Warrior General Games

Originally posted by -Phaytle-
Adding ladder record or ranking would be absolutely relevant in a tiebreaker. The NFL kind of does this when creating schedules by attempting to match teams with similar records from last year. For example, a team plays it's division twice, and an entire division from another conference, and then if they were 2nd best team from their division, they would be matched with the 2nd best team from another division. The benefit of using ladder games is the fact that it is always a similar level of competition. If you can consistently beat even opponents better than someone you are tied with in a division where you can both beat up on everyone in your league, then hey, you've got to hand it to the guy that can beat his peers more often than the other guy - in their league or not (as a tiebreaker).

But anyways, if this situation doesn't make it apparent that the current tiebreaker settings are just plain bad then it is worthless to keep on communicating... anything... ever again

Ladder rank isn't seasonal so using Ladder Rank would not be wise at all. Using the record from it would just be a huge balance mess. Keep within the leagues.

Regardless to say the tiebreaker settings are just bad when you

- Have the same league record.
- Have lost to this team.
- Have surrendered more points.

Is a bit strange.

Originally posted by bhall43
255-0, 80-0...still problematic.

Yeah, but those were games with top vet teams playing level 20s. Don't know that I ever saw a league game that bad.

Originally posted by -Phaytle-
lol, I bet

So this pretty much comes down to the last week of the season, ya'll need to give up 2 fewer points than Galactic does.

Is there a closer division race in any of the leagues right now?

Originally posted by Time Trial
Yeah, but those were games with top vet teams playing level 20s. Don't know that I ever saw a league game that bad.

lol there were a lot of league games like that. Teams that were using the basic settings got annihilated by us.

Originally posted by Galithor
So this pretty much comes down to the last week of the season, ya'll need to give up 2 fewer points than Galactic does.

Is there a closer division race in any of the leagues right now?

Grizzly and Hawk league both have ridiculous races right now.

Originally posted by Galithor
So this pretty much comes down to the last week of the season, ya'll need to give up 2 fewer points than Galactic does.

Is there a closer division race in any of the leagues right now?

The thing is, even if they end up beating us by 2 points allowed - is the better team with a better chance still going to the playoffs?

If a more relevant tiebreaker that better estimated a team's quality and strength were used, would Galactic Heroes or Chicago Bruins be claiming the #3 or even #4 seed?

Obviously, from everything else besides points allowed, and how close the points allowed race is - the Bruins are the better team, yet by a tiny margin on a less than omnipotent rating, they are on the outside, when on a more relevant scale they may be much, much better and have a higher chance to win the championship than any other seed.

They may have given up more points, by 2, but their margin of victory is much greater, along with other aspects.

This is like picking a weakness or slip up from a good team and then using that to compare against other teams... of course they will look shittier when you pick the weakest part of them - how about you look at more than one part of the WHOLE TEAM!

Originally posted by bhall43
Regardless to say the tiebreaker settings are just bad when you

- Have the same league record.
- Have lost to this team.
- Have surrendered more points.

Is a bit strange.

Another FG for us and you could be saying the same exact thing for the other team... except even if the tiebreaker settings were different they would not be close. We own every stat and record over the other team except this ONE that is being used to determine the tiebreaker. Either add more or change the tiebreaker altogether. The point of the tiebreaker is to send the better of the two teams right? Is this doing it? NO. Is there an easier, better, more accurate, obvious answer? YES.

Originally posted by bhall43
Ladder rank isn't seasonal so using Ladder Rank would not be wise at all. Using the record from it would just be a huge balance mess. Keep within the leagues.

Right. This would be hard to use for guys from different ages. But everyone in the same league is the same age, so they should generally be playing teams in around the same ladder rank and age. If an older team is playing a younger team you bet they aren't competing to get into the playoffs. So, again, this would prove very relevant to proving who is the better team in a division tiebreaker. Again, similar quality opponent wins are worth more than beating a league scrub. Ladder wins shouldn't come into play ehen determining league seeding or championships, but they should DEFINITELY be used for league tiebreakers.

Originally posted by -Phaytle-
Another FG for us and you could be saying the same exact thing for the other team... except even if the tiebreaker settings were different they would not be close. We own every stat and record over the other team except this ONE that is being used to determine the tiebreaker. Either add more or change the tiebreaker altogether. The point of the tiebreaker is to send the better of the two teams right? Is this doing it? NO. Is there an easier, better, more accurate, obvious answer? YES.

Well except you don't own every record as that is the entire reason why it comes down to the point in which they own you.

