thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
 Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 16:29 |
 
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | The purpose of the scheduler should be to make reasonably balanced match ups, if it fails then it should be changed. |
The scheduler tries to find a good solution to a hard problem, Matt. This is even harder than to bait CPOMB machines from pixel huggers out of their protective pocket. Read the freaking Wiki page. Learn something.
There is no such thing as a "reasonably balanced match-up" for the scheduler. If the Big C adds a cutoff, we may get more games with 480 TV gaps. Remember - the scheduler will try to optimize the number of games according to the TS and coach lists it gets.
Besides, let's not confuse the two issues I'm trying to address. Isolating the high TV CPOMB monoactivator by getting and odd number of activated coaches addresses the TV gap problem. Fouling addresses another problem altogether - what to do against a minmax team with a CPOMB machine. The two solutions follow from a Stag Hunt strategy. The second also follows from a general strategic point, as bghandras underlines.
Plus what Tussock says. |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 16:38 |
|
thoralf, please show me some example games where systematic fouling worked as a strategy to win the game vs high-TV CPOMB. I'm sure that if you looked at the total # of games where that was tried, the CPOMBer would have won the vast majority, and more often than not, completely decimated the would-be fouler.
The mathematics is clear that a CPOMB block/blitz is more likely to de-pitch a player than a DP gangfoul, plus: it can be done more than once per turn; there is no risk of being sent off, and there is also no loss of position by bunching players together.
Right there is the failure of CRP. If fouling was a decent counter to killstack, we wouldn't be having these discussions .. |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!"  |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 16:39 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | I suppose people will do what works for them. |
Indeed, and one day B players may discover what humans do since prehistoric times - hunting a stag requires we brace ourselves. |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 16:54 |
|
| JellyBelly wrote: | | please show me some example games where systematic fouling worked as a strategy to win the game vs high-TV CPOMB. |
This is not the CPOMB thread, JellyBelly. This is the B scheduler thread.
That you're using me to repeat the same ol' same ol' while dodging every single point I make is getting tiring. |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git.
Last edited by thoralf on Sep 18, 2016; edited 2 times in total |
|
tmoila
Joined: Nov 25, 2012
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 16:55 |
|
Perfect scheduler update:
Completely random pairing, with exception of a single redraw in case there is a pair with more than two consecutive matches. |
_________________
gg |
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 16:58 |
|
| thoralf wrote: | | JellyBelly wrote: | | please show me some example games where systematic fouling worked as a strategy to win the game vs high-TV CPOMB. |
This is not the CPOMB thread, JellyBelly. This is the B scheduler thread. |
Then stop claiming that fouling is somehow a viable counter to CPOMB. |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 17:03 |
|
| JellyBelly wrote: | | Then stop claiming that fouling is somehow a viable counter to CPOMB. |
Fouling a CPOMB abomination is not "a strategy to win the game vs high-TV CPOMB," has never been sold that way, and has not to be evaluated by such a silly criteria.
It's not even a strategy, for Emmanuel Lasker's sake!
You still don't get that my suggestion to foul CPOMB abominations was in response to AD's remark that one can't isolate a minmaxer the same way we can isolate a high-TV team.
Sheesh. |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 17:14 |
|
| thoralf wrote: |
Indeed, and one day B players may discover what humans do since prehistoric times - hunting a stag requires we brace ourselves. |
That before humans developed their brain enough to hunt stags with rifles.
In other words, we don't need to gang up, we just need to use our intelligence.
In our scenario the simple and smart thing to do is to prevent mismatches from happening at all by fixing the scheduler with a TV gap cap, this way cpombers will face cpombers over and over again at high TV and low-mid TV will be a bracket with a reasonable racial variety.
Rocket science, huh?
You will never persuade people to gang foul for the greater good of the Box, especially when fouling would make them lose the game. |
|
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 17:26 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | In our scenario the simple and smart thing to do is to prevent mismatches from happening at all by fixing the scheduler with a TV gap cap [...] |
I've already addressed this, Matt. A 500 TV gap *may* get you more matches with 480 TV gaps. In fact, in the long run, it *will.* What you think is a simple solution does not solve anything and has the potential to making matches worse for everyone.
Read the Wiki page. Read Christer's explanation. Your specification is invalid.
You should see that your rifle analogy is silly as soon as you realize that unless you're into Oregon Standoff fantasies, it doesn't replace society. The Stag Problem pertains to all insurance problems: you share the risks with others for the benefit of everyone. Including yours. |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 17:34 |
|
| thoralf wrote: | | The Stag Problem pertains to all insurance problems: you share the risks with others for the benefit of everyone. Including yours. |
This would work only if people weren't selfish, you live in a idealistic world and don't take into account reality.
People won't do things if they are not forced by laws and rules or encouraged by personal benefits and purposes.
The TV gap limit could be lower than 500, I proposed 500 TV because people would have whined for the impossibility of inducing Morg.
I'd rather something along 10-15 % of the lowest team's TV.
Who cares about getting less matches, if the alternative is playing a high TV mismatch, i.e. a non-match for definition? |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 18:43 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | ArrestedDevelopment wrote: |
My issue isn't high tv. It isn't cpomb, and it isn't mismatches. It's losing the opacity of the matchmaker. |
OK. But that is largely down to lack of coaches. Dealing with the issue that is helping to keep people way will fix your problem. |
People "keep away" for many reasons Koadah - ranked is not exactly brimming with games during the NA timeslot, and I am assured from everything I have ever read that Cyanide also experience a major dip in participation during these hours.
When you have 5+ people sitting/activating in box and "not enough possible matches", but 2 games being played in ranked, which division is more popular? 
| koadah wrote: | | You may as well just run a CPOMB team yourself. |
As you do on the few occasions when you play box now
Of course, there was once a time when you couldn't activate purely a single team in box, wasn't there? |
_________________
 |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 19:28 |
|
| ArrestedDevelopment wrote: | | People "keep away" for many reasons Koadah - ranked is not exactly brimming with games during the NA timeslot, and I am assured from everything I have ever read that Cyanide also experience a major dip in participation during these hours. |
FWIW, the Ticket to Ride server had the same problem.
Y U NO PLAY WHEN YOU SLEEP, GERMANY? |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 21:43 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | thoralf wrote: | | The Stag Problem pertains to all insurance problems: you share the risks with others for the benefit of everyone. Including yours. |
This would work only if people weren't selfish, you live in a idealistic world and don't take into account reality.
People won't do things if they are not forced by laws and rules or encouraged by personal benefits and purposes.
The TV gap limit could be lower than 500, I proposed 500 TV because people would have whined for the impossibility of inducing Morg.
I'd rather something along 10-15 % of the lowest team's TV.
Who cares about getting less matches, if the alternative is playing a high TV mismatch, i.e. a non-match for definition? |
It's a reality you create by refusing to even entertain the possibility of growing as a person. Are you afraid to answer "What if I try and fail?" People who can't get out of their own way don't get to lament realities they create. |
|
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2016 - 22:36 |
|
People won't do things if they are not forced by law? I stopped reading after that. |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
Lorebass
Joined: Jun 25, 2010
|
If your gonna complain at least give viable solutions that involve no complaining. |
|
|
|
|
| |
BB2016 Ranked, Leagu...
Search
