32 coaches online • Server time: 13:37
* * * Did you know? The most valuable player is Thursdaynight Guitarclub with 96 MVPs.
Recent Forum Topics  Gnomes are trash | Roster Tiers | Gnomes FTW! (Replays... |
2013-02-27 14:04:44
24 votes, rating 4.2
24 votes, rating 4.2
My top 10 list
Recently Qaz managed to hit the troll on the head with his similarly themed forum thread, and it showed that a lot of people feel strongly about CR. Or more precisely a lot of people feel strongly about how skill is rated in this dice-rolling game of ours.
Perhaps one of the reasons is that while the formula for CR is adequately accurate in general, it can still differ a lot from people's subjective opinion on who is the better coach. And to be honest I too consider some coaches in the top 100 nothing more than free wins, but thats just my problem.
The interesting thing is where to draw the line between making optimal choices within the given gamesystem, and when it becomes exploiting a flaw in the system. While its easy to make general statements about this (cheese zons/cdorfs in low TV box). While the former is quite unarguably same as having "skill" the latter is vigorously frowned upon. Perhaps it would all be good if people could accept CR as a number that is relatively good at predicting how good you are, but thats probably an unattainable hippie utopia. So in the meanwhile just chill the feck out :P
PS.
Because the topic of this wall-of-text was just to lure you in and read all the way down, I promise to make a list that will offend everyone except the 10 people in it, as soon as I get around to it. In the meanwhile, if you are reading this you can just assume you are in there, unless you're in my blacklist.
Perhaps one of the reasons is that while the formula for CR is adequately accurate in general, it can still differ a lot from people's subjective opinion on who is the better coach. And to be honest I too consider some coaches in the top 100 nothing more than free wins, but thats just my problem.
The interesting thing is where to draw the line between making optimal choices within the given gamesystem, and when it becomes exploiting a flaw in the system. While its easy to make general statements about this (cheese zons/cdorfs in low TV box). While the former is quite unarguably same as having "skill" the latter is vigorously frowned upon. Perhaps it would all be good if people could accept CR as a number that is relatively good at predicting how good you are, but thats probably an unattainable hippie utopia. So in the meanwhile just chill the feck out :P
PS.
Because the topic of this wall-of-text was just to lure you in and read all the way down, I promise to make a list that will offend everyone except the 10 people in it, as soon as I get around to it. In the meanwhile, if you are reading this you can just assume you are in there, unless you're in my blacklist.
Comments
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-27 14:11:16
But mind one thing: CR is polluted by Ranked matches.
Only Box matches should count for purpose of calculating it.
That's one reason you find poor coaches with high CR.
Another reason is the race: coaches playing regularly only competitive races tend to win more than coaches of same skill with weaker races.
Only Box matches should count for purpose of calculating it.
That's one reason you find poor coaches with high CR.
Another reason is the race: coaches playing regularly only competitive races tend to win more than coaches of same skill with weaker races.
Posted by JimmyFantastic on 2013-02-27 14:16:18
You are in my top 10 broski, kick my ass every time lol
Posted by Jeffro on 2013-02-27 14:18:20
Why did you foul a halfway decent blog with such an ignorant and close-minded comment, Dakka?!... because you just like to stir the pot?! .. or, I fear, that it is because you hated getting picked in ranked and in box you can spam ClawPOMB?!?...
You're on the money Stonetroll. I was thinking of making my own Top Ten as well. And mine will only include players who've played over 1000 games. That's my own minimum for a body of work to be considered.
You're on the money Stonetroll. I was thinking of making my own Top Ten as well. And mine will only include players who've played over 1000 games. That's my own minimum for a body of work to be considered.
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-27 14:23:38
@Jeffro: I don't spam ClawPOMB in the Box, I play a lot of different teams, so what? :D
Try harder with a better strawman.
Yes, I hated wasting my time in Ranked, that's right.
Box is the true competitive division.
Try harder with a better strawman.
Yes, I hated wasting my time in Ranked, that's right.
Box is the true competitive division.
Posted by harvestmouse on 2013-02-27 14:59:03
MattDakka, not sure if you believe that or are just trolling.
Ranked is a better guide to a 'real' CR than Blackbox. Blackbox is probably a better guide at win % (providing you play how the game was intended).
