|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
shmi15 wrote:FlyingArrow wrote:Anyone have the current standings? Page 1;) ok. didn't realize they were being updated. thanks.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,291
|
FlyingArrow wrote:shmi15 wrote:FlyingArrow wrote:Anyone have the current standings? Page 1;) ok. didn't realize they were being updated. thanks. Thats not official by any means, its just a running list. I'm using total gambit collected as a tie breaker, but basically, pay attention to Tournament points only.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
I only collected 3 rounds of gambit (30 points).
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,291
|
FlyingArrow wrote:I only collected 3 rounds of gambit (30 points). WHat are you trying to say?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,291
|
2 more games in this round.....
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
shmi15 wrote:FlyingArrow wrote:I only collected 3 rounds of gambit (30 points). WHat are you trying to say? To me "gambit points" sounds like the points you earn for being in gambit. I hadn't ever heard it used to mean all the points you earn in skirmish (points earned for defeating enemies + points earned for being in gambit). No big deal. 
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
Is this tournament cutting to a top 4 for playoffs?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/30/2008
Posts: 2,093
|
shmi15 wrote:TimmerB123 wrote:Btw, not that it matters here - but that is not how ranking works. Gambit score plays no part it it whatsoever. It should matter... It seems to make the most sense. If not, oh well, consider this my official " Power Rankings" Could certainly run a tournament that way. I would play.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/30/2008
Posts: 2,093
|
FlyingArrow wrote:Is this tournament cutting to a top 4 for playoffs? From the signup page it says that there will be a top 4 playoff after the swiss.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
Quote:Could certainly run a tournament that way. I would play. Counting kills in a loss makes some sense, but it makes no sense to count anything above 200. It just rewards players for the luck of landing in the 190s at the end of a round instead of the 200s. If you are at 210 and killed the opponent's whole squad in round 1, it's game over and you can't earn anymore points. If you have 6 rounds of gambit and are are at 199 at the end of a round, you could go kill another 60 points of enemies and get another round of gambit for 269 points. Rewarded for dumb luck and having a squad that uses more rounds. Quote:From the signup page it says that there will be a top 4 playoff after the swiss. Thanks. I missed that.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,291
|
FlyingArrow wrote:Quote:Could certainly run a tournament that way. I would play. Counting kills in a loss makes some sense, but it makes no sense to count anything above 200. It just rewards players for the luck of landing in the 190s at the end of a round instead of the 200s. If you are at 210 and killed the opponent's whole squad in round 1, it's game over and you can't earn anymore points. If you have 6 rounds of gambit and are are at 199 at the end of a round, you could go kill another 60 points of enemies and get another round of gambit for 269 points. Rewarded for dumb luck and having a squad that uses more rounds. Quote:From the signup page it says that there will be a top 4 playoff after the swiss. Thanks. I missed that. Could you give me any scenario that has ever actually happened, that is legit, where a player who has 199 Gambit, can score another 60 points in round 6? And likewise, can you show me any game where someone can kill Every piece in round 1 and collect gambit? I feel like you just threw numbers on there, and said what about this... But. ( Note, I am not saying your scenarios are impossible, but more or less improbable, and would more likely than not, never... Ever... Ever happen) To that I say, if your squad is good enough, and your opponent is bad enough, that you can manipulate exactly how much gambit you get every game, to maximize the amount of points you have.. Then I would say you should be on top... Because thats a whole lot of planning, and strategizing, to maximize how many points you can get, and your clearly a better player than anyone else in the tournament. Yea, its not a picture perfec idea, it was literally just something random I threw in to break up tie breakers. But to think you could show up to a game, and determine how many gambit points you want to collect with your squad, while also limiting your opponent to whatever gambit you want them to get... I would say that person is probably better than the rest in the group. In all honesty, to me, it just shows the power of the squad. If your squad can consistantly get 3 point wins throughout a tournament, and your constantly get over 200 gambit while doing it, how could that squad NOT be the top squad in the tournament? It clearly is a good call against whatever is being ran in this specific tournament. But, if your 5-0, and none of your games you broke 70 gambit, and just had 2 point wins, Then clearly your squad is not as good as other ones. I'm glad my rankings are causing a stir. And I stand by mine, over anyone else's because I have the stats to back it all up 
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
Those were extremes as an illustration, but you can see the discrepancy right at the top of the standings. You have TINT ahead of DeathsBaine based on a tiebreaker where both of them have 6 points (each with 2 wins where they cleared 200 points). They're exactly equivalent (or maybe one is slightly ahead based on strength of schedule). I don't think any player is making plans to land in the 190s at the end of a round just so that they can burst well past 200 in the next round to maximize their points scored in a game. If anything, they're doing just the opposite - chasing down exactly the enemies they need to hit 200 exactly to win a round earlier. But mostly it's just dumb luck if you end up at 230 points or 200 points even.
