| 02:17.26 | *** join/##ducleague Admirarc1 (i=mwr25@student.cusu.cam.ac.uk) |
| 02:24.05 | *** join/##ducleague [dmp] (n=dennis@koderen.dk) |
| 02:24.11 | *** mode/##ducleague [+o [dmp]] by ChanServ |
| 02:38.31 | *** join/##ducleague Thonolan (n=Thonolan@i53878556.versanet.de) |
| 02:38.31 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v Thonolan] by ChanServ |
| 03:09.38 | *** join/##ducleague Pimpi (n=frank@gondolin.pimpi.org) |
| 03:09.38 | *** mode/##ducleague [+o Pimpi] by ChanServ |
| 03:09.38 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v Pimpi] by ChanServ |
| 05:49.04 | *** join/##ducleague Birdie (n=Birdie__@d51A46E43.access.telenet.be) |
| 05:49.04 | *** mode/##ducleague [+o Birdie] by ChanServ |
| 05:49.04 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v Birdie] by ChanServ |
| 06:17.45 | *** join/##ducleague Blue_Eyes (n=Blue@treebupf.inet.it) |
| 06:17.45 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v Blue_Eyes] by ChanServ |
| 07:13.29 | *** join/##ducleague wizart (n=wizart@dslb-084-058-168-122.pools.arcor-ip.net) |
| 07:13.29 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v wizart] by ChanServ |
| 07:20.22 | *** join/##ducleague LePoulpe303 (n=olivier@AMontpellier-157-1-144-43.w90-0.abo.wanadoo.fr) |
| 07:20.23 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v LePoulpe303] by ChanServ |
| 07:21.13 | LePoulpe303 | tibidi bidi bidi wah |
| 07:22.01 | Birdie | that looks suspicious much as "birdie"! |
| 07:40.23 | LePoulpe303 | ti birdie birdie birdie wah |
| 07:40.48 | Birdie | :) |
| 07:42.05 | LePoulpe303 | sounds great too:) |
| 07:45.18 | Birdie | my name, what did you expected |
| 07:46.31 | Birdie | gtg, cu later and enjoy at work |
| 07:47.53 | *** join/##ducleague Gilly (i=btw@158-linus.auriamail.net) |
| 07:47.54 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v Gilly] by ChanServ |
| 07:48.55 | LePoulpe303 | hi Gilly |
| 07:49.04 | LePoulpe303 | welcome home :D |
| 07:51.58 | Gilly | Heya ;) |
| 09:05.19 | *** join/##ducleague quantumdot (n=Juan@desorden.ifca.unican.es) |
| 09:05.19 | *** mode/##ducleague [+o quantumdot] by ChanServ |
| 09:05.19 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v quantumdot] by ChanServ |
| 09:11.48 | *** join/##ducleague [suave] (n=totte@port151.ds1-aboes.adsl.cybercity.dk) |
| 09:11.48 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v [suave]] by ChanServ |
| 09:27.25 | *** join/##ducleague |zongo| (n=zongo@110.248.62.81.cust.bluewin.ch) |
| 09:27.25 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v |zongo|] by ChanServ |
| 09:44.43 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v Admirarch] by ChanServ |
| 09:49.23 | *** join/##ducleague Mr_Molez (n=admin@openleague.org) |
| 09:49.23 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v Mr_Molez] by ChanServ |
| 09:50.08 | Mr_Molez | can i just check i was in my right to post what i did on the ducati league forum i seem to have a habit of posting stuff i shouldn't |
| 09:59.47 | Admirarch | Mr_Molez: It was petty, inflammatory and fairly pointless, but sure |
| 10:00.24 | Mr_Molez | well i didn't find 13-0 and making a player quit very funny |
| 10:00.54 | *** join/##ducleague AlexandrTheGreat (n=ATG@pool-71-242-112-62.phlapa.east.verizon.net) |
| 10:00.55 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v AlexandrTheGreat] by ChanServ |
| 10:01.19 | Admirarch | I'm just saying there are better ways to deal with it |
| 10:02.02 | Mr_Molez | i tried talking to them last night matrixe just left and sussi just said i wanted to see how goblin would cope then just quit |
| 10:02.39 | Admirarch | Yeah, that sounds like Easy kill |
| 10:02.43 | Mr_Molez | once its public they cant walk away from the issue |
| 10:04.04 | Admirarch | Honestly though, what did you expect to happen on matching those two with an inexperienced teammate |
| 10:04.48 | Mr_Molez | i expected them to atleast let us cap once for my team mates sake. They were obviously going to win 13-0 is just rediculous |
| 10:05.18 | Mr_Molez | and even if this doesn't accomplish anything against easy kill it will make the league enforce a cap limit |
| 10:05.55 | quantumdot | I must say that Mr_Molez has got something right on this one, even if I hate to say that ;) |
