I'm Baaaaack!

WOK for Advanced Players

Moderators: Duke, trewqh, korexus

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Fri May 21, 2004 3:19 pm

Whatever TK, the only reason you tracked those ratings was for your own ego. If you had not won VPs that game, something tells me you would never have tracked those ratings until the end like you did. Heck, you admitted as much yourself there. The reason not to track these is because it frankly sets a bad precedent, as it specifically goes against my house rules. If we allow them in now, then at some date in the future in which the random RIP bonuses actually MEAN something, then players like you are going to take it upon themselves to rate the game if they win, and perhaps send it to a Gatekeeper who may just use them instead of bringing up the question publicly as Josh has here. The bottom line is, it goes against my house rules, which were clear when the game began! If players don't like the fact that my games are not rated, they should not sign up for them!!! Really, it's that simple.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Fri May 21, 2004 4:54 pm

Here's a link to the topic, for anyone that's still interested:
http://www.kaomaris.com/phpBB2/viewtopi ... 0206#10206

Now, when I read that, I assumed you were pointing out that only players who did well would want ratings tracked and so making an intelligent contribution to the discussion. If you were in fact, merely pointing out what you would do in the situation in which we now find ourselves, then I appologise whole-heartedly for thinking too highly of you.

The point is that some players in that game probably don't want the ratings to be counted. Just because you do and have tracked them, doesn't mean that they should be added up.

korexus.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

ThinKing
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2002 7:00 am

Post by ThinKing » Fri May 21, 2004 7:58 pm

Dameon wrote:If players don't like the fact that my games are not rated, they should not sign up for them!!! Really, it's that simple.
This would be a fair point if there were plenty of games around to choose from. There are currently only 4 WOK5 games running. Two of them have started in the last week, and one (Guatemala) is about to finish, by the looks of things. We simply dont have enough games to pick and choose which ones we will enter (unless waitlists appear simultaneously - a rarity!).


Korexus posts a link to the same thread which I linked to earlier, and still misses the point - let me repeat;

"This was in response to Nick's suggestion that a player could track his/her OWN rating (and not everyone else's)." That means you are taking it out of context. The current situation is different to the one I was commenting about originally. Please stop referring to it.


Korexus;
"The point is that some players in that game probably don't want the ratings to be counted. Just because you do and have tracked them, doesn't mean that they should be added up."

Sure - the people with negative ratings may not want the game to count, but that goes for ANY game! Of course, if I had died early on, I would not have kept on tracking the ratings, but who WOULD track a game they weren't involved in?? I certainly wouldnt mind if the winners, or other survivors, had tracked the game themselves. Is there any player out there who actually DOESNT want their games to be rated? The most negative reaction you will find to rated games is indifference.

These ratings should be added because each extra set of data makes us more informed about the shortfalls of the rating system. If it turns out that Dameon is right about the RIP bonuses, then we can formulate a new, improved, system. But if we only count a certain proportion of our games, then it will take us much longer to reach those conclusions (and hence much longer to create a good rating system with accurate values).

In fact I think it would be a good idea for winners to track the ratings of games where the GM cant be bothered. They certainly have an incentive! A quick post like Donut's would clear any small errors (which the current system looks to be prone to).


Regards,
The Artist Formerly Known As Gone

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Sat May 22, 2004 12:23 am

TK, I cannot control how many other GMs open games or do not. All I can do is open games when I have time, and run them by the rules I prefer. It may be tough, but that's just life. If you don't like the rules I set, do not play in my games. You have to decide whether you'd rather play in a game whose rules you don't entirely agree with, or not play. You chose to play, and thus are subject to the rules. The issue is not that I "can't be bothered" to track ratings, the issue is that I refuse to allow games I run to be rated.

Incidentally, I fail to see how one could think the RIP bonus is fair. I can cite several instances where a player RIPped another without having to kill any of their armies, or even do any real damage to them. But hey, I guess WOK is an all-or-nothing game, and ratings should be all-or-nothing....except of course we came up with ratings in part to modify the all-or-nothing VP scale....er....I guess I just don't get it. As long as those random RIP bonuses are there, my games will never, ever be rated. Period. I am not running any games now, of course, but after my break in late August I will be opening a couple of waitlists- make sure you don't join in those games if you expect any ratings to come out of it, OK?
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
Duke
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1699
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Sweden, Valn Ohtar

Post by Duke » Sun May 23, 2004 6:40 am

First off, I know we are in the same clan now and all and maybe I should team up on you here Dameon but.....no I cant 8)

This is just stupid. I know that you have principals and stick to them like there is no tomorrow and after reading this thread (why is the discussion in this thread btw?) I have understood that you think the ratingsystem is wrong in some way. So? Big deal. It is a freaking game. Like TK said, there isnt that many games to be rated and you are usually one of the most productive GM's we have.

