampant wrote: | OMG. That's terrible. Well, next week you're falling into the 30s. Sorry, man.
If we collectively see this as a bad thing, can we reset treasuries twice, so teams can induce WApos in Builders? |
Just ask for that cash, it's quick for us to throw some amount into your treasury. I did it myself, screw having just one apo when you can have three. |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 30, 2014 - 21:27 |
|
Yah, should ask for a pile of cash for builders, 1B or sumtin.
Use that cash to buy 8 rerolls and take extra apos if you want. But really NEED TO BUY BABES!
Should ask admins to reskill draftpicks as they acquire skills so they are easier to get the remaining spp. Dodge is the big one to get on most of them to help with the pushing. After that block/MB. Or ask for +AG 
ACtually... now that I think about it... Why not assign skills to the draft picks BEFORE builders start? Give them +2MA, +2AG, Dodge, block , and then just skill them to the required spp. Afterwhich they can just be reset to whatever they are supposed to be at. That would probably save a lot of builder time for certain ag1/2 guys. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 31, 2014 - 00:28 |
|
| licker wrote: | | It's a sign to stop drafting one turners when there are +ST dudes out there |
I might note that +ST dudes don't have the best track record either. For every Justin Killer, there's a Robert Faun, a Here Goes Nothing, and a Brian Schwinke. That said, I think it a major stroke of fortune that M. Doctor fell to us at #14 this season…. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
Relezite
Joined: May 21, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 02, 2014 - 02:20 |
|
Id be interested to see a chart of the overall performances of draftees over the seasons. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 02, 2014 - 02:30 |
|
I was working on one at one point. Might do it at midseason. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 23, 2014 - 22:13 |
|
NEW JRPR FORMULA!
Well, okay, JR shifts his formulae around a bit, so this isn't huge news. But the one I'm doing this week, expect it to be a recurring theme. Next time I'll include "Enemy" and "Future" rankings…
The formula is an aggregate ranking formula. Teams are ranked (rounding up on ties) according to each of five criteria, and then according to average ranking, with VP counted double.
The categories: note these are rankings, so low is good and 32 is the worst.
Victory: VP%. Counts double.
Aggro: Cas/game.
Ball: TDs scored/game.
Control: ∆Cas/game.
Defense: Fewest TDs allowed/game.
Overall rankings include a subjective element. If I move around a team's ranking, I'll explain any factors that went into my decision. The original JRPR (the formula score) will be noted in parentheses (for now, subjective SoS modifiers mean only #1 stays in original position).
EDIT: PRs to be posted below! |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor.
Last edited by JackassRampant on %b %24, %2014 - %14:%Feb; edited 2 times in total |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 24, 2014 - 05:57 |
|
Nice, but a question...
I follow the rankings just fine, but I don't follow the number after the record.
I wonder how the draw with JETS will affect NA, though we kept our CAS rate up there. |
|
|
Sutherlands
Joined: Aug 01, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 24, 2014 - 06:05 |
|
league points... 7/3/0 for w/l/t |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 24, 2014 - 06:18 |
|
Ahh.
Makes sense, even though I hate this new scoring system |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 24, 2014 - 15:25 |
|
As the inventor of the scoring system, I would like to know why it merits "hate".
My reasoning behind it was basically five-fold.
1) Ties are killers in 3-1-0 scoring. This somewhat frontloads the drama of the season, which isn't good because early on the drama is about performance and form, and VP comparison takes a back seat until the second half.
2) Ties are killers in 3-1-0 scoring. 7-3-0 by comparison bolsters undefeated teams at the expense of teams with more wins but with losses to back them up. Note, it's still better to win one and lose one than to tie two, but it's 17% better, not 50%.
3) The reasoning behind 3-1-0 is to encourage teams to play for the win. But… it doesn't work in divisional formats or four-team round robins. They have this problem in RotW football: the tempting chance at an extra victory point is no match for the human amygdala, so the opportunity to deny the chance to a rival (and the fact that you have to kick) wins out unless you already have the match in hand. You'd have to add more fuel to the fire (5-1-0? 3-0-0?) to change that mentality. I even played in a league once that gave 5-2-3 scoring, and even then, coaches would stall in the second half to secure a tie, then decline overtime, in games against close rivals (against teams that were way better or worse, they'd loosen up, yes…).
4) 3-1-0 favors blowout games, because you'll get extra VP when you can loosen up, but you can't play for a shootout. Those aren't the fun matches, and in a game with SPP handed out for obliterating your opponent or running up the score, that should be its own reward. Put another way, 3-1-0 favors the favorite.
5) NBFL could always use more NFL fluff, so an American football based scoring system makes sense.
If I were to recommend one more change to implement in Season XIII, it would be to put in a 2-point tolerance for tiebreakers. I could see a tiebreaker system like this:
Division
1. VP if ∆≥3
2. Head-to-head VP
3. Division VP
4. Conference VP
5. VP
6. Team ∆(3TD+2Cas)
7. Random
Conference
1. VP if ∆≥3
2. Head-to-head VP
3. Common Games VP
4. Conference VP
5. VP
6. Team ∆(3TD+2Cas)
7. Random
Draft
1. VP if ∆≥3
2. Head-to-head VP
3. Division VP
4. Common Games VP
5. VP
6. Team ∆(3TD+2Cas)
7. Random |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor.
Last edited by JackassRampant on %b %24, %2014 - %15:%Feb; edited 2 times in total |
|
Sutherlands
Joined: Aug 01, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 24, 2014 - 15:39 |
|
Wouldn't that basically turn it to 2-1-0? Unless the difference was 3-0-3 vs 0-6-0. |
|
|
|
|
| |
RNG speculations
Search
