Duel2.Com  
•   Home  •  Rules  •  Your Account  •  Forums  • Newsletters  •
Navigate
· Home
· Content
· Encyclopedia
· Forums
· Members List
· Newsletters
· Old Newsletters
· Private Messages
· Setup
· Tourneys
· Your Account
User Info
Welcome, Anonymous
Nickname
Password
(Register)
Membership:
Latest: replica hermes kelly 35cm
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 1
Overall: 1256

People Online:
Visitors:
Members:
Total: 0
Duel2.Com: Forums

Duel2 :: View topic - Roll Up Pool
 Forum FAQ  •  Search  •  Memberlist  •  Usergroups   •  Register  •  Profile  •  Log in to check your private messages  •  Log in

 
Post new topicReply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Author Message
guardian
Advanced Master Poster
Advanced Master Poster


Joined: Nov 05, 2002
Posts: 334

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 6:57 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

well i was loathe to do this but i broke down and did it I really didn't want to know


this data is parsed from 2290 team sheets (really it is )

= 11450 warriors on these team sheets the sizes break out as

3=162 .0141
4=154 .0134
5=253 .0220
6=318 ..0277
7=659 .0575
8=645 .0563
9=935 .0816
10=922 .0805
11=1237 .1080
12=1152 .1006
13=1247 .1089
14=942 .0822
15=886 .0773
16= 782 .0682
17=490 .0427
18=273 .0238
19=241 .0210
20=115 .0100
21= 37 .0032

now lets start with this premise

each of these warriors cost me 1 dollar
a dark arena warrior costs 2.15 dollars

i certainly would be significantly poorer

right now (as i type this) i have done no math beyond the above so whatever i flesh out will be news to me . and ill not alter it in any way

1. sz 12 is the median can we all agree on that ?

warriors i received via team sheet from rsi

smaller than the median =5285
the median =1152
larger than the median =5013



272 smaller not a lot across the sample but i would sure rather have it this way than the other

sz3 = 162
sz 21= 37


looks almost deliberate to me

sizes 4 =154
size 20= 115

fairly substantial

sizes 5 and 6 = 571
sizes 18 and 19 =514

(sizes 5-6-7 =1230 sizes 17-18-19 =1004

did it both ways because of the differing skill breaks top and bottom

think i am seeing a minor trend here .


sizes 7-8-9 =2239 sizes 15-16-17 =2158

still looking better than the dark arena to me


sizes 10-11= 2159 sizes 13-14 2189

not really relevant to " my " point (but i added it up any way ) because they are all within the average size skill set

sizes 3-9 = 3126(52.537 %) sizes 15-21 = 2824 (47.462%)

thats 302 more warriors on the smaller side =(5.07 %) and they only cost a dollar .

this comparison is done because it shows the bell curve of the warriors that are over the magical sz 15 " i suck line " vs the warriors along the same portion on the bottom of the bell curve .

again ill take this over what I'm getting from the dark arena

average size 11.8

so the team sheets are or were most likely generated along the same lines as the replacement rollups , so what my point the same as its always been .

that

1 based on skill break points there are to many large rollups
you can change that to to many shit large rollups if you want it is just
semantics .

2. that because this method of getting warriors costs less than half of what the dark arena costs the the program to generate the arena replacement rollups is broken . my opinion is still the same its broken because there are to many larger warriors that no one will run .
and there probably is a Small advantage in size on the team sheets as well but again its just semantics , my gut feeling was that there was an advantage this data shows one but its not significant enough to consider it gospel . based only on the number of warriors .

but looking at it ill take this over the dark arena even if it was not less than half the cost to get warriors this way .

one last comparison

tiny warriors 3-6 =887 7.76 percent thats means i spend 100 dollars on team sheets i get almost 8 size 3-6

average size warriors 7-14 = 7739 = 67.5 percent of them wow !

larg penalized dorks 15-21 -2824= 24.66 percent


so with al lthis said i sure would like to see this distribution from the dark arena instead of what i am getting


and yes you can say i have just been extreemy lucky across 2290 team sheets to get that many little and average size warriors , all i know is for years i have not gotten it from the dark arena , which is why i buy team sheets

guardian

_________________
im guardian who the f... are you !.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Woody
Grandmaster Poster
Grandmaster Poster


Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 989
Location: Lake Powell

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:58 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

guardian wrote:
well i was loathe to do this but i broke down and did it I really didn't want to know



so with al lthis said i sure would like to see this distribution from the dark arena instead of what i am getting


and yes you can say i have just been extreemy lucky across 2290 team sheets to get that many little and average size warriors , all i know is for years i have not gotten it from the dark arena , which is why i buy team sheets

guardian


Hmmm...
I have been too busy looking at the nuts and bolts to get the big picture.