However, I read the thread with a slight hope that you would utter the words "then I start up a ranking of my own for my own groups". That would rule since we then could compare us to boxing or wrestling. Eventually we have three different champs and a bunch of wierd looking belts.

Could you just for once not be the Michael Moore of WOK?
First one here, last one to leave.

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Sun May 23, 2004 2:15 pm

I don't expect you to back me up just because you are in my clan Duke, it's not like you can't have your own opinions. 8) Anyway, I understand why some people do not like the decision I have made in regards to the rating system, but really it's just a continuince in my ongoing feud against Lady Luck. RIP ratings bonuses are often luck-based, so I don't want them used in my games. I TRIED to propose a compromise I thought would be fair (shared RIP bonuses, just like you can share the RIP bonus in a game via the marketplace) but the WSC apparentely thinks that the members of the WOK communities are drooling idiots and would end up starting flamers about that. I will, of course, abide by the WSC's decision in that matter, but I also fully expect players in my games to abide by MY decision not to rate them. I am not going to change my mind here, unless the rating system become less luck-based, in which case I will gladly sign on.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
Duke
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1699
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Sweden, Valn Ohtar

Post by Duke » Mon May 24, 2004 7:08 am

I was being ironic when I said that stuff about backing up and judging from your smiley you got that. Actually I feel that different opinions is needed if we want things to evolve. So this isnt the start of a flamer. Not until X-wing starts to post. :roll:

So you are striving for a world of wok that is totally free of any influence of luck? All I can say is "fat chance". And if you manage to completely eliminate that element you have created a game that only accountants will enjoy. A smidget of luck is needed so there is a possablility of "impossible" recoveries. However, knowing you I take it that you are talkning about the outcome of battles, accuracy of GCA's, effects of spells etc. At least I thought you were but now you bring a rating system into this. I dont really get it.

Lets say we have 5 games left of the season in our football team (soccer to you) and meet five teams in the middle of the division that has no chance of winning or falling out of the division, hence they have nothing to play for. We lead the division at this point and the current runner-up is facing the teams that are from 3-5 and two teams fighting to stay in the division. This is luck my friend. The teams we are facing will probably not care all that much if they win or loose. They are looking forward to the vacation. The runner-up will go through hell with their games.

Wait, dont say it. I know you will say that this is completely different and not comparable. Hm, let me try again then.

Lets say I enter Australian Open in tennis (!). I get to face a bunch of blueberries on my way to the final (= getting a starting position in WOK close to newbies, people that goes M-1 on turn 1 etc). In the final I meet the current champ. THe champ sprains his ankle after the first set and I win the whole thing. That would boost my rating on the ATP tour like crazy but all due to mostly luck.

Fact being, you cannot eliminate the element of luck. If you do then everything will be predictable and how fun would that be? We would all loose to wierdos like TK ( :wink: ) who can calculate it all on his wok-adjusted meterstick.

Dont get me wrong here. I am with you a long way on the luck thing (WOK4 as example) but I will not follow you over the cliffedge if you get my pint. (typo. Should say point but it looked funnier as pint so I kept it that way. :) )

*clears his throut*

Ok, I am getting back in line now sir. 8)
First one here, last one to leave.

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Mon May 24, 2004 2:37 pm

I know you can't totally eliminate luck in a game like this, but I can do my best to minimize it's impact, which is why I made this choice. That's not the only reason I am against ratings, although it is the major one. The other one is we already have a VP system, so why use ratings? Really there's not going to be much difference between the two, now is there? The people who win VPs will get the most ratings points, and people who play more and are good will have higher ratings. The system doesn't really award aggressive behavior, either, since the RIP bonus that comes with it can often be stolen away, by pure luck, by players who haven't done a lot of work in RIPping a player, among other inequalities. I just don't see that the purpose of the ratings system, as described by it's inventors, is served at all the way it is currently implemented. So, I decline to use it.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
Lowebb
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 348
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Post by Lowebb » Mon May 24, 2004 4:15 pm

somneone introduce duke and his avator to transparency

User avatar
Polymorphic
Trooper
Trooper
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2003 8:00 am
Location: Oxfordish
Contact:

Post by Polymorphic » Mon May 24, 2004 4:25 pm

Lowebb wrote:somneone introduce duke and his avator to transparency
Why? It's easier to tell them apart this way :)