| 10:06.18 | AlexandrTheGreat | i think that a cap of 10 is proposed? |
| 10:06.27 | AlexandrTheGreat | or 8? |
| 10:06.36 | Mr_Molez | 8 works gr8 in the ol |
| 10:06.45 | AlexandrTheGreat | it's a fair number |
| 10:06.49 | quantumdot | Mr_Molez:'s post I think points in the correct direction |
| 10:07.22 | quantumdot | you can be more or less polite in expressing it, but he is right in the core |
| 10:07.26 | Admirarch | Most teams self regulate to ten at the moment |
| 10:07.55 | Mr_Molez | my team mate had 0 kills after 10 minutes |
| 10:07.59 | AlexandrTheGreat | wow |
| 10:08.02 | Mr_Molez | and only had 11 kills by the end |
| 10:08.06 | quantumdot | and I think he is right in pointing out in public |
| 10:08.08 | Mr_Molez | they could have atleast gone easy on him |
| 10:08.18 | AlexandrTheGreat | some teams would have |
| 10:08.24 | Admirarch | Yeah, that's just stupid |
| 10:08.29 | quantumdot | yep |
| 10:08.41 | AlexandrTheGreat | others just get carried away and drunk on scoring |
| 10:09.08 | AlexandrTheGreat | it sure is demoralizing to a new player |
| 10:10.05 | quantumdot | Mr_Molez: can you bring your mate and play BaR later tonite? |
| 10:10.10 | AlexandrTheGreat | hhe |
| 10:10.26 | quantumdot | we are known to stop capping after 7 or so |
| 10:10.41 | Mr_Molez | quantumdot: im not sure if he will stay in the team i have tried to talk him into stay but duno ill ask him if he wants to match as soon as he gets on |
| 10:10.45 | quantumdot | difference of 7 i mean |
| 10:10.56 | quantumdot | or we can play fun only |
| 10:11.01 | quantumdot | even mixed teams |
| 10:11.29 | Admirarch | Ditto with BZI, we've even got some newish players who would make it a closer match |
| 10:11.36 | quantumdot | i remember my first matches vs. fanta and co. |
| 10:11.42 | quantumdot | i lost so badly |
| 10:12.20 | Admirarch | Hehe, me too |
| 10:12.21 | quantumdot | one should try to be constructive, specially with new players |
| 10:12.39 | Admirarch | I think at one point the zees beat us 16-0 two games running |
| 10:12.45 | quantumdot | if one talks it over before the match, i dont see the point in doing 10-0 |
| 10:12.46 | AlexandrTheGreat | i think it's great that teams take on inexperienced players |
| 10:12.46 | Mr_Molez | eep |
| 10:13.11 | quantumdot | when you clearly see that 5-0 will do it |
| 10:13.19 | quantumdot | and you can keep killing |
| 10:13.49 | quantumdot | at least allow them to make a cap and feel how that is like ... hell! |
| 10:14.07 | Admirarch | Letting people cap is hard |
| 10:14.11 | quantumdot | hehe |
| 10:14.20 | quantumdot | i dont mean "letting" |
| 10:14.31 | quantumdot | but keep killing, no capping |
| 10:14.39 | quantumdot | to see if they can make it |
| 10:14.43 | Mr_Molez | i just got the feeling sussi saw it as funny after the match |
| 10:14.45 | Admirarch | If you're good enough to win 10-0 it pretty much has to be letting |
| 10:14.59 | AlexandrTheGreat | well, we've debated this in gu |
| 10:15.08 | AlexandrTheGreat | there are valid points to keep trying to score |
| 10:15.18 | AlexandrTheGreat | it makes the others fight hard and learn |
| 10:15.25 | quantumdot | i dont agree |
| 10:15.28 | quantumdot | bah |
| 10:15.35 | [dmp] | Admirarch: you can just stop putting your own flag into a safe-spot and forget about it. Try to protect it, but only let them move it :) |
| 10:15.40 | AlexandrTheGreat | it depends if the weaker team is new |
| 10:15.41 | Admirarch | There's only so far you should go |
| 10:15.43 | quantumdot | not if you have an experienced player with a noob |
| 10:15.51 | AlexandrTheGreat | yes, i agree with that |
| 10:15.57 | AlexandrTheGreat | a vet team can handle it |
| 10:16.08 | AlexandrTheGreat | FF still loses to TBO 14-1 |
| 10:16.09 | Admirarch | [dmp]: Sure |
| 10:16.11 | quantumdot | [dmp]: oh that's right, that's BaR |
| 10:16.32 | [dmp] | quantumdot: and others :) |
| 10:16.42 | Admirarch | AlexandrTheGreat: And BZI keep losing 13-0 to lots of people |
| 10:16.46 | quantumdot | [dmp]: BaR is like no other :) |
| 10:17.11 | Admirarch | [dmp]: But that's letting them capture it in my book |
