EPT2 HoGiL Hwasin -18
At least I recovered with:
Wk ▲Traded Acquired Pt ±
4 Hwasin Lomo +8
Man this week sucked for my team. Plus, they've devalued so much that I can't really trade for anyone decent anymore.
[Fantasy] PL R4 Daily Blog - Page 39
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
I8PP
Canada186 Posts
2 HoGiL Hwasin -18 At least I recovered with: Wk ▲Traded Acquired Pt ± 4 Hwasin Lomo +8 Man this week sucked for my team. Plus, they've devalued so much that I can't really trade for anyone decent anymore. | ||
|
Too_MuchZerg
Finland2818 Posts
On May 21 2009 02:13 Abydos1 wrote: The ratio of points scored to costs needs to be adjusted for teams, their price range will be similar to what it was at the beginning of this round. Team trade value for this round was just using the same constant as players (which results in inflated trade values but its fine since its all relative). So look forward to around a 40% (rough estimate) reduction in team costs. It should be something like WeMade 2, SKT 7 for the high and low costs. So I hope players trade value end of this season will be what it is when round4 ends. For long time there wont be any 0 pointers. I just hope there wont be this kind of round down: trade value 1.89 -> 1 for next round. But this would be better 1.45 -> 2. Gives more importance to player selection. | ||
|
Abydos1
United States832 Posts
On May 21 2009 03:49 Cesar2000 wrote: If you're doing this you need to reduce how many points teams give by the same amount or the more expensive teams will be significantly better value. On the contrary, we boosted team scoring to counteract instances where players may decide to pick a very cheap team to field better players (ex. KTF last round). Because each person has to pick 1 (and only 1) team we wanted to put a little more weight into that decision. Thus, the top team should under the new scoring net about the same number of points as the top player (note however that there is a cost difference there ~10 vs ~7) however, as you can see with Oz this round, there is still a lot of risk. Teams have shown more variance than players have in their performance; thus you get a higher risk reward scenario. Also, as evidenced this round, overall team and player scoring are inversely related with the large number of 3-0 victories we have seen massive point gains for teams but little gain for players with the lack of key ace matches to boost the top level player's scores. However, if we have a round were most matches go to an ace game we'll see the opposite; player scoring will increase with the extra games played and team scores will be lower because of all the 3-2 matches. Of course, everything isn't set in stone and we're going to review this round and possibly make some small changes. Overall we're pleased with the format as is and I think the increased team score makes for a tougher decision when picking your one and only team each round. On May 21 2009 07:10 Too_MuchZerg wrote: So I hope players trade value end of this season will be what it is when round4 ends. For long time there wont be any 0 pointers. I just hope there wont be this kind of round down: trade value 1.89 -> 1 for next round. But this would be better 1.45 -> 2. Gives more importance to player selection. No, we won't be rounding values down. | ||
|
hazed
United States42 Posts
Ranking:666 Total Points:66 Oh god... i think my team is possessed. | ||
|
Cesar2000
Sweden185 Posts
On May 21 2009 09:55 Abydos1 wrote: On the contrary, we boosted team scoring to counteract instances where players may decide to pick a very cheap team to field better players (ex. KTF last round). But now it would have the opposite effect. (lets say the next round would start tomorrow) If you set SKT to cost 7 points, you will score an 'expected' 58 points for a cost of 7. If you wanted to buy Bisu however, you would get an 'expected' score of 42 for a cost of 11 points. Where is the fairness there? I understand that all teams will be more attractive than players of the same price with this system, but the more expensive teams will net a bigger bonus. | ||
|
dranjam
Poland198 Posts
| ||
|
Musoeun
United States4324 Posts
On May 21 2009 18:07 Cesar2000 wrote:Where is the fairness there? I understand that all teams will be more attractive than players of the same price with this system, but the more expensive teams will net a bigger bonus. It's fair because everybody has the same choices to make, has to make the same gambles, etc. Everyone plays by the same rules makes it fair, the "rules" aren't fair or unfair by themselves. Alternatively, bearing in mind that teams are less predictable in general than players, there really ought to be a higher risk/reward for the teams anyway. | ||
|
ShadowDrgn
United States2497 Posts
On May 23 2009 15:36 Musoeun wrote: Alternatively, bearing in mind that teams are less predictable in general than players, there really ought to be a higher risk/reward for the teams anyway. I feel the exact opposite. The unpredictability of teams coupled with their high point returns makes the game a crap shoot. The top of the fantasy standings are dominated by SKT and CJ owners because of how many points those teams have earned; if you didn't pick one of them, you had very little chance to compete this round, even with good player selections. Every choice on your roster should be important, and no one pick should be capable of tanking your chances of winning. This problem occurred mainly because of all the 3-0 and 3-1 victories. You'd expect 3-2 matches to be the most common with 3-0 the least common, but the opposite actually happened. 8 points for a 3-0 victory sounded like a good idea until SKT, CJ, and Oz all rolled off 4 of them in 10 chances. If anything, the team win points should be reduced back to levels comparable with rounds 2 and 3. And the record, I'm very happy with my ACE squad's performance.  | ||
|
Solidus_315
213 Posts
now only if shine[kal] doesn't screw me over for the last time. | ||
LTT
Shakuras1095 Posts
| ||
|
doubleupgradeobbies!
Australia1187 Posts
| ||
|
Musoeun
United States4324 Posts
On May 23 2009 16:02 ShadowDrgn wrote: This problem occurred mainly because of all the 3-0 and 3-1 victories. You'd expect 3-2 matches to be the most common with 3-0 the least common, but the opposite actually happened. 8 points for a 3-0 victory sounded like a good idea until SKT, CJ, and Oz all rolled off 4 of them in 10 chances. If anything, the team win points should be reduced back to levels comparable with rounds 2 and 3. And the record, I'm very happy with my ACE squad's performance. Note that CJ was only worth 5 points - and so was KHAN. I'm a happy CJ owner, but I seriously considered picking KHAN and then I'd be screwed. Now, I'm just barely in the top 100 and probably won't stay there so who knows how valid my conclusions are. There is one reason to reduce team points - teams are guaranteed 11 matches a round, while most players aren't guaranteed 11 games (Flash, Bisu, Jaedong, hyvaa, and Leta are your exceptions). Eh, I don't know. This was my first round playing so I can't really compare, but it seems okay to me the way it is, while reducing team point costs would make the team matter that much less. | ||
|
Fzero
United States1503 Posts
I never made any trades. /shrug. | ||
|
Scorch
Austria3371 Posts
| ||
|
Musoeun
United States4324 Posts
| ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36388 Posts
On May 24 2009 15:43 Musoeun wrote: Odd: I currently lost points for both Anytime and Hyun (antiteam) even though they both lost today... no other results seem to be updated at all. I'm mildly confused. I assume fantasy just hasn't been updated for real yet? I updated and screwed up, we'll have to wait for Abydos to fix it. Sorry everyone! | ||
|
Arkanis
Italy37 Posts
give the points to gorush. thanks :D | ||
|
jnheart35
United States178 Posts
 Jaedong no pts were given | ||
|
integral
United States3156 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On May 24 2009 00:20 doubleupgradeobbies! wrote: only zero can screw me over now. zero lost, congrats | ||
|
Scorch
Austria3371 Posts
 ) so we can see the final results. When does round 5 start? | ||
| ||
