2015 League Post Game Results Here

hmm, let’s see…before pherman ever showed up, i was a tier E. then he comes along and it’s pretty clear from having played him 3 times that he is at least a tier 1, if not an E himself. he drops out with a bunch of games hanging, and now as a result i have lost my E status. this was just not handled properly. anyone who has played him, or seen his play, will readily attest that he is certainly not a tier 2. what we are seeing in the rankings is not a correction, as you say, but rather a corruption.

there definitely needs to be a better way to handle situations like this. i have worked very hard all season to reach that status, having now 50 games under my belt with many, many wins, and yet something way beyond my control took place and BAM, just like that, i get knocked back down.

this has been a big turn off for me.

Gamerman01, 12/12/23
The Tiers were never meant to be status.
The purpose of tiers is to help get accurate PPG’s for everyone so strength of opponent is taken into account.
If you want to measure your strength, that is PPG in relation to others. Not tier.

Giallo (allies) over axis-dominion (axis)

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36512.180

Gamerman01 - axis-dominion won

And now one ragequit is compounded by another.

Axis was STOMPING Giallo.  STOMPING.  Like Axis had 235, and Allies had 130.  I can’t believe the game was even still going.

I think Axis-Dominion totally has a point, tho.  I think we need a rule that games that are not finished, for whatever reason, simply won’t count in the absence of an official ruling.  It isn’t fair to them than Pherman’s bugout caused the huge drop.

seems to me, if you are a top player who happens to be very active in the league and therefore willing to play some of his games a tier or two lower, in the end you have a much greater chance of getting punished for it and knocked down a tier. by necessity, an active top player MUST be willing to play a tier or two lower, as most of the top players barely play…they are “too busy” to play more than a game or two at the same time, and each game they play can go on for many months.

if you are a top player who has played only a handful of other top players (like Juan, who has purposely kept his league games very low and instead plays a lot more outside of the league), then you will be safe.

this league rewards the latter while punishing the former.

i am a very active player, but now i am seeing that this is at odds with my wanting to stay at the top. i have to choose one or the other: 1) either slow it down a lot and be very picky about whom i play against, so as to stay at the top, or 2) be very active and most likely suffer ranking because of it.

definitely a big turn off for me.

In any case, Axis-Dominion, I also think it should be handled differently when someone goes out like Pherman. His status should be frozen, not changed as a result of all those default losses. You have to assume he is tier 1, thats what he reached with his games, that should be used.

If you win like I did today, give me his tier 1 points (sorry, subjective in this case).
If you have won games / lost games, like Axis had, dont adjust those games in a ngeative way for Axis. His total points vs Pherman should stand.

yes, or perhaps a cutoff for damage control…maybe cap it at 3 claims or something like that? i mean, it took a lot of claims before he finally dropped to tier 2…that just shows how solid his tier 1 status was.

@alexgreat:

In any case, Axis-Dominion, I also think it should be handled differently when someone goes out like Pherman. His status should be frozen, not changed as a result of all those default losses. You have to assume he is tier 1, thats what he reached with his games, that should be used.

If you win like I did today, give me his tier 1 points (sorry, subjective in this case).
If you have won games / lost games, like Axis had, dont adjust those games in a ngeative way for Axis. His total points vs Pherman should stand.

Here’s my suggestion: games that were not announced as losses by the loser (which would include anyone who simply disappeared, of course) go into arbitration.  We’d have a panel of judges who take a vote on the likely winner, and points are awarded based on that.  In a lot of cases, it probably wouldn’t be clear who might win, and those games simply don’t count as wins or losses.

@Shin:

Here’s my suggestion: games that were not announced as losses by the loser (which would include anyone who simply disappeared, of course) go into arbitration.  We’d have a panel of judges who take a vote on the likely winner, and points are awarded based on that.  In a lot of cases, it probably wouldn’t be clear who might win, and those games simply don’t count as wins or losses.

Totally against panels and such. Also against quotas. When someone leaves, then his last active status is what determines everything after. You cannot, even potentially, punish someone who might have won due to luck, erros etc, even if the game was judged leaning in favor of the other player.

@axis-dominion:

if you are a top player who has played only a handful of other top players (like Juan, who has purposely kept his league games very low and instead plays a lot more outside of the league)

perhaps this is the answer for those of us that aspire to stand atop the league rankings? There certainly isn’t anything wrong with being selective in League games  while playing lots of games in the other thread, not that I do this but it would solve part of this issue.