| 10:17.36 | AlexandrTheGreat | i guess you have to have a balance between learning something playing such a strong team and not getting demoraized |
| 10:17.54 | AlexandrTheGreat | demoralized |
| 10:18.22 | [dmp] | giving them a chance to get a point, even if its means you handicap yourself, isnt something i mind. We all want a fun game. One sided games is boring for both teams, ihmo |
| 10:18.23 | Mr_Molez | a cap limit will solve alot of the problem |
| 10:19.00 | Admirarch | I'm just worried 10 is too high |
| 10:19.21 | Mr_Molez | ol started with 10 then it got changed to 8 |
| 10:19.31 | AlexandrTheGreat | molo is probably right with 8 |
| 10:20.05 | Admirarch | [dmp]: This reminds me of one game ages back where luna spent the whole match on slow tank speed |
| 10:20.25 | Mr_Molez | some 1 talked about it not being fair if teams are 6-7 . with being so close it could make it unfair.. My arguement for that is 1v1 is first to 10. You dont carry on just because its close |
| 10:20.32 | quantumdot | Mr_Molez: you think it would be good to have a match end at a difference of 8? |
| 10:20.49 | Mr_Molez | not a difference of 8. But 8 total caps |
| 10:21.03 | Admirarch | A difference cap limit discourages giving your opponents a chance to cap |
| 10:21.13 | AlexandrTheGreat | oh, i thought a difference of 8 is better |
| 10:21.32 | AlexandrTheGreat | but you want a chance to come back |
| 10:21.43 | Mr_Molez | hmm maybe i aint really thought about that |
| 10:22.01 | Admirarch | I've done comebacks from 5-0 but never more :) |
| 10:22.29 | Mr_Molez | if it was done against difference i would probably make the cap limit about 5/6 |
| 10:22.36 | [dmp] | a fixed caplimit at 8, is a pretty clear target. A diffence of 8, forces players to think - which may not be the best during a game (i guess i plugin would solve that part) |
| 10:22.59 | Mr_Molez | i think -mts does difference im not sure |
| 10:24.27 | Mr_Molez | but yeh ol uses 8 caps total to keep things simple |
| 10:24.41 | Mr_Molez | even though a plugin stops game after 8 caps anyway |
| 10:25.09 | Admirarch | I don't think we'll end up going for difference |
| 10:25.59 | quantumdot | so Mr_Molez you really mean the first in capping 8 wins? |
| 10:26.05 | Mr_Molez | yeh |
| 10:26.06 | quantumdot | even if it is 8-6 |
| 10:26.12 | AlexandrTheGreat | now that bothers me |
| 10:26.12 | Mr_Molez | yep |
| 10:26.15 | quantumdot | i see |
| 10:26.19 | AlexandrTheGreat | the other team could have come back |
| 10:26.30 | AlexandrTheGreat | there could be 10 min. left |
| 10:26.42 | Admirarch | True |
| 10:26.55 | quantumdot | that would lead us to be cut off when the fun starts, at 8-6 and 5 min remaining |
| 10:27.07 | Admirarch | 10 would certainly solve that problem, I'm just not sure how much protection it would actually afford |
| 10:27.10 | AlexandrTheGreat | i'd prefer an 8 cap difference |
| 10:27.13 | quantumdot | i think the difference is what matters |
| 10:27.27 | Mr_Molez | once u guys get 15 min matches. You will wonder how you ever coped with 30 mins |
| 10:27.28 | quantumdot | i dont know how easy would be to code it thou |
| 10:27.36 | quantumdot | hehe |
| 10:27.39 | [dmp] | AlexandrTheGreat: you can say that with time too. If the game ends with 8-7 because time expires, its very true that a comeback was nearby, but we have just learned to accept that when time is out, its over.. The same is with the score. If you each 8-7.. its over. And you can rematch if you belive you would have won :) |
| 10:28.06 | AlexandrTheGreat | i guess |
| 10:28.17 | AlexandrTheGreat | but it seems to take some of the excitement of a comeback away |
| 10:28.39 | Admirarch | No, it just means that the excitement happens as they try to make their 8th cap |
| 10:28.48 | Mr_Molez | hehe |
| 10:28.54 | Admirarch | If anything it would make things even more fun |
| 10:31.21 | Admirarch | [dmp]: What fixed cap value? |
| 10:31.43 | [dmp] | Admirarch: first one that reached 8(or whatever) wins |
| 10:31.45 | Admirarch | Also, try to convince me on forfeits |
| 10:31.53 | Mr_Molez | 8 caps total probably wont work for ducati with full 30 min matches.. As most ol matches are 15 mins.. Infact i think ol had only played about 5 30 min matches. Every one just loves 15 mins so much :P |