Picking in ranked is not good for your CR, unless you find some little areas of weakness in the formula, and since nobody is listing these, I doubt there are many.
CR isn't and is not meant to be a formula to show how good you are, but how successful you are, and it does that.
I always considered csonti, fischerking, petew and fanatic to be the best. However I think really you need to look at pigstar. He's successful with every race, and in any environment. He doesn't strike me as being particularly intelligent or knowledgeable about bloodbowl.
However give him a team and set him off and he instinctively knows what to do. I'm not sure anyone else is like that. Erikekers maybe...
Ranked is a better guide to a 'real' CR than Blackbox. Blackbox is probably a better guide at win % (providing you play how the game was intended).
Picking in ranked is not good for your CR, unless you find some little areas of weakness in the formula, and since nobody is listing these, I doubt there are many.
CR isn't and is not meant to be a formula to show how good you are, but how successful you are, and it does that.
I always considered csonti, fischerking, petew and fanatic to be the best. However I think really you need to look at pigstar. He's successful with every race, and in any environment. He doesn't strike me as being particularly intelligent or knowledgeable about bloodbowl.
However give him a team and set him off and he instinctively knows what to do. I'm not sure anyone else is like that. Erikekers maybe...
Posted by Reisender on 2013-02-27 15:01:15
@mattdakka: seriously??? the worst picker in ranked got into the top 10 after minmaxing the box (ranked mass mb dp lrb4 orcs -> box minmaxed clawpombed chaos) and wihtout being good in an ingame sense (he´s not in the top 10 anymore anyway)
i agree about the races though, goblin, human, ogre coaches (etc.)will usually not top the CR
i agree about the races though, goblin, human, ogre coaches (etc.)will usually not top the CR
Posted by Jevulen on 2013-02-27 15:12:27
Not hard to get good rank if all you do is cherrypick opposition in ranked. Which I know alot of people did when I was actively playing there, I am sure today ain't any different.
Posted by Topper on 2013-02-27 15:22:58
I just loove being on your top ten list...
Always helps my ego :D
Always helps my ego :D
Posted by CroixFer on 2013-02-27 15:39:55
For anyone to cherrypick: is it not neccesary that some coaches are considered cherries? Who does this? Who is the judge that decides who is a cherry?
I do not know a coach that considers himself a cherry or any of his teams. And even if you consider someone a "cherry", is it not possible he will learn in the long run and become a good coach in the end? And, given most people has a learning curve, is it not logic there will always be beginners/cherries? Do they have room in "super-legendary" players site like this?
May be someone should ban the beginners before they enjoy the site too much and become a nuisance for anti-cherripicker players...
May be I have not been around for long, but I read about these topic (CR, Cherries, the box vs the rank...) too much. I do not understand the reason for this and I do not understand why some people consider themselves the judges on what is right or wrong on this site...
I do not know a coach that considers himself a cherry or any of his teams. And even if you consider someone a "cherry", is it not possible he will learn in the long run and become a good coach in the end? And, given most people has a learning curve, is it not logic there will always be beginners/cherries? Do they have room in "super-legendary" players site like this?
May be someone should ban the beginners before they enjoy the site too much and become a nuisance for anti-cherripicker players...
May be I have not been around for long, but I read about these topic (CR, Cherries, the box vs the rank...) too much. I do not understand the reason for this and I do not understand why some people consider themselves the judges on what is right or wrong on this site...
Posted by easilyamused on 2013-02-27 16:28:42
@MattDakka: I you seriously saying that to be the best CR wise you should go to B and min/max? If anything that is what gives you poor coaches with high CR.
It amazes me the crap some people come out with :P
It amazes me the crap some people come out with :P
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2013-02-27 16:33:01
"But mind one thing: CR is polluted by Ranked matches.
Only Box matches should count for purpose of calculating it.
That's one reason you find poor coaches with high CR."
MattDakka - 166.02
"That's one reason you find poor coaches with high CR."
so true, matt...so true...
Only Box matches should count for purpose of calculating it.
That's one reason you find poor coaches with high CR."
MattDakka - 166.02
"That's one reason you find poor coaches with high CR."
so true, matt...so true...
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-27 16:36:49
@harvestmouse: I do believe it.
@Reisender: yes, seriously.
