Warrior General Games

I mean, if I had known that scheduling a bunch of pro teams for ranked scrims would give my rookie team big points in the rankings, might have done that instead of scheduling other good rookie teams.

http://goallineblitz.com/game/team.pl?team_id=97

(that's the #1 team in the rookie leagues according to the team rankings, and by a pretty wide margin).

And that's not even mentioning the case where teams that are 1-0 in ranked scrims are ranked ahead of teams that are, for example, 17-4, 12-2, or 8-1.

lol

When they start playing Rookie teams, it will work itself out. The team ranking is based on Niboris's old rankings and they took a while to really normalize. The GLB rankings are the same way.

final team rankings decided in offseason ftw

Originally posted by Plankton
When they start playing Rookie teams, it will work itself out. The team ranking is based on Niboris's old rankings and they took a while to really normalize. The GLB rankings are the same way.

Figured as much, just think that's an awfully big bonus for getting clocked by high level teams.

Originally posted by rivergato
final team rankings decided in offseason ftw

Not really saying that.

My interest in seeing them normalize is primarily based on automatic qualifying criteria for a prep tournament (current rookie teams) I'm running next season. Rookie conference champs and other teams in the top 10 of the rankings get an automatic berth. I just want to make sure the rankings are worth a damn in the first place, since I've never really paid attention to them before.

Originally posted by Warhawk
Not really saying that.

My interest in seeing them normalize is primarily based on automatic qualifying criteria for a prep tournament (current rookie teams) I'm running next season. Rookie conference champs and other teams in the top 10 of the rankings get an automatic berth. I just want to make sure the rankings are worth a damn in the first place, since I've never really paid attention to them before.

They aren't.

agreed they appear to be insane

Originally posted by AirMcMVP
They aren't.

This, they mean absolutely nothing

Those don't mean much and wont until Bort caps how high a team can go based on it's league and competitive level. Also probably need a cap on how much ranking a team loses based on what level of competition is being played.

Originally posted by DarkRogue
This, they mean absolutely nothing

In rings sure? But it definitely shows the better teams for that season. Really should only he concerned with the top 25 around the playoffs. Analyzing in day -4 is just LAWL.

Originally posted by Dr. E
Those don't mean much and wont until Bort caps how high a team can go based on it's league and competitive level. Also probably need a cap on how much ranking a team loses based on what level of competition is being played.

Well, I don't really care about overall rankings, just rankings of rookie teams.

Originally posted by Homage
In rings sure? But it definitely shows the better teams for that season. Really should only he concerned with the top 25 around the playoffs. Analyzing in day -4 is just LAWL.

What I'm interested in is whether the rankings on Day 40 will be representative of the best teams, keeping in mind that conference champions also get an automatic invite to the tournament, so the rankings would just be used to determine the handful of top teams that failed to win their conference but deserve an invite nonetheless. Ergo, looking at how they are now, what I would like to know is if it would be possible for a team to "game" the rankings by scheduling games against vastly superior teams, losing badly, but picking up points for strength of opposition.

Originally posted by Warhawk
What I'm interested in is whether the rankings on Day 40 will be representative of the best teams, keeping in mind that conference champions also get an automatic invite to the tournament, so the rankings would just be used to determine the handful of top teams that failed to win their conference but deserve an invite nonetheless. Ergo, looking at how they are now, what I would like to know is if it would be possible for a team to "game" the rankings by scheduling games against vastly superior teams, losing badly, but picking up points for strength of opposition.

uh yeah, they tend to be the best in the game for that particular season regardless of league because top Pro Teams tend to rank WL teams.

And I don't know the equation enough to know if you can gain rank by simply losing to superior opponents but I'm sure it's a factor.

Originally posted by Warhawk
Not really saying that.



Originally posted by Warhawk
What I'm interested in is whether the rankings on Day 40 will be representative of the best teams...

Thought i got it, then i was ok that it wasnt your intention here, now im like huh?

Originally posted by Warhawk
What I'm interested in is whether the rankings on Day 40 will be representative of the best teams,

I think the day 40 rankings are not terrible and in general a decent representation of the team rankings, especially if you would be looking at rookie (prep next season). Day -3 rankings are bad, but by the end of the season, they should balance out unless a team really cherry picks like 8 scrims a day for a bunch of days for the purpose of moving up the lol rankings - I cannot see that as a real likely possibility, but by day 40, I think it would balance out plenty.

Rookie team "El Mano Negro" is ranked 236 and mostly CPU?

I smell Affirmative Action.....



But hey, the did score 21 of off the #6 ranked Texas Militia....

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=2195444&pbp_id=799571

On those CPU-roids....