| 10:32.06 | Admirarch | [dmp]: What I meant was, what value of "whatever" do you favour? |
| 10:32.48 | Mr_Molez | but i say 10 max |
| 10:33.06 | [dmp] | yeah |
| 10:33.07 | Admirarch | Agreed, any more than 10 just does nothing |
| 10:36.03 | [dmp] | Admirarch: Well, same as i wrote in the forum. I belive it should be up to the participating players when they want to give up. If they dont mind losing 0-13, and wants to fight for just getting one capture. Let them. |
| 10:36.22 | |zongo| | as i already told, 10 seems good looking at the games stats |
| 10:36.56 | |zongo| | there were close 30 min games with scores like 9-8 or 9-7 not more |
| 10:37.07 | AlexandrTheGreat | too bad we cant' tell how many comebacks there were |
| 10:37.25 | [dmp] | play at proxs and feel tokimi stats :-) |
| 10:37.29 | Admirarch | [dmp]: Does this mean you think people should be able to give up at any score |
| 10:37.38 | [dmp] | Admirarch: basically, yes. |
| 10:38.01 | [dmp] | Admirarch: This is giving the responsibility to the players, i know. |
| 10:38.12 | Admirarch | |zongo|: But do we even need the cap limit match to give the same result as the full time match |
| 10:38.28 | Mr_Molez | what if a noob teams gets 1-1 against a good team then gives up... they could abuse the system and get points just by drawing |
| 10:39.21 | [dmp] | if you forfeit, you lose. So the score dosnt matter |
| 10:39.35 | Admirarch | Then do we enter it as 1-1 or just as a loss? |
| 10:39.37 | Mr_Molez | ah |
| 10:39.50 | Mr_Molez | yeh good question |
| 10:40.15 | quantumdot | in case of forfeit we can set up a rule 5-0 for instance |
| 10:40.18 | [dmp] | Well, the matches system needs to show when a team forfeited. |
| 10:40.19 | |zongo| | Admirarch, i dont understand your previous question (to me) |
| 10:40.22 | quantumdot | whatever the real result was |
| 10:41.23 | Admirarch | |zongo|: What you're saying is that the cap limit should be designed so that it doesn't alter the result of the match as it would have been with no cap limit |
| 10:41.41 | Admirarch | I don't think this is necessary |
| 10:44.13 | |zongo| | what do u suggest? (sry im a bit sick today) |
| 10:45.46 | quantumdot | well an option might be to hide the score and just state who won |
| 10:46.00 | quantumdot | 1 x 2 |
| 10:46.16 | quantumdot | if you know what i mean |
| 10:46.33 | |zongo| | yeah...but...no i wouldnt like to see that ;) |
| 10:46.37 | quantumdot | the real score could be visible for admin only |
| 10:46.42 | Admirarch | |zongo|: I'm just saying that I think that a close fight up to the cap limit is just as valid as a close fight up to the time limit |
| 10:46.57 | |zongo| | i agree |
| 10:50.27 | Admirarch | So we shouldn't dismiss a cap limit of 8 just because it might alter some results |
| 10:51.07 | Admirarch | Though I am starting to like [dmp]'s forfeiting |
| 10:51.12 | |zongo| | i was only trying to keep it close to the _ancient_ system but you're right |
| 10:51.47 | |zongo| | i didnt want to change too much, not wanting to hurt old players feelings :) |
| 10:52.17 | [dmp] | foreiting have been used before - so nothing changes, except the rules needs to state it explicit :) |
| 10:52.30 | |zongo| | [dmp], in your forfeit system elo wouldnt change is it? |
| 10:53.07 | Admirarch | |zongo|: If we try to do that too hard then we won't change anything |
| 10:53.15 | [dmp] | |zongo|: Nope. (elo would just been seen as a loss) |
| 10:53.47 | |zongo| | Admirarch, i for all possible good changes ;) |
| 10:54.44 | |zongo| | i am* |
| 11:56.28 | *** join/##ducleague Gilly (i=btw@158-linus.auriamail.net) |
| 11:56.28 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v Gilly] by ChanServ |
| 13:29.40 | *** join/##ducleague CBG (n=CBG@cpc4-stme1-0-0-cust103.cdif.cable.ntl.com) |
| 13:29.40 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v CBG] by ChanServ |
| 13:32.53 | *** join/##ducleague [suaven] (n=totte@port151.ds1-aboes.adsl.cybercity.dk) |
| 13:32.54 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v [suaven]] by ChanServ |
| 14:03.27 | *** part/##ducleague tokimi (n=toki@70-57-24-100.hlrn.qwest.net) |
| 14:03.33 | *** join/##ducleague tokimi (n=toki@70-57-24-100.hlrn.qwest.net) |