@easilyamused: in Box you can't dodge other minmaxers, in Ranked you can 100% avoid unfavourable matches (check Ranked Amazons and Box Amazons. Ranked Amazons avoid Dwarfs... guess why?).
@Reisender: yes, seriously.
@easilyamused: in Box you can't dodge other minmaxers, in Ranked you can 100% avoid unfavourable matches (check Ranked Amazons and Box Amazons. Ranked Amazons avoid Dwarfs... guess why?).
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-27 16:38:53
@ shadow46x2: do you want to play a match with me?
^_^
^_^
Posted by easilyamused on 2013-02-27 16:39:08
You kind of missed the point there MattDakka, being able to min/max does not make you a good coach it just means you know how to exploit a system.
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-27 16:44:50
Neither cherrypicking and dodging matches.
The difference is that in Box minmaxers can't avoid to play against, in Ranked cherrypickers can.
The difference is that in Box minmaxers can't avoid to play against, in Ranked cherrypickers can.
Posted by Woodstock on 2013-02-27 16:48:44
So it is better to force people to play unfair matches, than to give them the choice to avoid them? Wunderbar!
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2013-02-27 16:49:57
a few points matt...
first, since i don't play lrb6, no we won't be playing..but even if we did, it wouldn't benefit you at all...
either you win, and contradict your point that high CR are poor...or you lose, and you prove yourself to be a poor coach by losing to a scrub who is obviously inferior to your holier than thou self...
secondly...you need to drop this infantile attitude that blackbox is the holy grail of "pure" matches...
there is infinitely more douchebaggery in blackbox than there is in ranked...mainly because of the minmax clowns who abuse the system for their own needs...
here's a hint...cherrypicking doesn't exist solely in ranked....just because a system hands you a match, doesn't mean you have zero control...you have plenty of control on how your team develops, and minmaxing is a prime example of people gaming the system to get easy matches...
not to mention, the jerkoff attitude of coaches like you is the reason why blackbox is such an abrasive, acidic division to play in...congrats on being a contributing factor to the development of trash...
first, since i don't play lrb6, no we won't be playing..but even if we did, it wouldn't benefit you at all...
either you win, and contradict your point that high CR are poor...or you lose, and you prove yourself to be a poor coach by losing to a scrub who is obviously inferior to your holier than thou self...
secondly...you need to drop this infantile attitude that blackbox is the holy grail of "pure" matches...
there is infinitely more douchebaggery in blackbox than there is in ranked...mainly because of the minmax clowns who abuse the system for their own needs...
here's a hint...cherrypicking doesn't exist solely in ranked....just because a system hands you a match, doesn't mean you have zero control...you have plenty of control on how your team develops, and minmaxing is a prime example of people gaming the system to get easy matches...
not to mention, the jerkoff attitude of coaches like you is the reason why blackbox is such an abrasive, acidic division to play in...congrats on being a contributing factor to the development of trash...
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-27 16:50:29
Is it better to give the people the freedom to play easy matches only without never playing the hard ones?
Yes, awesome, truly competitive.
Yes, awesome, truly competitive.
Posted by Woodstock on 2013-02-27 16:54:49
Not more or less than blackbox, each have their positives and negatives. It is just far easier to abuse them if your opponent can not avoid you.
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-27 17:00:17
@shadow46x2: 166 is not high CR, high CR is above 170 in my book, so no contradiction.
By playing somebody you can have a better idea of his skill than just by looking at his CR.
If Ranked were competitive I would play there, but facing cherrypickers with unnatural farmed teams or being unable to play the team I want to play whenever I have the mood (bash teams tend to struggle to get games in Ranked, according to my personal experience, although they are not my favourite kind of team) didn't persuade me to keep on playing there.
The minmax problem could be removed, if the site really wanted, but probably the user base would drop then, so it is going to stay.
If the minmax were removed, I do believe that the Box division would be nigh on perfect.
By playing somebody you can have a better idea of his skill than just by looking at his CR.
If Ranked were competitive I would play there, but facing cherrypickers with unnatural farmed teams or being unable to play the team I want to play whenever I have the mood (bash teams tend to struggle to get games in Ranked, according to my personal experience, although they are not my favourite kind of team) didn't persuade me to keep on playing there.
The minmax problem could be removed, if the site really wanted, but probably the user base would drop then, so it is going to stay.