But, yeah, I do agree that your rankings are the best ones available right now.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,291
|
FlyingArrow wrote:Those were extremes as an illustration, but you can see the discrepancy right at the top of the standings. You have TINT ahead of DeathsBaine based on a tiebreaker where both of them have 6 points (each with 2 wins where they cleared 200 points). They're exactly equivalent (or maybe one is slightly ahead based on strength of schedule). I don't think any player is making plans to land in the 190s at the end of a round just so that they can burst well past 200 in the next round to maximize their points scored in a game. If anything, they're doing just the opposite - chasing down exactly the enemies they need to hit 200 exactly to win a round earlier. But mostly it's just dumb luck if you end up at 230 points or 200 points even.
But, yeah, I do agree that your rankings are the best ones available right now. I agree its dumb luck... But its hard to get dumb luck unless your squad is capable of it in the first place. And for the record, Naarkon is not using mine for anything, I am just keeping it posted as a visual. Like I said earlier, pay attention to the records 1st, and then their Tournament points. But.... Just so your aware, TINT would be on top in any ranking, because Death's Baine's opponent didn't play him round 1, so by default, TINT would be #1. There is your SOS, and it just so happened to coincide with Gambit points... Hmmm, Harmony at the top.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/30/2008
Posts: 2,093
|
shmi15 wrote:
Could you give me any scenario that has ever actually happened, that is legit, where a player who has 199 Gambit, can score another 60 points in round 6? And likewise, can you show me any game where someone can kill Every piece in round 1 and collect gambit? I feel like you just threw numbers on there, and said what about this... But. ( Note, I am not saying your scenarios are impossible, but more or less improbable, and would more likely than not, never... Ever... Ever happen)
Actually yes. This happened a couple of years ago when I was playing Cin/Serra against Lord Krayt. I was holding gambit and the game was going like it should. Krayt would send in a guy, eat him then hit me, then jump out so I could never really do much. Anyway, he ended up running out of guys and we just had a huge Bash in Gambit and I ended up with 11 or 12 rounds of gambit (he also had a bunch) before I eventually killed Krayt putting me at somewhere over 300 pts. Happened the other way, way back in the day at the local shop as well. He was running a superstealth keldor squad with Nina and bunched them all up on setup since I didn't have any accurate shooters or anything. He didn't realize I had leia of cloud city, so I used force sense and then force push 4 on the first keldor to wipe out his whole squad. I probably didn't get gambit since I didn't have a movement breaker but it could have been a map that had an easy route to gambit.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,291
|
urbanjedi wrote:shmi15 wrote:FlyingArrow wrote:Quote:Could certainly run a tournament that way. I would play. Counting kills in a loss makes some sense, but it makes no sense to count anything above 200. It just rewards players for the luck of landing in the 190s at the end of a round instead of the 200s. If you are at 210 and killed the opponent's whole squad in round 1, it's game over and you can't earn anymore points. If you have 6 rounds of gambit and are are at 199 at the end of a round, you could go kill another 60 points of enemies and get another round of gambit for 269 points. Rewarded for dumb luck and having a squad that uses more rounds. Quote:From the signup page it says that there will be a top 4 playoff after the swiss. Thanks. I missed that. Could you give me any scenario that has ever actually happened, that is legit, where a player who has 199 Gambit, can score another 60 points in round 6? And likewise, can you show me any game where someone can kill Every piece in round 1 and collect gambit? I feel like you just threw numbers on there, and said what about this... But. ( Note, I am not saying your scenarios are impossible, but more or less improbable, and would more likely than not, never... Ever... Ever happen) To that I say, if your squad is good enough, and your opponent is bad enough, that you can manipulate exactly how much gambit you get every game, to maximize the amount of points you have.. Then I would say you should be on top... Because thats a whole lot of planning, and strategizing, to maximize