| 14:03.33 | *** mode/##ducleague [+o tokimi] by ChanServ |
| 14:03.34 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v tokimi] by ChanServ |
| 14:32.24 | *** join/##ducleague Thonolan (n=Thonolan@i5387AE57.versanet.de) |
| 14:32.25 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v Thonolan] by ChanServ |
| 14:34.34 | *** join/##ducleague Sporty (n=SportChi@69-167-25-130.stmnca.adelphia.net) |
| 14:34.34 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v Sporty] by ChanServ |
| 14:36.25 | *** join/##ducleague SportChick (n=SportChi@69-167-25-130.stmnca.adelphia.net) |
| 14:36.25 | *** mode/##ducleague [+o SportChick] by ChanServ |
| 14:36.26 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v SportChick] by ChanServ |
| 14:58.52 | *** join/##ducleague [suave] (n=totte@port151.ds1-aboes.adsl.cybercity.dk) |
| 15:06.01 | *** join/##ducleague jomojo (n=jomojo@c-24-17-68-130.hsd1.wa.comcast.net) |
| 15:17.14 | *** join/##ducleague catay_ (n=smertens@85-158-210-47.powered-by.benesol.be) |
| 15:21.04 | *** part/##ducleague quantumdot (n=Juan@desorden.ifca.unican.es) |
| 15:28.09 | *** join/##ducleague TheRedBaron (n=trb@koderen.dk) |
| 15:48.42 | *** join/##ducleague SportChick (n=SportChi@69-167-25-130.stmnca.adelphia.net) |
| 15:48.43 | *** mode/##ducleague [+o SportChick] by ChanServ |
| 16:12.25 | *** join/##ducleague bz-bamf (n=bamf@smtp.hspm.com) |
| 16:30.46 | *** join/##ducleague hiya (n=hiya@spfld-159-250-19-71.adsl.crocker.net) |
| 17:28.12 | *** join/##ducleague Blue_Eyes (n=Blue@host49-208.pool870.interbusiness.it) |
| 18:09.50 | tokimi | ~lart TheRedBaron |
| 18:10.48 | *** mode/##ducleague [+vv [suave] Blue_Eyes] by ChanServ |
| 18:10.48 | *** mode/##ducleague [+vv bz-bamf hiya] by ChanServ |
| 18:10.48 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v jomojo] by ChanServ |
| 18:11.01 | TheRedBaron | oi! |
| 18:11.52 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v TheRedBaron] by tokimi |
| 18:12.49 | *** part/##ducleague Mr_Molez (n=admin@openleague.org) |
| 18:28.53 | orange | I still think all matches should score the same amount, regardless of time |
| 18:33.45 | SportChick | orange: why? |
| 18:34.17 | orange | why create 'second-class' matches? |
| 18:34.22 | orange | it's still the same amount of challenge |
| 18:34.31 | orange | should we do 10-hour matches and score them 20 times as high as 30-minute matches? |
| 18:34.48 | orange | you have less time to score, and less time to be scored on... the difficulty and team play is the same |
| 18:35.30 | orange | most people I see who want less score for less than 30 minutes are being traditionalist and don't want the shorter matches at all |
| 18:35.34 | orange | but if we have to have them, want them devalued |
| 18:42.02 | bz-bamf | i agree with orange on this |
| 18:42.35 | bz-bamf | a win is a win |
| 18:54.23 | brlcad | but is it a win? |
| 18:58.01 | brlcad | depends entirely on 1) what is the purpose of the match, 2) what is the purpose of the score, and 3) is there a reason to provide incentive to one match length over another |
| 18:58.49 | brlcad | 3 is invariably based on 1 and 2, and 1 and 2 are invariably disputed purposes |
| 18:59.15 | Thonolan | well peeps look at open league |
| 18:59.24 | Thonolan | there it works perfectly |
| 18:59.31 | Thonolan | with different times |
| 18:59.42 | brlcad | any/either could work perfectly, it's all just affecting score |
| 19:00.08 | brlcad | that doesn't change 1 and 2 -- it's 1 and 2 that are not in agreement |
| 19:00.35 | Thonolan | like i said ...they match there without big discussions |
| 19:00.43 | Thonolan | they only want to match |
| 19:01.03 | Thonolan | thing should hold be easy |
| 19:01.10 | brlcad | if you say that the purpose of the match is an extended comparison of skill over a half hour and that a score should reflect the level of effort in a half hour match, you would be inclined to encourage disincentive to quarter hour matches |
| 19:01.53 | brlcad | if you don't care what the purpose of the match is, then yeah, it can work easily -- or even if your purpose is simply an unconditional test of skill over "some" time frame |
| 19:02.06 | Thonolan | well you can work for an complicated score system ..... or you handle it easy like they do |