Basically, you're saying:

-Team sheets give "better" warriors than the dark arena.

-Team sheets are cheaper per warrior than the dark arena.

-So what is everyone so upset about? Confused Question Confused
View user's profileSend private message
The Consortium
ArchMaster Poster
ArchMaster Poster


Joined: Nov 23, 2002
Posts: 8849
Location: on the golf course, in the garden, reading, traveling, and now Consulting

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:49 am Reply with quoteBack to top

We are not so sure, like you, there is anything to be upset about. Our understanding is that some managers gravitate to buying "new teams', like Guardian, because the sheets are somewhat better. The discussion on the table is
"if arena replacements were better, would/could that enhance/improve (in volume) arena play?"

Most say "yes". (Certainly everyone would like better warrior rollups.) If the masses agree, then there is value to asking/begging/demanding a change for the good of the players and for RSI.

While some of us disagree on the "fairness" (our word) of the rollups from the DA/graduation, it matters not, if we all accept the premise /objective in red above.

_________________
Ye Old Consortium Scribe & Crapmaster 2013, Crapgiver 2014
1004 ADM graduates (with 40+ manager IDs) including 107K+ fights and 70K+ wins plus 4 teams with 1000+ wins (Animal Farm DM11 @1533*; Bulldogs DM11 @ 1474; Lenpros DM30 @ 1435; Fandils @ 1340
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
The Consortium
ArchMaster Poster
ArchMaster Poster


Joined: Nov 23, 2002
Posts: 8849
Location: on the golf course, in the garden, reading, traveling, and now Consulting

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:04 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Guardian, thank you for all the time and effort and data you have provided on this topic. Efforts like your will definitely make the game better. We truly appreciate it.

_________________
Ye Old Consortium Scribe & Crapmaster 2013, Crapgiver 2014
1004 ADM graduates (with 40+ manager IDs) including 107K+ fights and 70K+ wins plus 4 teams with 1000+ wins (Animal Farm DM11 @1533*; Bulldogs DM11 @ 1474; Lenpros DM30 @ 1435; Fandils @ 1340
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
guardian
Advanced Master Poster
Advanced Master Poster


Joined: Nov 05, 2002
Posts: 334

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:40 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Woody wrote:
guardian wrote:
well i was loathe to do this but i broke down and did it I really didn't want to know



so with al lthis said i sure would like to see this distribution from the dark arena instead of what i am getting


and yes you can say i have just been extreemy lucky across 2290 team sheets to get that many little and average size warriors , all i know is for years i have not gotten it from the dark arena , which is why i buy team sheets

guardian


Hmmm...
I have been too busy looking at the nuts and bolts to get the big picture.

Basically, you're saying:

-Team sheets give "better" warriors than the dark arena.

-Team sheets are cheaper per warrior than the dark arena.

-So what is everyone so upset about? Confused Question Confused




big picture jeez its only in like 15 posts that the point is the dark arena sucks compared to buying team sheets so onone builds teams via the dark arena .

and the thought is ( posted above sveral times )

that if we got better warriors out of the dark arena/arena replacements , perhaps there would be more activity in regualr arenas and less activity in arena 82 and the like .

guardian

_________________
im guardian who the f... are you !.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Reaper
Advanced Expert Poster
Advanced Expert Poster


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 109
Location: Philadelphia, PA

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:18 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

guardian wrote:
Woody wrote:
guardian wrote:
well i was loathe to do this but i broke down and did it I really didn't want to know



so with al lthis said i sure would like to see this distribution from the dark arena instead of what i am getting


and yes you can say i have just been extreemy lucky across 2290 team sheets to get that many little and average size warriors , all i know is for years i have not gotten it from the dark arena , which is why i buy team sheets

guardian


Hmmm...
I have been too busy looking at the nuts and bolts to get the big picture.

Basically, you're saying:

-Team sheets give "better" warriors than the dark arena.

-Team sheets are cheaper per warrior than the dark arena.

-So what is everyone so upset about? Confused Question Confused




big picture jeez its only in like 15 posts that the point is the dark arena sucks compared to buying team sheets so onone builds teams via the dark arena .

and the thought is ( posted above sveral times )

that if we got better warriors out of the dark arena/arena replacements , perhaps there would be more activity in regualr arenas and less activity in arena 82 and the like .

guardian


It seems that the great RU controversy of 06 is masquerading as several issues at once.

Issue #1

agreed and done...
The current system does not financially incentify arena play ($$$$).
That is the issue...(for me clearly opinions like mathematicians vary)....
I am not sure if changing the probability to get a SZ 3-7 warrior is going to mean @#$#@ to a new player. They have alot to learn anyway. What you want is for new players to feel competitive and meet/interact with other players. I think this improves the likelihood that someone will keep playing.