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Mon May 24, 2004 7:00 pm

It's not as easy making those images as you might think. I have always used Photoshop to do it, but left that program at home when I came out here. So, I have to wait a couple weeks to make that background transparent- it's not hard if you have the right tools. If anybody else knows how to make that background transparent before then using a common program (like Paint), I'd love to learn. I thought it's be easy but it turned into a nightmare just using Paint- thus the Photoshop necessity.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Mon May 24, 2004 7:44 pm

http://www.mit.edu:8001/tweb/map.html has always worked pretty well for me. Colour the background in somehting that isn't used in the rest of the image (ie not white), upload it as an avatar, make a note of the URL, enter it into that site, choose the colour to be transparent, save the result and upload the new avatar.
Photoshop does the job too, but I don't have that. Paint can't save a colour as transparent as far as I am aware...


korexus.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Polymorphic
Trooper
Trooper
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2003 8:00 am
Location: Oxfordish
Contact:

Post by Polymorphic » Mon May 24, 2004 7:48 pm

Transparentised version here.

Fear my GIMPing skills :)

User avatar
Duke
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1699
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Sweden, Valn Ohtar

Post by Duke » Mon May 24, 2004 7:49 pm

Really? I am getting heat from a guy who has the absolute lowest type of avatar there is?

I am too chocked to even have a comeback for this.

And Dameon, I agree with you on the fact that the VP system works just fine. I cant see the need for the ranking either. I just wanted you to go along the same road as everyone else for a change. Just to see how it feels 8)
First one here, last one to leave.

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Mon May 24, 2004 8:05 pm

Thanks for that link Kor, I imagine that site will prove very useful to me in my future, I am bookmarking it. And thanks for the help with the avatar Poly! When I go home I am going to make sure to copy Photoshop from my parents computer to mine (I used to have it networked at home, and thus lost access to it when I moved- doh!), as that is really a very useful program to have.
Duke wrote: I just wanted you to go along the same road as everyone else for a change. Just to see how it feels. 8)
What, and ruin my image? Never! :twisted:
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
Duke
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1699
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Sweden, Valn Ohtar

Post by Duke » Tue May 25, 2004 5:54 am

Polymorphic wrote:Transparentised version here.

Fear my GIMPing skills :)
Ah, great! It would be useful too if it was LESS THEN 20K!!!!!!

Also, I am surpriced by the fact that no one has made a joke yet on the subject of transparancy and the phrase "I see right through you".
First one here, last one to leave.

User avatar
trewqh
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1877
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings

Post by trewqh » Tue May 25, 2004 8:19 am

Dameon wrote:The other [reason] is we already have a VP system, so why use ratings?
That one's simple and I already mentioned that:
Some players like to look at and compare such numbers. The more types of rating there are the more the plyers (of this kind) will have fun.

I don't expect you to change yor rules, but I still think we can have an inofficial rating that will be based upon the same rules and will include any games that the one that is going to keep it will like. Donut?

trewqh

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Tue May 25, 2004 9:06 am

There you go, Duke, got you one down to under 2K. 'Morph's only a yung'un and so doesn't quite understand that sometimes, using microsoft products is the right thing to do! :wink: (Although, in this case, I think you'll find that his version was pretty small too...)

PS, I took the liberty of uploading it myself. :twisted:


korexus.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Polymorphic
Trooper
Trooper
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2003 8:00 am
Location: Oxfordish
Contact:

Post by Polymorphic » Tue May 25, 2004 10:38 am

Duke wrote:
Polymorphic wrote:Transparentised version here.

Fear my GIMPing skills :)
Ah, great! It would be useful too if it was LESS THEN 20K!!!!!!

Also, I am surpriced by the fact that no one has made a joke yet on the subject of transparancy and the phrase "I see right through you".
Umm, Duke's original: 2.7 KB
My version: 1.9 KB
Why the complaint? :)

Oh, korexus - I avoid using any Microsoft products ever.

User avatar
Duke
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1699
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Sweden, Valn Ohtar

Post by Duke » Tue May 25, 2004 10:59 am

[Had too much caffeine today and editted Duke's post instead of quoting it, sorry! Anything in square brackets is me... -korexus.]

Polymorphic wrote: Umm, Duke's original: 2.7 KB
My version: 1.9 KB
Why the complaint?
[Duke wrote something about the boards saying that the file was Over 20Kb]

[Duke wrote something about me being great]

Microsoft 1
Oxford 0
Go Bill

[Although it should be pointed out that it was an own goal!]


Needed to add some things after I posted this. What does the Moderator of this board say about the avatars by the way. I know we cant use hrm, adult language but can I have an obsene shield. *I wonder if Nick is having second thoughts about bringing me into the clan?*


[Official answer: Don't upload them.
Unofficial answer: Sal's avatar hasn't been changed yet, has it? :wink:

Oh well, I guess I don't need to reply now... :? ]
First one here, last one to leave.

Post Reply