If the minmax were removed, I do believe that the Box division would be nigh on perfect.
Posted by easilyamused on 2013-02-27 17:12:39
You forget that B existed as part of R first, it was called SMACKS. Plus if you got rid of min/max then a lot of B coaches would actually have to learn how play rather than press PO :P
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-27 17:14:24
@easilyamused:
"Plus if you got rid of min/max then a lot of B coaches would actually have to learn how play rather than press PO :P"
And this would be great! :D
"Plus if you got rid of min/max then a lot of B coaches would actually have to learn how play rather than press PO :P"
And this would be great! :D
Posted by harvestmouse on 2013-02-27 17:33:01
This is a pointless argument as Matt your point is horribly floored.
If 'Coaches cherry pick in ranked to inflate their win %' was your argument. Yes, I know that, you know that. Those that do it are scumbags. Recently there's been more of it too.
However there are only 2 ways of picking now with inducements evening the table in ranked.
1. Pick on weak coaches.
2. Pick on favourable match ups with your team.
Both of these points are taken into account when calculating CR.
A coach that picks in ranked, would have a very similar ranking to the same coach that plays even games in ranked (provided he played at the same level with both strategies).
However if you want to inflate your CR (taking into account what you think CR actually is), the only real way of doing that is min-maxing in box. CR cannot take that into account, as how can the system tell the difference between a properly made 1400 Pact team and a min-maxed one? It can't, so they have the same worth when it comes to working out CR, which breaks the system (under the stipulations you have added, that it shows coaches' skill).
However even this argument is futile, as it doesn't show that. As I stated at the start, it shows how successful a coach is, and...............no matter how you win or lose, or game the system, it will always show that, exactly.
So Matt, yes you are wrong, very very wrong.
If 'Coaches cherry pick in ranked to inflate their win %' was your argument. Yes, I know that, you know that. Those that do it are scumbags. Recently there's been more of it too.
However there are only 2 ways of picking now with inducements evening the table in ranked.
1. Pick on weak coaches.
2. Pick on favourable match ups with your team.
Both of these points are taken into account when calculating CR.
A coach that picks in ranked, would have a very similar ranking to the same coach that plays even games in ranked (provided he played at the same level with both strategies).
However if you want to inflate your CR (taking into account what you think CR actually is), the only real way of doing that is min-maxing in box. CR cannot take that into account, as how can the system tell the difference between a properly made 1400 Pact team and a min-maxed one? It can't, so they have the same worth when it comes to working out CR, which breaks the system (under the stipulations you have added, that it shows coaches' skill).
However even this argument is futile, as it doesn't show that. As I stated at the start, it shows how successful a coach is, and...............no matter how you win or lose, or game the system, it will always show that, exactly.
So Matt, yes you are wrong, very very wrong.
Posted by Lorebass on 2013-02-27 18:01:53
i laugh whenever matt riles you guys. back when he and i were part of www.stuntyleeg.com noone clawpombed the lrb 5+. our blackbox you HAD to throw in 5 or more teams. i remember when a certain someone(up above) did nothing but complain about rng while losing sooo many games. all coaches that played there regular. happygrue, mobo, funnyfingers. wang. and many more are all high level here. where i was first learning to play. someone quit for fumbbl cause "the rng is bad" and can now clawpomb and minmax not to mention pick from any skill of coach. i love you matt like the scruffy italien pooch you are. lets all be nice
Posted by harvestmouse on 2013-02-27 18:19:44
When ever I was on stuntyleeg, Matt used to complain about FUMBBL and I avoided him/chat channel. However he's a good guy now and an good addition to the FUMBBL family.
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-27 18:42:12
@Lorebass
"i remember when a certain someone(up above) did nothing but complain about rng while losing sooo many games".
Not sure if that is aimed at me, but I quit stuntyleeg for a very simple reason: after FUMBBL implemented CRP, the site was quit en masse, and I had no opponents to play with.
"... can now clawpomb and minmax not to mention pick from any skill of coach."
Look at my Box teams: I have 1 clawpomber in 17 teams, and he's in a cd teams not minmaxed. (shock! abuse!exploit)
My best Box team is an Undead one with 15 players... if for you that is minmax... :-D
"i remember when a certain someone(up above) did nothing but complain about rng while losing sooo many games".
