|
Post by Bob on Feb 15, 2014 22:52:17 GMT -8
The round has been simmed. Aiming for the next one for Wednesday!
**********Tournament Round 3 Stamina**********
Guests Who Larsa=7 Edea=10 Minwu=7 Alma=5 Leo=2 Olan=9 FuSoYa=10 Lebreau=3
Sublimely Magnificent 7 Jecht=1 Balthier=4 Seifer=0 Cid Highwind=6 Edge=8 Edgar=5 Laguna=10 Snow=10
Loveless Lightning=10 Terra=4 Genesis=8 Cecil=8 Sabin=5 Vivi=7 Hope=10 Marche=0
Mercenaries Lani=7 Amarant=10 Ba'Gamnan=8 Gafgarion=4 Tseng=5 Elena=6 Rude=10 Worker 8=6
Marlboro Mayhem Brother=2 Tidus=1 Zack=10 Cloud=2 Rufus=6 Shinra=3 Ashe=8 Ritz=10
The Mad Experiments Odine=8 Hojo=5 The Mask=3 Kuja=8 Mikoto=2 No. 288=6 Deling=10 Julius=10
SPOILERS:
Now THESE were some good matches! Starting with the losers!
GW vs GB: The Guests weren't foolin' around this game! The Grizzlies made their always-fatal mistake: pulling Auron. And so, even the team that barely entered the tournament, the Guests, were able to take them down by a fair margin! Good job, Guests. Go home Bears!
SM7 vs NS: The other teams fighting for survival weren't fooling around, either! And in one heck of a close match, SM7 takes down the Shades! Congratulations, SubMags! Go home, Shades!
Now the winner's bracket!
LO vs MRC: The undefeated champs, Loveless, took on the Mercs. It was a close match and even though I can't think of a time when the Mercs ever held the lead, Gafgarion's quick shots from the center were always quite a threat. And so, again by a single point, Loveless takes home the win! Good job, Loveless! The Mercs now dabble in the underworld bracket o' losers.
MAR vs TME: The unknowns, the Marlboros, took on the Mad Experiments, who won League #4 and were runner-up for Tournament #4, so it was an interesting match. Again, a single point made the difference, and this single point favored the Marlboros! Good job, guys! Mad Experiments, join the losers!
Bob's Picks For Next Round:
LO vs MAR: I highly considered going Marlboros, but seeing that Loveless have some awesome stamina right now (all key forwards are rested), I can't vote against them. If Tidus were able to play, maybe they'd stand a chance, but I'm thinking that Loveless will take this round, but I also predict the Marlboros will come back for a second chance with a rested Tidus and put up a much better fight.
TME vs GW: Y'know, I just don't know on this one. The Guests really came to play in this tournament, despite their not so great league standing. I'm gonna go underdog and go for Guests in this one, but it'll probably be close!
MRC vs SM7: Hmmmmm.... SM7 has never faired too well against the Mercs, so despite SM7's victory over NS, I think things end next round and I'll go with the Mercs.
|
|
|
Post by countlieberkuhn on Feb 15, 2014 23:56:15 GMT -8
SM7's victory against the Mercs is only a matter of time, Bob! It may be Wednesday, or months from now, but one day, MY TIME WILL COME!!
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Feb 16, 2014 1:33:24 GMT -8
I have to admit that Marlboro Mayhem has established themselves as a worthy competitor in their first season/tournament. Props to Rich for his team build. But that doesn't mean I'll go easy on you.
I think the Experiments are going to do some mad experiments upon the Guests. Unless Gabe has a major flaw in his team build, I can't see the Guests winning. The victory over the Bears was a hell of a fluke (thanks for benching Auron!) and I don't see the Guests going much further. Still, go Guests!
I am biased in Sm7's favor, because statistically speaking, the Mercs are Loveless' greatest threats. If Loveless can beat Mayhem and SM7 can take down the Mercs, then Loveless is in a VERY good position to take their second consecutive tournament title AND become the first ever team to win a league and a tourney in the same blitz cycle. Go SM7! I'd loan you Lightning if I could.
And are we gonna stagger game G again like we did last season?
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 16, 2014 11:56:50 GMT -8
Good question. I dunno, what do you all think? It might be good for LO and MAR to see who's ahead in the loser's bracket before moving on, so maybe a slight delay for game G.
And yes, Marlboros are definitely worthy competitors. They're really proving that the way to win this game isn't in a strong offense. They have two primary shooters on rotation and they do really, really well. It's why I'm wanting to fix up the Grizzlies, who are very offensive.
...And screw those Guests! They get no presents from me! Auron was benched because it was either this match or next and we THOUGHT we could beat them without him! #INeedTwoAurons
|
|
|
Post by wyvernxk7 on Feb 17, 2014 6:25:58 GMT -8
Man... All these games have been generally super-close! I'm bummed that TME's in the loser's bracket already, but that's what they were prepping for (in case they had to). NS is gonna have to do some serious thinking for the upcoming season - maybe they'll even propose a trade!
