+1, there are several solutions that could/would make this entire thing a whole lot better. Hard to make everyone happy. I do think 1 thing that would possibly work is maybe handing out something tangible to all the guys in the top 5, I mean really the MVP walks away with a trophy he cares nothing about while someone else gets the real prize? Iv seen the -1's in here, LOL U, so stat whoring your way to top 5 is ok but to #1 is not? Its just something that is a part of the game, people do it all the time to win stat trophies, MVP's and yes to get top 5 in MVP for lottery. If nothing else make this a reality in WL where teams really are more concerned with winning than endorsments.
Forum > Suggestions > Weight the MVP lottery by the MVP scores
jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by fogie55
jd's in a bad mood or something calling people stupid...
does the the exception proves the rule? how many of the 350 or so DMVPs in GLB are DEs? I'm not about to go count but I'd bet its over 200 if not 250. 2 guys out of 11 take home at least half (and probably a lot more) of the hardware.
yes, I know my example was hyperbole, but the end result is overwhelmingly that DEs have a much better shot at MVPs than anyone else. the randomizer helps offset that advantage IMO, so again, -1 for the D and +1 for the O
SAPL DMVP: http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=2508741&playoffs=0 If you bothered to check the various Pro leagues you'd see a ton of CBs and safeties in the top five due to interceptions. Again, do not post unless you have at least a tiny clue what you're talking about.
jd's in a bad mood or something calling people stupid...
does the the exception proves the rule? how many of the 350 or so DMVPs in GLB are DEs? I'm not about to go count but I'd bet its over 200 if not 250. 2 guys out of 11 take home at least half (and probably a lot more) of the hardware.
yes, I know my example was hyperbole, but the end result is overwhelmingly that DEs have a much better shot at MVPs than anyone else. the randomizer helps offset that advantage IMO, so again, -1 for the D and +1 for the O
SAPL DMVP: http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=2508741&playoffs=0 If you bothered to check the various Pro leagues you'd see a ton of CBs and safeties in the top five due to interceptions. Again, do not post unless you have at least a tiny clue what you're talking about.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by Longhornfan1024
This is stupid. If there is concern that people will abuse the system in order to get MVP EQ, that should be dealt with on an ad hoc basis rather than with a flat rule that causes the system to make no sense. We're better off just getting rid of MVP EQ than using the current system.
says the guy that is stat padding?
This is stupid. If there is concern that people will abuse the system in order to get MVP EQ, that should be dealt with on an ad hoc basis rather than with a flat rule that causes the system to make no sense. We're better off just getting rid of MVP EQ than using the current system.
says the guy that is stat padding?
Phantom Of The Opera
offline
offline
I just don't understand why they give one player the MVP gif and another player the EQ. If a player wins the lottery for the gear, just give him the MVP gif as well. Getting the MVP gif without the gear is just stupid as fuck.
Originally posted by bhall43
says the guy that is stat padding?
I run a full roster with a complete depth chart and presets loaded. I don't punt on every offensive down and I don't run plays to give up TDs on every defensive play. Having a team that is better at some aspects of the game or that isn't full of human players isn't stat padding.
says the guy that is stat padding?
I run a full roster with a complete depth chart and presets loaded. I don't punt on every offensive down and I don't run plays to give up TDs on every defensive play. Having a team that is better at some aspects of the game or that isn't full of human players isn't stat padding.
Originally posted by bhall43
Well no it clearly is stat padding.
No, stat padding would be handing the ball off to your HB every play or throwing every day regardless of down and distance and score. Stat padding would be running a defense purposefully to give up points so that your offense can get more chances with the ball. Running a full roster with preset tactics provided by GLB that just happens to have CPUs isn't stat padding. If that were stat padding, every team with CPUs or with a bad coordinator would be stat padding. I could choose to have a defense with CBs on the DL and DL playing DB or an offense with a TE playing QB and throwing every down to OL at WR, because that would help my returner pad his stats. I don't do that. I have dots all at their correct positions and am using preset casual tactics. That isn't stat padding.
Well no it clearly is stat padding.
No, stat padding would be handing the ball off to your HB every play or throwing every day regardless of down and distance and score. Stat padding would be running a defense purposefully to give up points so that your offense can get more chances with the ball. Running a full roster with preset tactics provided by GLB that just happens to have CPUs isn't stat padding. If that were stat padding, every team with CPUs or with a bad coordinator would be stat padding. I could choose to have a defense with CBs on the DL and DL playing DB or an offense with a TE playing QB and throwing every down to OL at WR, because that would help my returner pad his stats. I don't do that. I have dots all at their correct positions and am using preset casual tactics. That isn't stat padding.
Originally posted by fogie55
maybe +1 for offense but -1 for defense until they fix the formula, which is something like: sacks=10 pts, INTs = 0.05
maybe +1 for offense but -1 for defense until they fix the formula, which is something like: sacks=10 pts, INTs = 0.05
Saris
offline
offline
People already exploit the shit out of the MVP systems. It takes a lot of effort to pad one particular dot's stats to that degree and this effort should obviously be rewarded.
Not to mention the benefit to the game financially. If Agents can buy a team that they fill completely with CPU players with the exception of their returner and the STOP's blocking for that returner; suddenly you have a lot more human owned teams, which equals more flex and more income to sustain this game.
+1
Not to mention the benefit to the game financially. If Agents can buy a team that they fill completely with CPU players with the exception of their returner and the STOP's blocking for that returner; suddenly you have a lot more human owned teams, which equals more flex and more income to sustain this game.
