no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Discussions / The BUG or not? - NO BUG Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 5 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
| posted: 2013-02-02 11:05:10 (ID: 80252) Report Abuse | |
|
dark_wing wrote:
Sanco wrote:
Changing the original example like this Gr.A (55+55+55+55+55)/5=55 > Gr.B (55+55+55+55+55+55+54)/7=54,86 Gr.A (53+53+53+53+53)/5=53 > Gr.B (55+53+50)/3=52,67 but overall Group A (55+55+55+55+55+53+53+53+53+53)/10=54 < Group B (55+55+55+55+55+55+54+55+53+50)/10=54,2 Edit: bolded This example is not correct. Because we are not have the so large difference between players' rating. Maybe THIS is OK in your view? It's just the basics. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-02-02 11:16:12 (ID: 80254) Report Abuse | |
|
dark_wing wrote:
jack6 wrote:
Darkwing, you ask the owner and creator of this game if he can program? How can that NOT be offending and rude? 
That simple example did it, I think, to explain the basics. It CAN happen. Another question is, if it is right or wrong in your mind, but since this is Peters game .... @all: I really don't get why everyone is so horny over those ratings. They just help to compare in a raw kind of way. WOW.
We have players with rating 3 and 30?
With example where in group A numbers are aprox millions You'll have more interresting results. And example gives information about big problem in overal rating calculation on the blueprint stage. You a right raiting system here is incorrect. But manugers do not have another numbers for team developmant. And this is the problem. 
Man, if you had any study on mathematic or engineering, then I hope you can live by that, because with that narrowed mind of yours I hope you do not work in some business where errors can lead to deaths. Is it so hard to understand: - average of smaller and larger groups of numbers are not compareable to averages of all individual numbers taken together? - that Peter did implement some formulars and that they just do their job. They might be good or bad, but they just do their job. - that at the end of the day those ratings do NOT help to justify wins or losses. I simply don't get your goal here. Maybe you do a suggestion on the rating calculation and then we will see, how solid THAT system is. If it is good, maybe Peter does change his implemented one. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2013-02-02 11:26:08 (ID: 80255) Report Abuse |
|
jack6 wrote:
dark_wing wrote:
Sanco wrote:
Changing the original example like this Gr.A (55+55+55+55+55)/5=55 > Gr.B (55+55+55+55+55+55+54)/7=54,86 Gr.A (53+53+53+53+53)/5=53 > Gr.B (55+53+50)/3=52,67 but overall Group A (55+55+55+55+55+53+53+53+53+53)/10=54 < Group B (55+55+55+55+55+55+54+55+53+50)/10=54,2 Edit: bolded This example is not correct. Because we are not have the so large difference between players' rating. Maybe THIS is OK in your view? It's just the basics. Yes this result is more interresting. It based on disbalance in number of group members. This is another type of mistake on the blueprint stage. In this case ratings of groups are incorrect. It's a science nothing personal. 
For example NFL QB-rating based on formula, but if more than constant then constant. This is correction. Do You understend me? Last edited on 2013-02-02 11:30:37 by dark_wing |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-02-02 11:36:14 (ID: 80258) Report Abuse | |
|
dark_wing wrote:
jack6 wrote:
dark_wing wrote:
Sanco wrote:
Changing the original example like this Gr.A (55+55+55+55+55)/5=55 > Gr.B (55+55+55+55+55+55+54)/7=54,86 Gr.A (53+53+53+53+53)/5=53 > Gr.B (55+53+50)/3=52,67 but overall Group A (55+55+55+55+55+53+53+53+53+53)/10=54 < Group B (55+55+55+55+55+55+54+55+53+50)/10=54,2 Edit: bolded This example is not correct. Because we are not have the so large difference between players' rating. Maybe THIS is OK in your view? It's just the basics. Yes this result is more interresting. It based on disbalance in number of group members. This is another type of mistake on the blueprint stage. In this case ratings of groups are incorrect. It's a science nothing personal.
For example NFL QB-rating based on formula, but if more than constant then constant. This is correction. Do You understend me? No, I don't get you. Maybe this is a language issue. You can not force managers to put in always the same amount of players in one group. So the formular must work with what's there. I don't know Peters formulars, but the example working with average is a simple solution. If you don't like it, suggest a better one. The NFL-QB formular is also as dumb or clever as anyone wants it to be and every year it is in discussion by several fans and journalists. Some companies did do their own QB-Rating-Formular because they don't like the existing one. So I don't get your argument. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-02-02 11:38:16 (ID: 80259) Report Abuse | |
|
I will move that stuff to discussions, and won't join it again.
I feel I dont have to let me attack for such peanuts in that way... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2013-02-02 12:04:47 (ID: 80268) Report Abuse |
|
jack6 wrote:
No, I don't get you. Maybe this is a language issue. Then RussianUkrainian native speaking English with German native language problems are possible. 
jack6 wrote:
You can not force managers to put in always the same amount of players in one group. Ofcourse no! 
jack6 wrote:
So the formular must work with what's there. So formulas needs corrections. jack6 wrote:
I don't know Peters formulars, but the example working with average is a simple solution. If you don't like it, suggest a better one. I am not sure, but it seems to me, Peter never implement any my solution.
jack6 wrote:
The NFL-QB formular is also as dumb or clever as anyone wants it to be and every year it is in discussion by several fans and journalists. Some companies did do their own QB-Rating-Formular because they don't like the existing one. So I don't get your argument. I am study mathematical statistics many years ago. But I remember examples like in your post. I just try to say very simple calculations can give wrong results. Last edited on 2013-02-02 12:07:35 by dark_wing |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-02-02 12:09:54 (ID: 80269) Report Abuse | |
|
dark_wing wrote:
I am not sure, but it seems to me, Peter never implement any my solution.
Yep, that is because I judge if to go for an users idea in this order: nationality, religion, skin colour, gender, username and if he likes Guinness ("She's" won't make it to the todo list at all...) .... 
C'mon...I don't care about WHO is making a suggestion...as long as it is reasonable and matches my goals it will make it to the ToDo-list. Any other criterias like "it is dark-wing"...are not involved in that process. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
malkarma
|
posted: 2013-02-02 12:17:00 (ID: 80272) Report Abuse |
|
So my plan of sending a 6-pack of Guinnes cans to your hoem after posting a sugestion will not increase its chances of being put in the "to do" list?
Damn my plan for game domination has crumbled to dust |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-02-02 12:21:06 (ID: 80273) Report Abuse | |
|
I am sorry
 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Fummer
|
posted: 2013-02-02 12:24:43 (ID: 80276) Report Abuse |
|
try 2 6-packs, watch pete drink it, then post your suggestion.
thats how i got 6 draftpicks per draft... Pete has high integrity, but he is still only human. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 5 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / The BUG or not? - NO BUG | |