Issue #2

To me the issue of buying rollups by the pound to get the perfect guy is a different topic. Clearly, RSI is in this to make $$$. It is also critical to <somehow> balance this behavior off as it clearly has a negative game play aspect. It discourages the growth of the game through new players. Don't have answers for this, but changing the probability of getting smaller warriors won't change this.

Issue #3
Do better aka smaller warriors do anything to attract arena players? Don't know really.... Clearly, if I think that I have a RU that will outclass everyone else, I will run him. If everyone has warriors on this higher level will I notice any change in my day to day???? Again don't know... I tend to think a new player is going to get his or her clock cleaned for the first few turns no matter what you give them for for RUs?? What it does do is give them hope that some day.... long in the future... they could compete on the ADM and Primus levels... Which may help.... Of course they would have to know what that is, but....

R
View user's profileSend private message
Nomad
ArchMaster Poster
ArchMaster Poster


Joined: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 2080
Location: Fargo, ND

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:51 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Wow - that is a lot of data Gardian went through - and more team sheets than I can imagine ever seeing in many lifetimes.

Based on what has been in this thread it seems to be the consensus that DA and graduation replacements do not generally meet the quality standards that the guardian demonstrated from his team sheets. Right?

Ok - here's the impact - and it isn't just on new players. I am a smaller manager - I run two teams full time and have only seen 4 team role-ups in my life. (And despite a long layoff I started playing on turn one of arena 10, so it does cover a long time.) I already feel at a huge disadvantage in tournaments compared to those who only focus on that, but I can deal with that because it is the nature of the game - if you focus on the tournies then you ought to out-perform those of us who do not. However, if in addition to your larger financial resources, sandbagging, award bonused warriors, and what ever else, I now find myself also confronting managers that routinely get better replacements than I do (Mine will all be coming from DA or graduation) on a per-replacement basis, well, why bother?

At that point I might as well give up arena play - which for me is probably the same thing as saying giving up the game. This game needs all of us and can't afford to lose anyone who loves the game for whatever reason.

Let me be clear - I am not complaining about those who focus their play in other ways than I do (tourney managers) - to each their own. However, I do want to be able to be competitive in my arenas.

This really doesn't address what I think the original issue was - would better replacements bring people back to the arenas, but it is an additional issue. On that point, by the way, I'd just as soon see you keep your sandbaggers in 82.

I hope this made some sense.

_________________
-Nomad
Sentinels(7)
Nomadic Tribe(21)
Dragonbane Guild(81)
View user's profileSend private message
Nomad
ArchMaster Poster
ArchMaster Poster


Joined: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 2080
Location: Fargo, ND

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:54 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

In case it wasn't clear - I suspect this means I might very well support something that improved DA replacements - or at least made them equal to what the team sheets spit out.

_________________
-Nomad
Sentinels(7)
Nomadic Tribe(21)
Dragonbane Guild(81)
View user's profileSend private message
guardian
Advanced Master Poster
Advanced Master Poster


Joined: Nov 05, 2002
Posts: 334

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:56 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Issue #2

To me the issue of buying rollups by the pound to get the perfect guy is a different topic. Clearly, RSI is in this to make $$$. It is also critical to <somehow> balance this behavior off as it clearly has a negative game play aspect. It discourages the growth of the game through new players. Don't have answers for this, but changing the probability of getting smaller warriors won't change this.

Issue #3
Do better aka smaller warriors do anything to attract arena players? Don't know really.... Clearly, if I think that I have a RU that will outclass everyone else, I will run him. If everyone has warriors on this higher level will I notice any change in my day to day???? Again don't know... I tend to think a new player is going to get his or her clock cleaned for the first few turns no matter what you give them for for RUs?? What it does do is give them hope that some day.... long in the future... they could compete on the ADM and Primus levels... Which may help.... Of course they would have to know what that is, but....

R




2 qnd 3 ar ethe same issue and it is semantics ,

better smaller whatever

i used the smaller analagy becasue of the huge disadvantage you are at at sz 15 plus becasue the hitpoints damage rating bonus you get there does not adeuquetly compensate the warrior for the penalties to defense and parry ( personally it should have gotten programmed in reverse smaller better defense , bigger better parry . but that is just opinion .


and clearly it will make a difference becasue i am telling you if it was fixed i will run in arenas's more regularly and even if i am the only one who does so it makes a difference , a smal lone but it is in fact a difference , and i am betting it would make a difference to some other people as well .


guardian

_________________
im guardian who the f... are you !.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Reaper
Advanced Expert Poster
Advanced Expert Poster


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 109
Location: Philadelphia, PA