The other issue, game abandonment, is a bit more difficult. Perhaps, to be fair, alex’s idea should be considered? Imo it seems reasonable but this is really Gamerman’s call !

@axis-dominion:

hmm, let’s see…before pherman ever showed up, i was a tier E. then he comes along and it’s pretty clear from having played him 3 times that he is at least a tier 1, if not an E himself. he drops out with a bunch of games hanging, and now as a result i have lost my E status. this was just not handled properly. anyone who has played him, or seen his play, will readily attest that he is certainly not a tier 2. what we are seeing in the rankings is not a correction, as you say, but rather a corruption.

there definitely needs to be a better way to handle situations like this. i have worked very hard all season to reach that status, having now 50 games under my belt with many, many wins, and yet something way beyond my control took place and BAM, just like that, i get knocked back down.

this has been a big turn off for me.

I completely disagree.  As I made the corrections last night, it was becoming obvious that your tier E status was in serious jeopardy.  Yes, Pherman dropping from his rage quit was a factor, but it is not as it appears.

I’ll tell you one solution.  Everybody didn’t have to claim wins over him by forfeit.  Now maybe it was appropriate in every case here, in my opinion it depends on how long the game has gone and how it was going, but in my opinion, if it was anybody’s game, I myself would not claim the win.  So you have all the buzzards to thank too.

You’re not going to like this, and I’m not going to take the time to give you a complete answer, but I think your stay in tier E was tenuous.  Yes you have a lot of wins, and a whole lot of them are against weak opponents.  How many wins do you have against other tier E’s?  ONE.  You have 38 wins and ONE is against a tier E.  Bmnielsen beat you 3 times, Adam beat you, Ghost beat you.  I really am sorry, but you’re biased.  You don’t belong in tier E yet.  Keep trying.

So I take issue with your pouting about the system because you don’t like what just happened.  It WAS in fact a correction, not a “corruption”.  If you want to be tier E, go out there and beat some tier 1’s and E’s.  One win against a tier E when you have 50 completed games is not going to do it.

@Shin:

I think Axis-Dominion totally has a point, tho.  I think we need a rule that games that are not finished, for whatever reason, simply won’t count in the absence of an official ruling.  It isn’t fair to them than Pherman’s bugout caused the huge drop.

You have a point, and I think some kind of rule is needed for quits, and I will think of one.  I don’t like people getting credit for wins from forfeits either.  Sorry Jenn, but there’s no way you could ever beat DutchmanD in a full game, unless he was drunk during every turn.

However, it was NOT just Pherman’s bugout that caused a huge drop.

Pretty good discussion, I do understand all points made.

You have to remember, we don’t change the rules in the middle of the year.  I don’t like the effect of forfeits either, and I didn’t like it before the Pherman issue.

I like the ideas like panels and quotas, believe me, but I think we need a totally objective method that does not involve judgment calls.  I was careful to remove judgment calls from assigning players to tiers.  Believe me, I love making judgment calls, but for the integrity of the league it is important to keep them to 0 or an absolute minimum.

AGAIN

I’m sorry, but I do not view Dominion as a tier E player, though I have not seen any of his games.  I’m just going by who he’s won and lost to all year.

Dominion, are you not having fun in the league?  Seems anyone who plays 50 games is a big fan.

15L G40 AeV (Allies +18) vs AHB (Axis) rematch

AHB wins over AeV

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36476.105

This time I handled the Pacific correct, but the disaster caught me on the Eastern Front. :-o

MakeMaps vs Variance (Allies +23):
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36558.45

I tried to do an experimental game that had a bad start for both Germany and Japan. I’m going concede early for this one.

@Shin:

And now one ragequit is compounded by another.

Axis was STOMPING Giallo.  STOMPING.  Like Axis had 235, and Allies had 130.  I can’t believe the game was even still going.

I messaged Giallo.  I’m not recording this one unless Giallo accepts it.

I can principally understand that changing rules during a running season is not desirable in general. Do the current rules cover situations like a tier change from an player that went inactive all of a sudden? If no, this is not a change anyway but a necessary amendment (cant find a better word, not a native speaker), if yes, the point is taken on my side. I could not find a specific rule, but only skimmed over them so might have easily overlooked.

I do not doubt that rules will be refined next year, btw, with a big majority being satisified.

BerntBernt (Axis) over Radiant (Allies+19)

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36551.0

@Gamerman01:

So you have all the buzzards to thank too.

this is pretty funny!  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

Anyways, for what it is worth, I will give up my abandonment victory over PHerman….I think I was ahead but it was very early perhaps T4-5…The game of course still could have gone either way…