 |
|
Quick ladder question... - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Campaign Series (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=8) +--- Thread: Quick ladder question... (/showthread.php?tid=51537) |
RE: Quick ladder question... - Von Luck - 06-02-2009 :stir::stir::stir:Only person kicking your butt Ed is your better half when you plead for more beer DOH BEER.Only joking mate dont take it serious.:stir::stir::stir: 
RE: Quick ladder question... - Hawk Kriegsman - 06-02-2009 mwest Wrote:MrRoadrunner Wrote:So, my 1949 ELO means most players will kick my butt? :chin: I would!! :whis: I keed, I keed! :bow: Thanx! Hawk RE: Quick ladder question... - Von Luck - 06-03-2009  Time to get Foghorn Leghorn to take out that little chickenhawk Erik:stir::stir::stir:
RE: Quick ladder question... - umbro - 06-03-2009 MrRoadrunner Wrote:So, my 1949 ELO means most players will kick my butt? :chin: Ed: I am going to assume that you are serious for a second. :-) 1949 ELO, .511 Win/Loss implies that you play most of your games against players with an ELO below 2000. For example, you have played fully 20% of your games against Laza who has an ELO of 1916, and another 10% against Tanker Mike with an ELO of 2080, but have lost 2/3rds of those games. umbro P.S. Please don't shoot me, I am simply the messenger. RE: Quick ladder question... - Herr Straße Laufer - 06-03-2009 umbro Wrote:MrRoadrunner Wrote:So, my 1949 ELO means most players will kick my butt? LOL! I am serious ... and I only shoot those who need shooting! Maybe that is why my ELO is so low? ;) Actually, I think it might also be from reporting games with lesser victory levels against players who were starting out and were "not quite high in ELO themselves"? Probably another 30% of my games total? "Just how many draws does he have", you may ask? Or, taking losses against players who would not report a draw when ending a game early (due to the scenarios obvious lack of balance and any remaining "fun" in playing it out). Or, offering players, with higher (and/or lower) ELO scores than mine, draws or minor losses in games that may have been equally unbalanced? So then, my poor "Chicken Farmer" of an opponent is a slacker and hurt my ELO? :chin: He will not like hearing that. I'm not too fond of hearing that too. When I played him his ELO was much higher. :smoke:Or was it all those new players that I "gifted" wins and/or draws to, while helping them learn the game without the normal "frustration" of getting their asses kicked and reported as such, are really dragging down my ELO? :eek1:  And, I am sure that Tiger88 will be surprised to see that all those games I played against him barely register? So, as I stated, my ELO is not a reflection of my ability as much as my .511 win/loss percentage? :P I hope you did not break anything by being serious for more than a second? :bow: RR RE: Quick ladder question... - umbro - 06-03-2009 Some good points here: 1) ELO is calculated when the game is reported using the two players current ELO scores. 2) Level of victory IS significant (as are draws), you gain more points for a greater victory. 3) ELO is a zero sum game, if one player gains points the other will lose a similar number. 4) Playing newbies would ordinarily have a positive effect on your ELO as they (presumably) have an inflated ELO by starting at 2000. 5) Nice guys finish last - you are obviously too nice a guy Ed! umbro RE: Quick ladder question... - Herr Straße Laufer - 06-03-2009 umbro Wrote:Some good points here: I never wanted to be first? I've always been most proud of my wooden cross awards over any others. ;) Nor, did the newbies mind gaining a gratuitous win or a draw when they had no forces left on the map? :smoke: ELO also does not count the thousands of words of instruction, included in e-mails, written to help out those who needed to learn how to play better? I don't count "best" as the highest ELO or the highest Win/Loss ratio. I'm neither a ladder position whore. Nor do I play all the time to win. I do often just stop playing those who do. I may have wanted them to bring more to "the table" and am often dissappointed when they don't. :( Nor do I throw the lead around in a hap hazard manner. As I am often portrayed? Though, recently I am more willing to call a spade a spade when it is called for. And, screw the consequences? :chin:Ed RE: Quick ladder question... - Chuck10mtn - 06-03-2009 Hi Ed, As a person who you have " gifted " more than my share of draws don't let a number get to you. You are one of the top players for anyone to play. You showed me more about how to play, than years of playing the computer. I am probably personally responsable for you being under 2000.I know from playing you that the numbers don't mean that much to you, All I can tell you is to keep having fun, when the game gets to be too much like work you'll have to quit we all have a job already. Chuck RE: Quick ladder question... - Herr Straße Laufer - 06-04-2009 Hi Chuck, Thanks! I know there are many others. The discussion about ELO being the most accurate descriptor of a player's ability on the ladder has revealed it's flaws. Anything based on player input (or player preference) will have flaws. I thought that would be the case when it was argued into implementation. I thought win/loss percentage was enough of an indicator. :smoke: We all know there are more to players than great ELO numbers's or win/loss ratios? Ed RE: Quick ladder question... - Mojo26 - 06-04-2009 MrRoadrunner Wrote:We all know there are more to players than great ELO numbers's or win/loss ratios? Fun factor (as in an engaging, friendly, and interesting opponent), learning experience, and fair challenge...what else could one ask for? :) |
){kind=link}