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:41 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Guardian - I agree with you. On Issue 1 you have my vote. Make a DA and a Rollup the same ($$$$ and quality-wise) and call it a day. - R

Sorry if I pissed you off... just reading forums and drinking whiskey...
View user's profileSend private message
guardian
Advanced Master Poster
Advanced Master Poster


Joined: Nov 05, 2002
Posts: 334

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:38 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

nomad


dont misunderstand the data

the replacements are genrally only slightly better from team sheets , the real issue is it costs you twice as much money and takes a hlee of a lot longer to get decent rollups with ahaving to wait and all .


and its not fair that it does , tourney managers can always buy more rollups arena mangers have to wai t especially those on a limited budget and those mangers are the ones hurt the most by the disparity

secretly though this entire thread is just about me wanting to get more warriors through the dark arena oops did i say that out loud ?


guardian

_________________
im guardian who the f... are you !.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Woody
Grandmaster Poster
Grandmaster Poster


Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 989
Location: Lake Powell

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:53 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

The Consortium wrote:

"if arena replacements were better, would/could that enhance/improve (in volume) arena play?"



Here's an idea:
If you graduate a warrior from basic, and he has at least 20 arena fights, the replacement for your graduate is an 87 pointer.

This would:
-Increase arena participation
-Suck off some the the challenger sandbaggers back into the arena
-Increase the freshmen tourney participation
-Level the playing field some at the rook/app/init tourneys
-Reduce the problems associated with the bigger rollups

This would not:
-Affect the competitiveness at the higher levels
-Require any code changes, rollup database changes

It would be difficult for anyone to severely unbalance the rookies tourney by a flood of 87 pointers. If they could, then they've earned it by their contributions to the arena part of the game.
View user's profileSend private message
Woody
Grandmaster Poster
Grandmaster Poster


Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 989
Location: Lake Powell

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:49 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

guardian wrote:
well i was loathe to do this but i broke down and did it I really didn't want to know


this data is parsed from 2290 team sheets (really it is )

= 11450 warriors on these team sheets the sizes break out as

3=162 .0141
4=154 .0134
5=253 .0220
6=318 ..0277
7=659 .0575
8=645 .0563
9=935 .0816
10=922 .0805
11=1237 .1080
12=1152 .1006
13=1247 .1089
14=942 .0822
15=886 .0773
16= 782 .0682
17=490 .0427
18=273 .0238
19=241 .0210
20=115 .0100
21= 37 .0032

guardian


I got bored so I put together a bias test.

A goodness-of-fit test (where a normalized distribution of the given data is used for expected values) yields the following conclusion:

The size attribute on your rollups comes from a biased source (big surprise). The confidence interval is more than (.999).

In English: it is more than 99.9% sure that the pool you drew from is biased.
View user's profileSend private message
Woody
Grandmaster Poster
Grandmaster Poster


Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 989
Location: Lake Powell

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:56 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

LHI wrote:
I looked at my data and for 2097 discreet warriors I had these numbers:

SZ 07 = 4.7%
SZ 08 = 6.2%
SZ 09 = 7.3%
SZ 10 = 9.0%
SZ 11 = 9.7%
SZ 12 = 11.6%
SZ 13 = 11.2%
SZ 14 = 7.9%
SZ 15 = 7.4%
SZ 16 = 6.7 %
SZ 17 = 4.3%

I've only had 11 SZ 3 and 9 SZ 21.


I did a bias test on this one, too.

There is no bias in the 7-17 range.

The confidence interval is more than (.90).

In English: It is more than 90% certain that the rollup pool you drew from has no size bias in the 7-17 range.
View user's profileSend private message
pipthetroll
Advanced Master Poster
Advanced Master Poster


Joined: Nov 04, 2002
Posts: 447
Location: In my underwear, in front of my computer

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 4:10 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Woody wrote:

The size attribute on your rollups comes from a biased source (big surprise). The confidence interval is more than (.999).

In English: it is more than 99.9% sure that the pool you drew from is biased.


Whats with the big surprise crack? Theres no surprise at all--the team sheets are a static pool, theres somewhere between 150-250(could be more now), then they repeat.

How many possible team sheets could there be if it was random? In the billions most likely. How big is the sample we have? 250ish with repeats? We will never see 99.99% of the possible team sheets. A sample of team sheets will always be biased.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailICQ Number
Display posts from previous:      
Post new topicReply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Powered by phpBB 2.0.10 © 2001 phpBB Group

Version 2.0.6 of PHP-Nuke Port by Tom Nitzschner © 2002 www.toms-home.com
Forums ©
:: fisubsilver shadow phpbb2 style by Daz :: PHP-Nuke theme by coldblooded (www.nukemods.com) ::