Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All

Author Topic: I don't know what this thread has turned into (was Making it to Level 42 -Lvl 5)  (Read 32140 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dave970

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: +2
    • View Profile
0

Regardless, Doug probably shouldn't turn down the randomness factor: if he turned it down to less than the average, then people who care about their rank wouldn't want to play lower-ranked players. (Which they already don't, to some extent, despite tat's counterexample.)

And it's this that I don't get.  Why is everyone so invested in this number?  Why are people so deathly afraid of dropping in rank?

Said another way... everyone has to start somewhere.  Whether you're level 2 or level 42, you started at level 0.  Just because you refuse to play a lower "ranked" player (quotes intentional) now, doesn't mean that player isn't actually good, or isn't even actually better than you are.  What, you're going to wait until their level surpasses yours, then mystically accept the challenge, as they're now "worthy" of you?

The number is nowhere near as important as some people make it out to be.  This quote above can give rise to the argument that tat's actually "doing it right".
Logged

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1489
    • View Profile
0

Hmm, the quote talked about "people who care about their rank". I't does not say this is "everyone". And pretty much by definition this group is "interested in this number."

Btw. you start with level 0, but your mean skill is 25 (with 3sigma=+-25). Of course on does not see this in the lobby, but the "best estimate" of TS of your skill is 25 (with a pretty high variance).
Logged

Dave970

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: +2
    • View Profile
0

Fine, you're taking "everyone" to it's extreme.  How about "everyone that is passionate enough about the number to come onto a message board and abduct a topic to complain that someone else has a higher number than they do".

By the way, I'm part of this group, and I'm not "interested in this number", in the sense that it's being argued about here.  So, it goes both ways.
Logged

rrenaud

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 990
  • Uncivilized Barbarian of Statistics
  • Respect: +1184
    • View Profile
    • CouncilRoom
0

Highly competitive players want to be the best.  The ladder is some proxy measurement of the best player.  When the proxy measurement is poor, it's frustrating/annoying to try to optimize ranking purely by improving play.  If the system was perfect, improving play would be the only way to improve ranking.  But you strongly suspect that the top player is there not because of great play, but because of good ranking system gamesmanship. 
Logged

ARTjoMS

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Respect: +6
    • View Profile
0

Looking at tat's councilroom stats (http://councilroom.com/player?player=tat), he is 1 - 3 against ARTjoMS.  Assuming this ARTjoMS is Latvia who currently has a ranking of 41, there are at least a few games of a highly ranked player against him.
I'm afraid when i played these games i wasn't high ranked player yet. After looking on dates my level probably wasn't higher that 15.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2011, 03:16:01 pm by ARTjoMS »
Logged
Quote
When a friend of mine sees a girl he finds attractive, he remarks how he'd like to "Throne Room" or "King's Court" her.
- Axe Knight

''Especially regarding such an iconic (and somewhat infamous) name that is known as ARTjoMS.'' - shark_bait is boosting my ego.

fp

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 94
  • Respect: +5
    • View Profile
0

Ok, I've been away from awhile doing other things, but it will be ready tonight. Along with 10.

Thanks for being patient (and discussing a nonposted article for 3 pages).
Logged

ackack

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
0

Ok, I've been away from awhile doing other things, but it will be ready tonight. Along with 10.

Thanks for being patient (and discussing a nonposted article for 3 pages).

On that note, you might consider starting a new thread for the article. Perhaps rrenaud or theory can retitle this one to something about leaderboard debates.
Logged

tko

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 129
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
0

I'm with ackack on starting a new article for "making it to level 42".

That said, I usually automatch and vary from level 23-31, and I learned not to worry too much about level, but when I turn automatch off, it's difficult to find a 31+ level player to propose a game with.  Automatch works so fluidly that I almost agree with tat and automatch is the way to go to play many games.  Trying to propose games just slows you down... I agree with the people backing up tat knowing whoever that person is, they are good at Dominion.
Logged

Blooki

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 118
  • I am constantly overmeditated...
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
0

I just got a curious proposal for a game so I decided to look up the proposer's Council Room page. I'll let it speak for itself.

http://councilroom.com/search_result?p1_name=HornyToad

Say what you want about tat, but at least he plays the game.
Logged

fp

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 94
  • Respect: +5
    • View Profile
0

The title is still a bit unclear to me. Why excactly 42 and not like #1 Leaderboard :-) Otherwise I should not read your expected good article  :P

http://www.google.com/search?q=answer%20to%20life%20the%20universe%20and%20everything
Logged

Thisisnotasmile

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1493
  • Respect: +672
    • View Profile
Logged

Blooki

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 118
  • I am constantly overmeditated...
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
0

Dig the new title.  :P
Logged

fp

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 94
  • Respect: +5
    • View Profile
0

Dig the new title.  :P

I'll take credit for that?
Logged

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +541
    • View Profile
0

Guys I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but it's like all of you are missing the point with the player we're discussing on purpose:

tat doesn't automatch*. Automatching isn't an issue here. tat selects his opponents so he never plays strong players. Plenty of strong players in here are reporting challenging him, and him never playing them. Looking over his playing history confirms this. That's what I take issue with and think is lame, I didn't even mention automatching in this thread until very late in response to others talking about it.