how many points you can get, and your clearly a better player than anyone else in the tournament. Yea, its not a picture perfec idea, it was literally just something random I threw in to break up tie breakers. But to think you could show up to a game, and determine how many gambit points you want to collect with your squad, while also limiting your opponent to whatever gambit you want them to get... I would say that person is probably better than the rest in the group. In all honesty, to me, it just shows the power of the squad. If your squad can consistantly get 3 point wins throughout a tournament, and your constantly get over 200 gambit while doing it, how could that squad NOT be the top squad in the tournament? It clearly is a good call against whatever is being ran in this specific tournament. But, if your 5-0, and none of your games you broke 70 gambit, and just had 2 point wins, Then clearly your squad is not as good as other ones. I'm glad my rankings are causing a stir. And I stand by mine, over anyone else's because I have the stats to back it all up Actually yes. This happened a couple of years ago when I was playing Cin/Serra against Lord Krayt. I was holding gambit and the game was going like it should. Krayt would send in a guy, eat him then hit me, then jump out so I could never really do much. Anyway, he ended up running out of guys and we just had a huge Bash in Gambit and I ended up with 11 or 12 rounds of gambit (he also had a bunch) before I eventually killed Krayt putting me at somewhere over 300 pts. (Rad my Bold, Italicized, and underlined) Which is why I said its more Improbable, than Impossible. How many years have you been playing, and you can recall once, a couple of years ago? I'm trying to think of the most points I have ever collected in a match.... and I am not sure I have ever broke 230  Again, this is nothing official, its more of a pass the time kinda thing. After round 3 I think will gel out a lot more. Its really the early matches that are hard to gauge as far as who should play who and all that.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
Remaining in round 2:
Spry vs DarthFrenchy
Kezz vs pnktd
Ends October 1
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,291
|
FlyingArrow wrote:Remaining in round 2:
Spry vs DarthFrenchy
Kezz vs pnktd
Ends October 1 These matches are key right now also. Both are 1-0 3 point match ups.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/3/2014
Posts: 2,098
|
Shmi15's rankings
1. Thereisnotry 2-0 6 points 465 Gambit
2. Death's Baine 2-0 6 points 428 gambit
3. KezzaMachine 2-0 5 points 381 gambit points
4. Ultrastar 2-0 5 Points 246 Gambit
5. Darth_Jim 1-1 4 points 366 Gambit
6. Urbanjedi 1-1 4 points 345 gambit
7. PNKTD 1-1 4 points 341 gambit points
8. Darth O 1-1 4 points 336 Gambit
9. Caedus 1-1 3 points 274 gambit
10. McNizzle 1-1 3 points 231 Gambit
11. Shmi15 1-1 3 points 206 Gambit
12. UrbanShmi 1-1 3 points 203 Gambit
13. FlyingArrow 1-1 3 points 202 gambit
14. TimmerB 0-2 2 points 210 Gambit
15. Naarkon 0-2 1 point 204 gambit
16. Jenari 0-2 1 Point 123 Gambit
17. DarthRattlehead 0-2 0 Points 0 Gambit
My Rankings
1. Ultrastar 2-0 5 Points 246 Gambit
2. Thereisnotry 2-0 6 points 465 Gambit
3. Death's Baine 2-0 6 points 428 gambit
4. Spryguy 2-0 6 points 450 gambit
5. Darth O 1-1 4 points 336 Gambit
6. KezzaMachine 2-0 5 points 381 gambit points
7. Darth_Jim 1-1 4 points 366 Gambit
8. Darth_Frenchy 345 gambit
9. Urbanjedi 1-1 4 points 345 gambit
10. McNizzle 1-1 3 points 231 Gambit
11. UrbanShmi 1-1 3 points 203 Gambit
12. Shmi15 1-1 3 points 206 gambit
13. PNKTD 1-1 4 points 341 gambit points
14. FlyingArrow 1-1 3 points 202 gambit
15. Caedus 1-1 3 points 274 gambit
16. TimmerB 0-2 2 points 210 Gambit
17. Jenari 0-2 1 Point 123 Gambit
18. Naarkon 0-2 1 point 204 gambit
19. DarthRattlehead 0-2 0 Points 0 Gambit
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/13/2011
Posts: 201
|
our game will be at 4 pm central time zone if anyone wants to watch
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
jen'ari wrote:The power ranking based off of solely gambit is not the best way. It takes human thinking to figure out the best ranking.
It does not point into play the bye auto 3 points for instance.
My Rankings thus far.
Ultrastar
TINT
Deathsbaine
Darth O
DarthJim
UrbanJedi
Mcnizzle
Urbanshmi
Shmi15
FlyingArrow
Caedus
Timmerb
Jen'ari
Naarkon
DarthRattlehead
How is Ultrastar on top of your power rankings with one of his wins being a 2 point win that he almost surely would have lost if they played it out to 200 points? Is it just based on who you think will win the tournament?
|
|
|
Guest |