| 19:02.36 | Thonolan | the teams there agree to a match lenght |
| 19:02.39 | brlcad | scoring is never complicated, it's just a formula |
| 19:02.44 | Thonolan | and so a win is a win |
| 19:03.01 | brlcad | for those teams, sure, I don't doubt it |
| 19:03.21 | Thonolan | what is different on ducati teams ? |
| 19:03.22 | brlcad | that doesn't necessarily prove any point though that the situation will work for everyone |
| 19:03.29 | brlcad | i'm not arguing for or against, mind you |
| 19:03.37 | Thonolan | same here :) |
| 19:03.42 | brlcad | just that it should be considered why some folks disagree |
| 19:04.15 | Thonolan | well this leagues shoud stand for one importand thing : to have fun |
| 19:04.28 | Thonolan | and to get fun use a simply way |
| 19:04.45 | brlcad | 30 minute matches only is pretty darn simple :) |
| 19:05.10 | Thonolan | yes youre right |
| 19:05.30 | Thonolan | but a lot of people havent hte time |
| 19:05.39 | Thonolan | for 30 min |
| 19:05.41 | brlcad | yep |
| 19:05.49 | brlcad | that's the crux of the issue imo |
| 19:06.08 | brlcad | and there are many means to resolve that issue, not just half-time matches |
| 19:06.50 | Thonolan | its is in my sight an great advantage that people agree before match to an match lenght |
| 19:07.04 | brlcad | if you're playing a game of soccer, you could say we're only going to play N minutes and have a nice fun game that might be valid in some sense of a competition (maybe not) |
| 19:07.29 | brlcad | you just have to also agree on what that competition means |
| 19:07.42 | Thonolan | ducati need definitly new ways |
| 19:07.54 | brlcad | which is where people don't agree -- there are scores at stake that will impact *my* team if two other teams are consistently playing shorter matches |
| 19:08.08 | brlcad | so it's not just team A and team B to consider |
| 19:09.08 | brlcad | i imagine one of the motivations (whether subconscious or not) for deincentivizing shorter matches is to minimize that third-party impact |
| 19:09.48 | *** join/##ducleague Birdie (n=Birdie__@d51A46E43.access.telenet.be) |
| 19:09.49 | *** mode/##ducleague [+o Birdie] by ChanServ |
| 19:09.52 | brlcad | i personally don't think dual-triple-quad score systems is the way to go, even ELO is "complex" |
| 19:10.33 | Thonolan | yes it is to comlicated :) |
| 19:10.47 | Thonolan | dual triple quad |
| 19:10.50 | Thonolan | i mean |
| 19:10.53 | Thonolan | :) |
| 19:11.06 | Thonolan | if a team win its a win |
| 19:11.45 | Thonolan | it should ´nt depends on matchlenght |
| 19:12.01 | Thonolan | but only my opinion ;) |
| 19:12.18 | Thonolan | <PROTECTED> |
| 19:12.21 | brlcad | still no justification, but sure that's a valid opinion |
| 19:12.23 | brlcad | ;) |
| 19:12.27 | Thonolan | :) |
| 19:17.15 | brlcad | as long as we're playing league trivia persuit, when does a win not become a win?, |
| 19:17.52 | brlcad | if we're talking about time frames and 15 minutes is valid, would 5 minutes be valid also? what about 2 minute matches? 40 second matches? |
| 19:18.48 | brlcad | keep in mind that a win means that your ranking in the league, for both teams, will necessarily change as a result of a win/tie/lose |
| 19:19.46 | brlcad | and of course, regardless of the answer.. "why?" that answer |
| 19:19.47 | Thonolan | well you can discuss it but like i said on OL it works perfect |
| 19:19.59 | brlcad | you said 15 minutes works perfect |
| 19:20.06 | brlcad | do they play 5 minute matches? |
| 19:20.10 | Thonolan | and i doubt that teams agree to 2 min matches ;) |
| 19:20.15 | Thonolan | no |
| 19:20.27 | brlcad | so then it's not answering my question at all :) |
| 19:20.46 | Thonolan | i agree |
| 19:21.17 | brlcad | i'm just thinking fundamentally, what makes a win a win that is equivalent .. when is it not equivalent? |
| 19:21.50 | brlcad | that helps answer whether or not 15 minute matches really are the same or not from 30 minute matches and if they are or aren't, it at least helps understand the difference |
| 19:23.16 | Thonolan | well this questions they dont have there ;) they agree to the match settings :map style and time and then .... |
| 19:23.28 | Thonolan | they match :) |