Yeah, this is probably a good time to skip G.
|
|
|
Post by monsoonexe on Feb 17, 2014 17:46:16 GMT -8
I may not have Tidus, but the Marlboros have won games without him before. Good luck Loveless!
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 19, 2014 21:57:20 GMT -8
Results up tomorrow. Only have one game simmed. Two teams had some stamina issues, so we're waiting on a couple re-works.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 20, 2014 19:50:42 GMT -8
Losers Round 2 is done! Going to sim the next two together, so just need one more team and we can sim.
SPOILERS:
Because stamina is a spoiler, we'll tag it here, but I don't think ya'll really care about spoilers anyway. So! Fleck, get me Guests data and then I can sim G and N together.
Results:
TME vs GW: The game started very back and forth. All was looking good for both teams...until TME had a critical turn-over. And then another. And probably one more. By about the half, maybe a little after that, GW had it locked in. And so, as predicted, the Guests continue to dominate the Losers bracket. Fleck's got the top and bottom brackets running! Yikes!
MRC vs SM7: Probably the first game of the whole tournament that...just...hell, it wasn't even close. The Mercs made the SubMags suck their butts, really. With Jecht and Seifer on the bench, SM7 were dead in the water. Not to mention the Mercs were cheating their asses off. I'm sure nobody would notice this unless I pointed it out, but it's a huge programming flaw that I can't figure out. Check this output:
Cid Highwind's ball at (-9,0). Shot Bonus: 7 1 on defense.* Amarant hits hard and grabs the ball from Cid Highwind*!
Amarant's ball at (10,0). Shot Bonus: 0
Amarant's ball at (10,0). Shot Bonus: 0 Amarant* shoots! Shot Power: 56 Edgar's CA: 29 Edgar can't catch it! Goal!
Everything PROBABLY looks kind of normal, unless you know what normal output looks like. See, each time a player moves, I output something like this:
Cid Highwind's ball at (-5,3). Shot Bonus: 7
Cid Highwind's ball at (-6,2). Shot Bonus: 7
Cid Highwind's ball at (-6,2). Shot Bonus: 7
Cid Highwind's ball at (-7,1). Shot Bonus: 7
Cid Highwind's ball at (-8,1). Shot Bonus: 7
Cid Highwind's ball at (-9,0). Shot Bonus: 7
What you'll notice about Amarant is how...well...he didn't travel with the ball. That bitch tackled Cid SO HARD that the momentum of the hit took him from one end of the pool to the other. Seriously! Cid is at (-9,0), Amarant tackles him, then suddenly Amarant is at (10,0)! Ho-lee sheet. Gonna be thinkin' about this little issue for awhile because it might indicate a serious problem in the program, I just...don't know what it means. I'm wondering if Amarant was somehow in two places at once, maybe? *shrug*
**********Tournament Round 4 Stamina**********
Guests Who Larsa=5 Edea=7 Minwu=4 Alma=3 Leo=10 Olan=8 FuSoYa=8 Lebreau=10
Mercenaries Lani=4 Amarant=8 Ba'Gamnan=6 Gafgarion=10 Tseng=3 Elena=10 Rude=7 Worker 8=5
Bob's Pick:
Just talkin' Guests vs Mercs here. I dunno. I stand by the Guests having a monumental record in the Losers bracket, given their poor league status, but I've gotta stick with my Mercs. After they slaughtered SM7, I can't see them losing just yet. But I guess we'll just see!
|
|
|
Post by wyvernxk7 on Feb 20, 2014 19:59:58 GMT -8
Bummer to be out so soon, but there's always next league - this has been a disappointing season for TME (and yet another for NS)... hopefully next time around things go a bit better.
Have we determined how we do trades, because I'm really thinking about it.
EDIT: Also, Rich and I have noticed on various occasions that a rebound off a shot can end up on the total opposite side of the pool, giving the other team an instant set-up for a shot. It happens pretty frequently, but it doesn't really discriminate, so I didn't bring it up until now, but perhaps it has to do with the tracking of players on opposite sides? Maybe Amarant grabs the ball at (-9, 0) relative to SM7, but the system then tracks him as being at (9, 0) relative to MRC, and thus when he moves one, he's at (10, 0)? That's the only thing I can think of off the top of my head. It would make sense for a number of things - this sample, the rebound thing, and why two characters end up squaring off against each other non-stop sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by wyvernxk7 on Feb 20, 2014 20:08:51 GMT -8
Doesn't look like that's necessarily it at least in most cases, but maybe sometimes there's a bug in the system... I don't know, I'm trying to think of other possible causes, but can't come up with any at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 20, 2014 20:40:47 GMT -8
I think the basic idea is that two people just decide if they want to swap, then I'll make the change by Private Message. I'll try my best not to peek at your stats, as always! Always trying to stay impartial and uninformed. And gotta say, so far, I'm doing a great job of it. I sometimes notice the players that are 15|15s, but hell, I've forgotten which ones they are anyway My quick skim is a check to make sure rules are followed (no two players the same and no stats > half of level). ANYWAY, I think the problem with trading will be that we should trade blindly (no stat peeking), which could result in total bummers. I was thinking of proposing a like, semi-rebuild of teams. Basically, complete redos of more than one player at a time (nothing big though...thinking 2-4, leaning toward 2). Would need a vote on that one though, but I don't think I'm the only one that has a failing or otherwise changing team dynamic that would take way too many leagues to finalize. For the bug, always let me know if you spot something fishy. I like to spot these things and fix them. So thanks for the head's up--good to know it isn't just the one occurrence, since it never is. Glitch has gotta come from something! The sooner I spot the pattern, the better, and I THINK I might know the problem's source, just not the problem (there's a position for each player and a position for the ball--maybe the ball isn't carrying over properly...somewhere).