Originally posted by -Phaytle-
Right. This would be hard to use for guys from different ages. But everyone in the same league is the same age, so they should generally be playing teams in around the same ladder rank and age. If an older team is playing a younger team you bet they aren't competing to get into the playoffs. So, again, this would prove very relevant to proving who is the better team in a division tiebreaker. Again, similar quality opponent wins are worth more than beating a league scrub. Ladder wins shouldn't come into play ehen determining league seeding or championships, but they should DEFINITELY be used for league tiebreakers.

You aren't getting it. The ladder rank goes on forever. It isn't seasonal. You could be well behind someone in rank regardless of having a better season than them. Not to mention you could have a worse record against other teams than another team in your league but they were moving up the ladder and you were moving down.

Originally posted by bhall43
Well except you don't own every record as that is the entire reason why it comes down to the point in which they own you.

No. Use ANY other record for a tiebreaker and we win. OBVIOUSLY the reason we need a TIEBREAKER is because our record is tied, that's not owning anybody. We're also tied in league record, so use anything else besides points allowed and we are ahead.

Originally posted by bhall43
You aren't getting it. The ladder rank goes on forever. It isn't seasonal. You could be well behind someone in rank regardless of having a better season than them. Not to mention you could have a worse record against other teams than another team in your league but they were moving up the ladder and you were moving down.

No sir, you aren't getting it. It would only be used as a TIEBREAKER. If both teams competing for a playoff spot, then they are obviously, by virtue of being tied, having close to the same quality season. So then, why not go to ladder games and/or rank as a tiebreaker - where they are matched with equal opponents. If #149 and #50 teams are in the same league and tied for a playoff spot, who should get it? You could use one shitty stat as a tiebreaker, that may not tell the quality of the team like now, or you could use multiple stats. Or you could go with either better ladder record or ladder ranking. Despite the league record, the high ranked team is still facing and beating better opponents as is evidenced by them earning a higher ladder rank.

The only time your argument might come into play is if there is a team that has been in the cellar of a league for a few seasons and has also acquired a shitty ladder rank. Then all of a sudden one season they turn it completely around and are tied for a playoff spot and because there have been so few games, they haven't had enough to jump up the ladder ranks since they were so far down there at the beginning of the season. But then I'd guess most would say that is fair to the team that has been consistently higher on the ladder, for them to get the nod if the tiebreaker were ladder rank.

Originally posted by -Phaytle-
No. Use ANY other record for a tiebreaker and we win. OBVIOUSLY the reason we need a TIEBREAKER is because our record is tied, that's not owning anybody. We're also tied in league record, so use anything else besides points allowed and we are ahead.

So, essentially, you're saying fix the tiebreaker in a way that gets you in the playoffs. I assume these will be a new fix suggested next season that suits your needs then?

As long as tie-breakers are known, have some form of logic, and are consistently applied I don't really care what they are. I just don't see the logic in including non-league games in league playoff seedings. For the sake of argument, let's say the NFL and CFL reached an agreement where their teams would play each other to determine who the best football team between the leagues was. The NFL playoff seedings shouldn't be impacted in any way by the CFL matchups.

Originally posted by -Phaytle-
No sir, you aren't getting it. It would only be used as a TIEBREAKER. If both teams competing for a playoff spot, then they are obviously, by virtue of being tied, having close to the same quality season. So then, why not go to ladder games and/or rank as a tiebreaker - where they are matched with equal opponents. If #149 and #50 teams are in the same league and tied for a playoff spot, who should get it? You could use one ****ty stat as a tiebreaker, that may not tell the quality of the team like now, or you could use multiple stats. Or you could go with either better ladder record or ladder ranking. Despite the league record, the high ranked team is still facing and beating better opponents as is evidenced by them earning a higher ladder rank.

The only time your argument might come into play is if there is a team that has been in the cellar of a league for a few seasons and has also acquired a ****ty ladder rank. Then all of a sudden one season they turn it completely around and are tied for a playoff spot and because there have been so few games, they haven't had enough to jump up the ladder ranks since they were so far down there at the beginning of the season. But then I'd guess most would say that is fair to the team that has been consistently higher on the ladder, for them to get the nod if the tiebreaker were ladder rank.

You're looking at this based on "today". Imagine 7 seasons from now. You'll have teams that have been playing Veteran for two seasons and their ladder ranking will reflect that. A team newly promoted to Veteran will, by nature of the system, have a lower ladder ranking. Longevity of a team at the veteran level shouldn't be a deciding factor in playoff seeding.