+1
SciFi not Syfy
offline
offline
Just make a limit of the % of plays that a player can be the ball carrier. Go over that % and no MVP. I saw an owner this season just give/pass his player the ball every down. Mostly CPU defensive players, and no real attempts to win games. Of course that player dominated oMVP.
I would really love to see only stats from wins count. Percentage of team contribution was the dumbest thing that Bort added to the MVP calculation. Do not scam team titles, but scamming MVPs are perfectly acceptable.
I would really love to see only stats from wins count. Percentage of team contribution was the dumbest thing that Bort added to the MVP calculation. Do not scam team titles, but scamming MVPs are perfectly acceptable.
I think all JD wants is something just a little more in line with reality. Do players get MVP's in real life that many think someone else was better deserving? Yes. But, mostly, you can at least make an argument for the guy with the trophy and why he/she won it. JD's not asking to remove the possibility of the MVP not getting the EQ... just giving him a better chance than currently exists. The numbers kinda don't matter (whatever %) since there already exists a system for this stuff... he just wants it tweaked a bit.
+1
That said, I wouldn't really want this implemented until GLB addresses the failings of the MVP system. It doesn't have to be perfect... but for damn sure it could be better than it is now. Once that is fixed, then stat-padding won't be as easy (duh... that's part of the fix!) and MVP equipment awards will actually mean something to those that get it.
+1
That said, I wouldn't really want this implemented until GLB addresses the failings of the MVP system. It doesn't have to be perfect... but for damn sure it could be better than it is now. Once that is fixed, then stat-padding won't be as easy (duh... that's part of the fix!) and MVP equipment awards will actually mean something to those that get it.
Edited by Theo Wizzago on May 15, 2013 00:55:39
MC_Hammer
offline
offline
As long as there is even the POSSIBILITY of people stat-padding, gaming the system in any way they possibly can, or generally doing stupid stuff just to piss off other users, you can guarantee it will be done (+10, kneeling every down a la the old CPL days, etc.)
The fact remains that there are people out there that get enjoyment out of taking away others' enjoyment, or exploiting/cheating their way to an undeserved trophy, whether it be team or individual trophy. As long as this is allowed to go unpunished it will continue, and no amount of weighting will fix the problem.... it will just make it more of a challenge for those that can't win on merit alone.
I can appreciate the attempt at making the game a bit more fun or realistic, but until such time as asshats are dealt with more harshly (or banned altogether) this gets a +0 from me.
The fact remains that there are people out there that get enjoyment out of taking away others' enjoyment, or exploiting/cheating their way to an undeserved trophy, whether it be team or individual trophy. As long as this is allowed to go unpunished it will continue, and no amount of weighting will fix the problem.... it will just make it more of a challenge for those that can't win on merit alone.
I can appreciate the attempt at making the game a bit more fun or realistic, but until such time as asshats are dealt with more harshly (or banned altogether) this gets a +0 from me.
Originally posted by jdbolick
I realize that math, logic, and pretty much anything involving the brain aren't really your strong suit, but try to grasp that this would still be a lottery. All it would do is weight appropriately instead of pretending that every 2nd through 5th finisher in every league is equally worthy.
Depends on the weights used to be honest. You could turn a lottery into a near certainty if the weights are too extreme.
e.g. 85%,5%,5%,4%,1%
That's a near certainty that the MVP will almost get the equip every time (8.5 times out of 10 on average) .
You could do an empirical study to find out the actual %'s if you wanted to.... I don't care to but if this were to be implemented, what's the max weight that should be applied to the MVP calcs? Should it be 70% 60%? And at that point, what's the gain over what we currently use now?
All questions only Bort knows the answer to...
I realize that math, logic, and pretty much anything involving the brain aren't really your strong suit, but try to grasp that this would still be a lottery. All it would do is weight appropriately instead of pretending that every 2nd through 5th finisher in every league is equally worthy.
Depends on the weights used to be honest. You could turn a lottery into a near certainty if the weights are too extreme.
e.g. 85%,5%,5%,4%,1%
That's a near certainty that the MVP will almost get the equip every time (8.5 times out of 10 on average) .
You could do an empirical study to find out the actual %'s if you wanted to.... I don't care to but if this were to be implemented, what's the max weight that should be applied to the MVP calcs? Should it be 70% 60%? And at that point, what's the gain over what we currently use now?
All questions only Bort knows the answer to...
jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by slashxtreme
You could do an empirical study to find out the actual %'s if you wanted to.... I don't care to but if this were to be implemented, what's the max weight that should be applied to the MVP calcs? Should it be 70% 60%? And at that point, what's the gain over what we currently use now?
The whole point is to have the system based on merit instead of arbitrary bullshit. If two dots have relatively similar seasons, it makes sense for them to have similar chances of winning the MVP equipment. Similarly, if one dot is head and shoulders above everyone else, it makes sense for him to have a dramatically higher chance of winning the MVP equipment. Hell, I've asked to remove the MVP equipment forever because it makes no sense to reward the highest performing dots with things that make them even stronger, but if you're going to do it then at least have it make sense.
You could do an empirical study to find out the actual %'s if you wanted to.... I don't care to but if this were to be implemented, what's the max weight that should be applied to the MVP calcs? Should it be 70% 60%? And at that point, what's the gain over what we currently use now?
The whole point is to have the system based on merit instead of arbitrary bullshit. If two dots have relatively similar seasons, it makes sense for them to have similar chances of winning the MVP equipment. Similarly, if one dot is head and shoulders above everyone else, it makes sense for him to have a dramatically higher chance of winning the MVP equipment. Hell, I've asked to remove the MVP equipment forever because it makes no sense to reward the highest performing dots with things that make them even stronger, but if you're going to do it then at least have it make sense.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