|
|
|
Post by wyvernxk7 on Feb 20, 2014 21:51:27 GMT -8
Those pesky balls getting all over the place, gettin' all up in your face... Flippin' balls.
Also, I figured trades would be blind. It would be interesting to see what dynamics might occur if everyone had to make a trade (not saying it has to happen, but it could be neat): thus, each team has at least one fresh player from another team. If we were to do it, I think it would combine well with two rebuilds, and if it were done before leveling packages, even a player who doesn't manage to be a perfect fit can still end up making a new strategy emerge for the team he/she ends up on.
Any thoughts? I don't wanna push mandatory trading, but on the flip side, I wonder if it could shake things up just enough to keep everyone guessing.
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Feb 20, 2014 22:23:50 GMT -8
Please no no no no no mandatory trades. No. And then some more no.
All a mandatory trade system would do is take away one player from our roster. Unless you got super lucky and got a player that exactly fit your play style, the traded player is just going to be a permanent bench warmer, maybe a backup if their stats aren't too terrible. And then when the next league rolls around, that player is going to be the one that gets traded. I'm just imagining a system where we all perpetually trade the same cluster of people round and round and round and round. Like blitzball hot potato.
Furthermore, I don't see how trades could be a good thing. Bob makes the argument that trading could allow him to rebuild his team faster than our current system does, but I think with blind trading, it'd take longer because it would take at least two or three tries probably before he got a player that he could use. With blind trading, the system devolves into pure luck (have I mentioned I don't like luck?) mixed with the friendliness/spitefulness of the person sending you the trade.
Which brings me to my next point: if you're forced to trade, it's actually to your benefit to bust a player's kneecaps and thus stick your opponent with a useless player. Find the least helpful member of your team, give them all CA bonuses (if they're a forward or defender) and then send them off to be someone else's problem. Even if we're allowed to level up new trades, it still doesn't help much because that player will have a bunch of garbage stats, basically ensuring that they'll get traded again immediately.
I'm skeptical of the trading system as it is, but if someone wants to go ahead with a blind trade, I won't stop them (I won't be risking any trades, unless I am offered hot loving). But mandatory trades is something I am vehemently opposed to.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 20, 2014 23:19:05 GMT -8
Yeah, no mandatory trades. In fact, I dunno, I'd probably just say "no trades." I think it's too complicated with our setup. We're all custom-building teams and we all don't know each others' stats. If I want a power forward like Lightning, I'd just make a 15/15 Jecht Shot with Volley Shot (not actually sure if that's Lightning's stats, but I'm kinda guessing it's similar). Trading would also cause problems with the "no two players the same" rule (might end up with two players of the exact same build). So...I dunno. Unless you guys can persuade me otherwise, I'd just say "no trades." Again, I'd be in favor of allowing more than one complete rebuild per season, or at least we'll say after every fifth league/tournament you can overhaul your team with a rebuild (we'd have to define "overhaul," but that's a new paragraph), but I'd say no trades. Too complicated. What say ya'll about some form of overhaul to characters though? I know Wyvern raised the idea before and we all kinda said "ehhh, probably not," but I'm probably not the only one wanting a few drastic changes to my roster. Still wouldn't say any more than 4 players for a full rebuild (don't want teams to change completely), but we've had these teams for five leagues now and we're all finally getting the hang of stats, so what do you think about allowing more than one (again, 2, 3, or 4 players max are my suggestions) for this season? Might help out some of those bottom-feeder teams that could use a fix? Heh, OR, we could say that your place in the league defines how many you rebuild each season! 1st in league means one max, 4th in league means 4 max (half team), and 8th in league means fuck it, rebuild the whole damn team! You're all fired! ( ...That's kind of a joke idea, but I do kind of like the concept of it. Maybe league standing divided by 2 or something. I just don't want anybody throwing games in the league to get a rebuild or anything. Or something with brackets, maybe? Top 3 teams get 1 rebuild max Middle 3 teams get 2 rebuilds max Bottom 3 teams get 3 rebuilds max Or maybe it's just way too late on a school night for me to be thinking about this. Moral of story: I'm against trades, but open to allowing more full-rebuilds of players than just 1, at least this once.
|
|
|
Post by wyvernxk7 on Feb 21, 2014 13:10:58 GMT -8
Arite, no trades, but revamping more characters meets my needs anyway. I like the bracket model, personally, especially because I don't think anyone's going to throw games just to overhaul extra players.
|
|