| 19:23.34 | brlcad | maybe too many deep thoughts for an evening, but everyone should really consider them before jumping on a position that things should be one way or the other without considering the potential holistic impact |
| 19:24.03 | brlcad | i know they don't have those questions, lots of folks in bz don't like to think sometimes :) |
| 19:24.07 | brlcad | that's why we play games :) |
| 19:24.16 | Thonolan | yes :) |
| 19:24.17 | brlcad | it's relaxing and fun |
| 19:24.23 | Thonolan | real life hard enough ;) |
| 19:25.05 | brlcad | important when you're instituting a system because a sufficient number of the players can't agree on what "fun" is any more |
| 19:25.22 | brlcad | this all started because of a strong difference of opinion on what it means to have fun |
| 19:25.57 | Thonolan | i agree the defintions of "fun" are very different :) |
| 19:26.14 | brlcad | playing fair, good sportsmanship, importance of matching, importance of winning, etc |
| 19:26.38 | Thonolan | yes..... |
| 19:28.22 | orange | I was off matching |
| 19:28.24 | brlcad | the players on the whole have had more than a year to reconcile that dispute on the meaning of the league and what is fun to them, so if rules have to be established then the hard questions have to be asked and worked through |
| 19:28.28 | orange | so I missed out on a lot of this |
| 19:28.38 | orange | a rare 30 minute match for me... I can almost *never* do them |
| 19:28.39 | brlcad | orange: you didn't miss much :) |
| 19:28.41 | brlcad | just musings |
| 19:28.47 | Thonolan | hehe |
| 19:28.47 | orange | and that's been the #1 contributor to my less than active status |
| 19:29.08 | Thonolan | hello orange |
| 19:29.08 | orange | brlcad: I'd say if two teams are willing to risk points on a 30-second match, that'd be their call |
| 19:29.27 | orange | hi Thonolan |
| 19:29.35 | orange | of course, 30-second matches would *always* be ties |
| 19:29.54 | Thonolan | hehe |
| 19:29.54 | brlcad | that's why I said 40 second ;) |
| 19:29.54 | orange | lol |
| 19:30.10 | orange | in all seriousness, I'd personally accept 1-minute or 1-hour matches |
| 19:30.18 | orange | they both have levels of skill in them |
| 19:30.19 | orange | but |
| 19:30.26 | orange | I'd personally never take one less than 10 minutes or so |
| 19:30.34 | orange | just because I don't think I'd enjoy it that short, personally |
| 19:30.54 | orange | I find that most often the match is "over" after 15-20 minutes anyway |
| 19:31.06 | orange | rarely does it come down to the wire |
| 19:31.17 | orange | though I admit I capped for a tie with 1 second left a few weeks ago |
| 19:31.19 | brlcad | the "problem" (whether it is one or not) is that there may be a bias in the scoring system such that those that play more matches naturally achieve higher scores |
| 19:31.29 | brlcad | not saying there is, or will be.. but it's not unthinkable |
| 19:31.33 | orange | yes, that's possible |
| 19:31.39 | brlcad | and not for certain that it doesnt' currently exist |
| 19:31.53 | orange | I don't know if it does or not... intuitively I'd say no |
| 19:31.59 | orange | because there isn't a built-in activity factor |
| 19:32.26 | brlcad | yes, the equation would lead one to think no, but I haven't exactly worked out a proof of that intuition myself |
| 19:32.51 | brlcad | it could simply be masked by the fact that matches are currently "long" |
| 19:32.54 | orange | but if you punish 15-minute matches, do you reward 60-minute matches? |
| 19:35.11 | brlcad | good question both on the if and the else |
| 19:35.48 | brlcad | hmm, so if we considered a 2 minute match between two teams |
| 19:36.32 | brlcad | is that the same as a 30 min match? what would a 2 minute match "mean"? (thinking aloud ala text here) |
| 19:38.30 | brlcad | personally, I don't think they are at all equivalent if only because peformance of teams does change over "some" timeframe |
| 19:38.54 | brlcad | and there's potentially a huge difference in performance between 2 minutes and 10 minutes, for example .. |
| 19:39.12 | brlcad | yet, less of a diff between 15 and 30 often |
| 19:42.17 | orange | [dmp] will be able to tell us soon, we hope |
