Also, for the record:
I never had any complaints regarding ELO, other than "don't ruin it by imposing Standard upon it." That mode has always managed to be fair, IMO. There were no game-breaking bans, there were no ridiculous rules that you had to search the entire site over to figure out how they might affect your score (okay, not counting the daily ELO penalty for not playing...)
I guess I don't really understand what motivates the developers to try to steer players towards less balanced modes of play.
Sorry for another non-numerical post, but I've been thinking a lot about the modes and what Zoidberg has said as well...
Maybe the best fix to what I've been complaining about regarding the general DT philosophy would just be to put all of the bonus stats somewhere easily accessible? If the end-game summary screen could do a good job of breaking down where the points come from, win or lose, using that data to your advantage would be fair. A mode that rewards quick thinking is great, a mode that rewards the few players who can follow a magical set of clues to wherever it is on the site that all of the DT bonus stuff is explained, is not great.
the repeated matches is likely the matchmaker not being able to find suitable opponents... ive had the same opponent 3 times out of 10 matches before in small DTs.
sorry its not a car man... car breaks you die. UR breaks... you can come up with something to improve it.... world and life continues.
i think we are way beyond the simple broken or not broken question Zoid. we have a few examples of it breaking for sure... and a lot of examples where it is likely broken (but we are not sure). so we have a few options, 1) quit 2) say its broken and throw it at UR and say fix it or 3) do something productive and figure out when and how it is breaking and point it out to UR
your 12 star to 14.5 star difference is well within the realm of the matchmaking rules, especially if you are winning.
and if you are seeing that with 12 star average you keep running into 14 stars.... then run 14 star average and see if you run into higher starred decks. It is an impossibility that everyone would be running into higher star decks on average... someone is obviously playing against the low star decks.
there is a distinct possibility that DTs are heavily loaded with high star decks.... with all the unpenalized power cards out there this is a real possibility. UR should have these stats.... If there is a overpopulation of high star decks out there... then it is no surprise that lower star decks are more likely to get overwhelmed by them more often. I am starting to think that this is what is happening.
Keep the numbers coming in .
the rules for DT are out there... .they are not hard to find. a genius player should have no problem finding them and playing to them.
sorry i dont see a system that rewards casual players equally as devoted players.... i dont get that at all.... that would be a broken system. we might as well just lottery everything out... not good for long term health of any game.
if " mediocre player that builds his deck to get the most advantageous matchups" was so simple... then everyone would be winning DTs.... but they dont. Its amazing when good DT players publish DT decks and it gets copied by tons of people with no clue how to use it....
You do realize there are several approaches to winning DTs right???? each one plays at a different speed (some are faster than others) and each one needs to be aiming for a certain win rate (some need to be close to 100%, some can get away with just above 50%).
DT is a race... it doesnt matter if i have better technique than Usain Bolt... but in UR, at least any newb can actually beat the "Usain Bolts' of UR for a step or two... but will still lose (and should still lose) the race given the discrepancy in skill.
truth.. whether or not we like to hear it or not
Waster, I think you misunderstand me.
All I am saying is that this game should not degenerate into a contest of who's been here longer. If it does, the game will be unattractive to new players for obvious reasons, and old players will leave sooner or later. I hope you can understand that this is not a good approach.
You're completely right -- there are several ways to win DTs. That's because some people are playing chess and some people are playing dodge ball! Not everyone has the same information, and just the fact that someone with a 50% win rate can "beat" someone with a 100% win rate is a good indicator of how uneven things are. Have you ever heard of any other tournament setting where that can be true?
I am not suggesting any kind of lottery. I am suggesting that UR should ideally focus more on skill (that is, being able to win a match against an opponent with a deck that has a similar star count, because you made better strategic decisions) and less on seniority (that is, winning because you drew your Jackie Cr and your opponent does not own a Jackie Cr, or because you've been here long enough to figure out some obscure game rule that isn't introduced to you when you start playing.)
