Warrior General Games

Originally posted by vorenus73
Originally posted by atm490

Originally posted by Ballbright


There are those of you who think I'm an asshole, and that's fine; but I doubt anyone here (save a few idiots on the Bandit's team, yes Daman I'm referring to you) doubts the effacy of the formula I created, and its predictive powers.


"Effacy" is not a word. So I do doubt your formula's "effacy".

That being said, at this point, I have no reason to agree with or doubt your formula's "effectiveness" or perhaps "efficacy". Can you reveal the formula? Otherwise, we can only assume that these are random numbers...



1. Mathematicians aren't known for strong spelling skills. The fact that he can't spell efficacy gives me more confidence in his mathematical abilities.

2. YOU can assume these are random numbers if you want... which would also mean assuming some guy wasted an hour or two of his life "making up" false percentages to ignite discussion on an MMORPG message board... but I believe that yes, even though the formula is not revealed *gasp*, these are not random numbers.


Making up words does not equal intelligence. Wow.

Originally posted by Revolution
"Emerald City-- 12-4 overall; 3-4 vs. playoff teams; 0 quality wins. Average score differential vs. playoff teams was -.25 points"

0 quality wins? I hope you are meaning in the playoffs. PS, EVERY win in the playoffs is a quality win, and we made it to the 2nd round last year. We had one quality win.

Oh, and yeah, emerald city is GREATLY underestimated. We were hit hard with a good team, and only got beat by 6. We were ahead until the 4th. The part that really counted...

Nevertheless, our year has not come yet, but with the team we have, we will do more than get recognition next year. We will be the buzz of Alpha, and we will earn EVERYONE'S respect.


Beating Emerald City was a high point for the Bandits. It was one of the few competitive games early in the season. Close game, won 9-6.

I would rather not face them again next season.

Originally posted by atm490

Making up words does not equal intelligence. Wow.

Sounds like you're just jellish.

Originally posted by atm490
Originally posted by vorenus73

Originally posted by atm490


Originally posted by Ballbright



There are those of you who think I'm an asshole, and that's fine; but I doubt anyone here (save a few idiots on the Bandit's team, yes Daman I'm referring to you) doubts the effacy of the formula I created, and its predictive powers.


"Effacy" is not a word. So I do doubt your formula's "effacy".

That being said, at this point, I have no reason to agree with or doubt your formula's "effectiveness" or perhaps "efficacy". Can you reveal the formula? Otherwise, we can only assume that these are random numbers...



1. Mathematicians aren't known for strong spelling skills. The fact that he can't spell efficacy gives me more confidence in his mathematical abilities.

2. YOU can assume these are random numbers if you want... which would also mean assuming some guy wasted an hour or two of his life "making up" false percentages to ignite discussion on an MMORPG message board... but I believe that yes, even though the formula is not revealed *gasp*, these are not random numbers.


Making up words does not equal intelligence. Wow.

It wasn't a "made up" word. It was simply a typo I didn't catch. One needs only look at the definition of efficacy, to see that is what was intended. I'm sorry it vexed you so much, I'll correct it later.

And before you use the "you always go after everyone else's grammar" argument, I would like to say this. I could care less how your grammar is. I merely point out grammatical errors in people's posts when they attempt to call me, or someone else stupid. It's that whole "he who is without blame" stone slinging thing. How are you going to call someone else an idiot, when you can't type a sentence out correctly...?


As far as the formula goes, it is a formula, and I won't/can't reveal the mathematics behind it as I no longer hold the rights to it for commercial use. I sold it several years ago. I will, however, be more than happy to answer any questions about the process, the data that goes in, or any other questions you may have about it. Just post them here.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Someone posted above that I merely "picked the higher seeds." But a realistic look shows that there were 4 teams tied by record for the top of Zeta, and three teams tied for second in Alpha. Determining seeding by tiebreaker really is an arbitrary process. Anyone of those teams could have had any number of "seedings." I actually didn't look at where they teams were seeded before I entered the data into the formula.

6-2, not bad. Not perfect, but I believe almost anyone will take 75% correct when betting, considering it takes about a consistent 58% correct to make any real money, and even your top guys pick in the low 60% range...

Also, I will be re-running the data for the next round and post it shortly.

Looks like you were wrong about Fiji. We are for real, and we want to wreck your game prediction system.

Originally posted by shortstack
Looks like you were wrong about Fiji. We are for real, and we want to wreck your game prediction system.

Fiji is a good team. All the teams left are, especially on the Alpha side of the house. The only real "frauds" in the playoffs from the Alpha side were Carabao and Aukland. They both benefited from insanely weak schedules.

Carabao has a LOT of potential. Just look at their starters. Lots of level 20s all over the place.

Only problem is that they desperately need some depth, which is also the reason they're so high-level (starters get a ton of playing time). If they keep signing players each offseason they'll be on top eventually.

Originally posted by billyvassi
Carabao has a LOT of potential. Just look at their starters. Lots of level 20s all over the place.

Only problem is that they desperately need some depth, which is also the reason they're so high-level (starters get a ton of playing time). If they keep signing players each offseason they'll be on top eventually.

Your in-game experience maxes out after I believe 40 plays (maybe 50). Whether you're in for 50 or 70, it doesn't matter exp-wise. I agree that Carabao is very good, though.

Yeah I think it's 50 now that you say that.

Carabao was in the Championship game last year against us. Their dropoff has to be attributed to the lack of depth with the new stamina changes put in place this year. They can easily correct that, so I expect to see them back in the mix next season.

Still awaiting the Zeta results, but it seems my Alpha predictions were dead on...

Canberra/New England conference final

Damn, great job with the Alpha picks. That was by no means an easy one to predict.

Tongan won, just waitin on the Gods vs Vampires

Gods > Vampires