Warrior General Games

Assault 47 - Isotopes 19
Ewoks 32 - Beavers 17
Horde 104 - Avalanche 7
Strikers 50 - Beastmen 14
Hedgehogs 58 - Predators 6
Bugeaters 36 - Elves 14
Shockers 21 - Grave Diggers 14
Demolition 126 - Longhorns 4

Ugh. If these predictions are right, all but one game is a snoozer.

I don't see us putting 126 up, but the Horns getting 4 is a very bold prediction by the "Predictor". They would have to pin us within our 5 with their kicking game a few times.

I wish people understood that it is not predicting the actual score..... this is why i stoped posting this data.

By all means enlighten us then. What do the numbers represent?

A big number to a small number (regardless of what the number actually is) means a prediction that one team will almost certainly beat another team. I interpret the numbers to be a preview of how close the game should be as opposed to what its score would be.

It is a predictor of the score, but there is a flaw in it. There is nothing in the predictor to only put points up according to FG, TD, and Safety. It would take a lot more work for it to be refined enough to give realistic scores.

lol, looks like there would be less criticism if you just put the spread... :oP

Originally posted by opspearhead
By all means enlighten us then. What do the numbers represent?

CVRedWave has is pretty accurate. It looks at both team's past scoring and makes a prediction based up that. The fields are locked, so I can't access the formulas easily or I'd provide better detail.

tyante is also correct. It does not break the scores into realistic football scores, so you'll see scores like 2, 4, or 5. Maybe I'll start rounding these scores just to silence the masses or post spreads as Sting suggested.

Originally posted by opspearhead

By all means enlighten us then. What do the numbers represent?


CVRedWave is correct.

If you want I will have the Developer (who has a guy on our team) come and break it down for you.....

Originally posted by morid
Originally posted by opspearhead


By all means enlighten us then. What do the numbers represent?


CVRedWave is correct.

If you want I will have the Developer (who has a guy on our team) come and break it down for you.....

Maybe you should do that then, its alot more productive than making the snooty comments we are becomming so accustom to. God forbid someone should question the integrity of this magnificent formula that predicts multiple safetys to be amassed in every game.

Originally posted by morid
Originally posted by opspearhead


By all means enlighten us then. What do the numbers represent?


CVRedWave is correct.

If you want I will have the Developer (who has a guy on our team) come and break it down for you.....

That's ok. The people above you did a good job explaining it without sounding like an asshole.

Originally posted by MattMan Firespot


Maybe you should do that then, its alot more productive than making the snooty comments we are becomming so accustom to. God forbid someone should question the integrity of this magnificent formula that predicts multiple safetys to be amassed in every game.

What is funny is it has been addressed so many times. The "magnificent formula" is only as good as the data provided. It also cannot take in to account how the Sim actually plays out. The numbers are more of a Str/Power comparison.

It is just funny how everyone complains how unrealistic the predictions are due solely to them showing 4 points instead of 3.

Originally posted by opspearhead

That's ok. The people above you did a good job explaining it without sounding like an asshole.

Awww, did I offend you?

Originally posted by morid
Originally posted by opspearhead


That's ok. The people above you did a good job explaining it without sounding like an asshole.

Awww, did I offend you?

I think your embarassing yourself more than anything else. Thats vindicating enough just to watch.


edit for ludeness

Where exactly did I "complain"? You are seriously wound tight. Anyone want to pitch in to get this guy a hooker?