Not sure if that is aimed at me, but I quit stuntyleeg for a very simple reason: after FUMBBL implemented CRP, the site was quit en masse, and I had no opponents to play with.
"... can now clawpomb and minmax not to mention pick from any skill of coach."
Look at my Box teams: I have 1 clawpomber in 17 teams, and he's in a cd teams not minmaxed. (shock! abuse!exploit)
My best Box team is an Undead one with 15 players... if for you that is minmax... :-D
Posted by pythrr on 2013-02-27 18:57:40
where is the list? we want the LIST!
Posted by pythrr on 2013-02-27 18:59:11
also, this blog and its comments are WIN
Posted by Beerox on 2013-02-27 19:46:52
"Competitive" has some strange and varied definitions around here.
Posted by JanMattys on 2013-02-27 20:14:22
I blame Stonetroll for luring me here.
Posted by Qaz on 2013-02-27 20:33:41
While you are here why not spec a major final and dust off Lavino?
Posted by Purplegoo on 2013-02-27 20:43:43
One of my favourite comments sections in ages. Oh the Dakka doth suck them in!
My top 10;
1. Studman
2. Studmen
3. Buff rowdy JockMcRowdy
4. Dudebro
5. Maverick
6. All of my Brogres
7. Anyone without a shirt post helicopter
8. Woof Dogs
9. Neal
10. Synn's self worth.
Definitive!
My top 10;
1. Studman
2. Studmen
3. Buff rowdy JockMcRowdy
4. Dudebro
5. Maverick
6. All of my Brogres
7. Anyone without a shirt post helicopter
8. Woof Dogs
9. Neal
10. Synn's self worth.
Definitive!
Posted by blader4411 on 2013-02-27 20:49:05
@Purplegoo:
Why did (half of) Studman take my place? :(
Why did (half of) Studman take my place? :(
Posted by Purplegoo on 2013-02-27 20:56:10
Are you not a Brogre?
Posted by JimmyFantastic on 2013-02-27 20:58:58
Goo - You forgot Spiro!!!!
Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2013-02-27 20:59:20
Hey look, TrollDakka is saying things again. Fun times! :)
Posted by Purplegoo on 2013-02-27 21:05:02
Hmmmm. Spiroooooo > Neal?
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2013-02-27 22:49:13
sure matt...
you have one clawbomb...
but you have plenty of PO/MB...which is petty much just as bad...
you have one clawbomb...
but you have plenty of PO/MB...which is petty much just as bad...
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-27 22:55:00
So shadow46x2 are you suggesting to play in the Box (a.k.a. the bashiest division) without POMB?
In a gunfight you bring guns, not knives.
I will be accused to use blodge on my elves I guess...
In a gunfight you bring guns, not knives.
I will be accused to use blodge on my elves I guess...
Posted by pythrr on 2013-02-28 03:57:04
Neal > Sprio, but both should be on the list.
Posted by huff on 2013-02-28 10:57:34
That's it.. If you can't beat em join em. I'm gonna make a min-max team. I'm gonna do it a little different though.. A BCPOMB Fanatic (the cb is for ball & chain). I can feel the hate already.
Posted by Qaz on 2013-02-28 12:52:25
To think that Neal has become somewhat of a pseudo legend and isn't even here to witness it nor enjoy his stardom makes me sad.
Ohh yeah and the best part theres no locking a blog! smart move Mr. StoneTroll
Ohh yeah and the best part theres no locking a blog! smart move Mr. StoneTroll
Posted by Tauro on 2013-02-28 17:19:42
If you want to play competitive games in R why you dont play some tournaments simply?
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-02-28 17:44:51
@Tauro
1) Not interested in Ranked tournaments with farmed teams;
2) My pc randomly crashes so I would risk to lose a tournament match for a time out.
1) Not interested in Ranked tournaments with farmed teams;
2) My pc randomly crashes so I would risk to lose a tournament match for a time out.
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2013-02-28 21:34:12
he'd much rather play in B tournaments with minmaxed PO/MB cherrypickers...
Posted by MattDakka on 2013-03-01 00:09:26
Yes, at least the Box coaches can't avoid unfavourable match ups as Ranked coaches do when they farm their teams before a tournament. ^_^