| 19:48.20 | *** join/##ducleague [suave] (n=totte@port151.ds1-aboes.adsl.cybercity.dk) |
| 19:48.52 | orange | there is a difference, naturally |
| 19:48.56 | orange | but who gets the advantage? |
| 19:49.00 | orange | and does it matter, if both agree? |
| 19:50.34 | [dmp] | "fsck.ext3: Attempt to read block from filesystem resulted in short read while trying to open /dev/hdc1.. Could this be a zero-length partition?" :( |
| 20:27.13 | SportChick | well, for the record, bzi just played a match against exo. If it had ended at 15, bzi would have lost 0-3. We won 5-4 ultimately. |
| 20:27.33 | tokimi | yups, thats what i thought would happen |
| 20:28.29 | orange | that doesn't necessarily mean much, imho |
| 20:28.40 | orange | if it had gone to 60 minutes, it might have switched again |
| 20:28.54 | SportChick | well here's one though |
| 20:29.06 | SportChick | ELO currently is based on playing 30 minute matches |
| 20:29.18 | orange | how is the time figured into it? |
| 20:29.31 | SportChick | if you change the match lengths to something shorter, scoring could easily be effected. |
| 20:29.45 | SportChick | some teams run out of steam at 15 minutes or so |
| 20:30.27 | catay_ | SportChick: can you report match SNT 6 - Untamed 1 , ty |
| 20:30.40 | SportChick | here's another thought - presuming a ladder is implemented, the ladder scoring could be done regardless of match length, but scale ELO to keep it based on 30 minute matches |
| 20:30.43 | SportChick | catay_: sure |
| 20:30.45 | SportChick | just ended? |
| 20:30.59 | SportChick | catay_: when did it finish? |
| 20:31.09 | tokimi | just now |
| 20:31.10 | orange | I guess I just don't see why the length matters if both teams agree |
| 20:31.22 | orange | if you feel like you are a strong team at 15-30 minute period, then only take 30 minute matches |
| 20:31.41 | SportChick | catay/tokimi: entered |
| 20:32.19 | tokimi | SportChick: thanks :) |
| 20:32.43 | SportChick | tokimi: are we matching? |
| 20:32.47 | SportChick | and if so, how many? |
| 20:32.53 | tokimi | i have 4 |
| 20:34.28 | orange | Mr_Zelom is Mr_Molez? |
| 20:35.10 | tokimi | orange: yes |
| 20:35.17 | orange | k |
| 20:35.20 | tokimi | zelom is molez baxkwards |
| 20:35.27 | orange | yeah, just confirming it wasn't an imposter |
| 20:37.12 | tokimi | dont think zelom is an imposter (unless some one else registered the name recently.. but i doubt so) |
| 20:37.22 | orange | bz-inc and SNT in a race for top activity now |
| 20:37.40 | tokimi | good |
| 20:37.41 | tokimi | :) |
| 20:42.07 | Birdie | zelom has a point with what he said in the forum |
| 20:43.00 | brad | wizart: ping |
| 21:03.45 | Birdie | tokimi: around? |
| 21:17.44 | tokimi | Birdie: pong |
| 21:17.47 | *** join/##ducleague Blue_Eyes (n=Blue@host55-221.pool870.interbusiness.it) |
| 21:19.53 | wizart | brad, pong. |
| 21:23.28 | *** join/##ducleague [suave] (n=totte@port151.ds1-aboes.adsl.cybercity.dk) |
| 21:23.42 | [dmp] | anyone know what their harddisk temp. is? |
| 21:26.16 | brad | wizart: I was going to ask you for a gu match but it has just finished |
| 21:34.58 | brad | that's always fun Birdie |
| 21:35.24 | Birdie | yea.. |
| 21:35.30 | Birdie | didnt opened it in the whole year |
| 21:35.33 | Birdie | didnt went to the lessons |
| 21:35.41 | SportChick | Birdie: tokimi is on bzg:2001 |
| 21:35.49 | Birdie | i got tokimi in pm allready |
| 21:36.41 | SportChick | oops - just saw hehad ponged you - sorry |
| 21:37.11 | Birdie | dont be sorry:) |
| 21:58.16 | SportChick | k, I'm not sorry! ping ping ping! take that! :D |
| 22:33.41 | *** part/##ducleague TheRedBaron (n=trb@koderen.dk) |
| 22:54.03 | SportChick | ~tokimi++ |
| 22:54.05 | SportChick | ~admirarch++ |
| 22:54.10 | *** mode/##ducleague [+vvv [suave] Blue_Eyes catay] by SportChick |
| 22:54.19 | tokimi | what i do this time? |
| 23:28.07 | *** join/##ducleague CBG (n=CBG@cpc4-stme1-0-0-cust103.cdif.cable.ntl.com) |
| 23:28.18 | *** mode/##ducleague [+v CBG] by [dmp] |
| 23:35.25 | *** join/##ducleague spldart (n=spldart@cpe-67-10-221-4.houston.res.rr.com) |
| 23:36.14 | spldart | Waz goin on? |
| 23:37.08 | SportChick | hiya |
| 23:37.35 | spldart | Any exciting matches goin on this weekend (just curious) |