Lol i give up...
i think you need to play more DTs to understand it mate. once you understand DT more... please have a look at your proposal again. trust me... there is something glaring thing about it (actually there are several)... i know exactly what deck id use to win DTs under your proposed changes. experienced DT players will see it too within 3 seconds or less of reading it. those who cant... well they'll find a reason to hate on it im sure. i can also see the list of gripes people will have under your proposed system. mate grind some DTs, trust me it will be good for you. and you will see that DTs are actually quite newbie friendly for those wanting to get rich. top 150 DT is definitely much easier for a noob than lets say 1200 ELO for a noob.
no point comparing it to other tourneys.. its not the same. cause i could easily come up with something like... shots on goal in a hockey or football game, or speed dating... yes 50% can beat 100%
posting only stats or answers to questions on this thread from now on
Two separate runs in Standard
300 people during run 1, 286 during 2
Running a mission deck with all 3*s, win rate is roughly 50-60%
Even with a bad win rate, it looks like I end up fighting higher star decks way more often than not. I haven't seen a 6 or 7* difference in Standard yet, but even this is somewhat undesirable IMO -- it's bad for new players trying to compete, and great for veteran players who are farming DTs.
I really think you should check your attitude. Do you realize that you come off as a bit arrogant?
Why do you assume that because I don't like something about UR, I must not understand it?
These are two totally unrelated things. I think I understand DTs just fine.
When I tried to fiddle with them after Standard came, I made top 100 or better every time I had about an hour to spend on it. I wrote a post on my guild's message board about how to achieve those results through use of cards that were disproportionately powerful in Standard DTs, as well as a basic DT strategy guide... After that, I had a few guys approach me and say, "thanks, I made top 100 for the first time using your technique."
I know how you feel about perception, but when you perceive things over and over again and you've gathered enough data to consistently be able to use it to your advantage, the word for it is "fact."
You post a thread to see if something is broken and when its proven to be so you don't want to accept it, again the numbers are an AVERAGE and therefore some opponents decks will be LESS than the 5 star average difference and some (and this is the important bit as you need to concentrate on this) will be MORE thant the 5 star average which would imply the broken part.
You also seem determined to take things selectively to suit what ever you are saying as I have pointed out before your player score is made up of three elements
1 your average deck score
2 your win rate (We don't know over how many games)
3 your decks "Global win rate"
now as stated before and my stats show the decks I am using do not have a 100% win rate and neither do I so I should not be facing as much as a six star difference.
If the difference is large then the opponent and their decks should have a very low win rate now lets take my last fight I am running a reasonable Sackrohm Pussycats 25 star deck, please note this doesn't contain Gaxx/ Charlie or any or the other top power house cards. My opponent ran a mono La Junta deck and drew 18 Stars in their hand including Emeth and Byron, they have a decent 57% win rate at level 47. So neither they or their deck have low win rates or in other words this is not a deck I should be facing under the system that is run. Yes they could have just 8 stars but its strange I never face any of these 8 star hands
Cont. As for the car point you don't buy a broken product if it kills you or not, yes I took this too the extreame but I am sure you can still see the point. And you can fix a cars broken steering as well.
As stated in previously in other threads and this one I have contacted UR to try to get them to fix it, I have even offered to check their math free of charge despite all my qualifications, I have also posted numerous times that this problem exists but so far no fix has come about from UR or even an update on what is being done to fix it, hence the reason why people are leaving.
I agree with you on that there should be clear rules on the DT points system, there used to be something half decent about but I can't find it anymore an you need to cross reference to the banned charecter list. BUt you can work on two principles you win more points for winning a fight with a low star deck than a high star deck, and you get more points per round won for beating higher star cards with your lower star cards. Hence it used to be interesting to run tiny bits decks in the old rooms as you expected to fight higher star decks and could set your deck up for this, it was also a good pay off in trying to get the points you did get for winning fights against win rates. But the new format has killed this
Yes also another non stat related post.
I like both yourself and waster and have to say that I think at times all three of us come off as rather overly zelous and extreamist (Dare I say a bit arrogant in our views) maybe I am the only one of us that sometimes does it on purpose. And in defence of Wasteroftime he is the only mod/ur staff member that can be bothered to post regulary and respond to what people have to say, yes maybe some of it could be better phrased but the same could be said of our posts, and I say this with a huge amount of respect and generally agreement of what you have said Ghelas, I hope you keep posting your views and that UR actually responds.
As you say I think we have seen more than enough on here to see that the opponent selector is broken with a high degree of certainty