Automatching is, as far as I know, a pretty sweet system I don't have many problems with.

*It's possible that he does use automatch, I don't know. It's not all he does though (see above).
Logged

Thisisnotasmile

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1493
  • Respect: +672
    • View Profile
0

(S)He does use automatch. Someone in this topic stated that they know tat uses automatch because they got automatched against tat. Some people who automatch don't accept direct challenges because... you know... they automatch and a direct challenge is not an automatch. Try automatching when tat is around. See if you get automatched against him (her). If (s)he declines that match, THEN you can come back here and whine about tat. Until then you can't.
Logged

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +541
    • View Profile
0

Didn't feel like responding to my previous post huh? :p No worries man, it's all good.
Logged

tko

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 129
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
0

I just got a curious proposal for a game so I decided to look up the proposer's Council Room page. I'll let it speak for itself.

http://councilroom.com/search_result?p1_name=HornyToad

Say what you want about tat, but at least he plays the game.
While I enjoy playing random just like anyone, I play predefined sets on occasion - I think it's still "playing the game."  There are predefined sets directly in the rule book such as:
"For the first game, we recommend using the following 10 Kingdom cards: Cellar, Market, Militia, Mine, Moat, Remodel, Smithy, Village, Woodcutter, and Workshop."
The aforementioned player wacked me with a predefined set but I knew what I was getting into... isotropic is kind enough to alert you about the constraints used. 
Logged

Thisisnotasmile

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1493
  • Respect: +672
    • View Profile
0

Didn't feel like responding to my previous post huh? :p No worries man, it's all good.

I figured you are one of those "must have the final word" people so I left it. I mean, what's the point in responding to the same thing over and over again if each time you're just going to put words in my mouth and argue against whatever you want to argue against rather than what was actually said? I've made my point and it seems there are plenty of people who paid attention to it and accepted it as a point that had been put forward in the discussion. Just because you are not one of those people doesn't mean that I must continue to repeat myself.

Go ahead... make some smart comment and twist my words. You know you want to.
Logged

Blooki

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 118
  • I am constantly overmeditated...
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
0

Quote
While I enjoy playing random just like anyone, I play predefined sets on occasion - I think it's still "playing the game."  There are predefined sets directly in the rule book such as:
"For the first game, we recommend using the following 10 Kingdom cards: Cellar, Market, Militia, Mine, Moat, Remodel, Smithy, Village, Woodcutter, and Workshop."
The aforementioned player wacked me with a predefined set but I knew what I was getting into... isotropic is kind enough to alert you about the constraints used.

I have no problem with predefined sets on occasion (or even refusing to play with high variance cards/sets as many players do), but this is hardly on occasion.

I did a quick exercise and repeatedly chose 3 of his/her 10 kingdom card preferences (i.e. Vault/Grand Market/Peddler, Tactician/Smugglers/Tournament) to search through my 3K+ games and found that I've only played 0-3 games with such trios. Virtually all of this player's games are with the same predefined set which I find to be outside the spirit of Dominion because part of the beauty of the game is the challenge of formulating a strategy as you analyze the opening kingdom set.

Furthermore, I can't imagine this player doesn't hold a significant edge over his/her opponents by having gained so much experience playing the same kingdom set over and over. Would you regularly play a chess game where the first four moves were predetermined and your opponent had played the game hundreds of times before? What about a Texas Hold'em game where the hands were void if there wasn't a flush draw on the flop? How did we feel when we played our first KC/KC/Goons/Masquerade game prior to being aware of the combo?

Artificially limiting the rules of any game in a way that maximizes your advantage over the opponent seems lame in my opinion. And yes, I realize it's my opinion.
Logged

tko

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 129
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
0

Quote
While I enjoy playing random just like anyone, I play predefined sets on occasion - I think it's still "playing the game."  There are predefined sets directly in the rule book such as:
"For the first game, we recommend using the following 10 Kingdom cards: Cellar, Market, Militia, Mine, Moat, Remodel, Smithy, Village, Woodcutter, and Workshop."
The aforementioned player wacked me with a predefined set but I knew what I was getting into... isotropic is kind enough to alert you about the constraints used.

I have no problem with predefined sets on occasion (or even refusing to play with high variance cards/sets as many players do), but this is hardly on occasion.

I did a quick exercise and repeatedly chose 3 of his/her 10 kingdom card preferences (i.e. Vault/Grand Market/Peddler, Tactician/Smugglers/Tournament) to search through my 3K+ games and found that I've only played 0-3 games with such trios. Virtually all of this player's games are with the same predefined set which I find to be outside the spirit of Dominion because part of the beauty of the game is the challenge of formulating a strategy as you analyze the opening kingdom set.

Furthermore, I can't imagine this player doesn't hold a significant edge over his/her opponents by having gained so much experience playing the same kingdom set over and over. Would you regularly play a chess game where the first four moves were predetermined and your opponent had played the game hundreds of times before? What about a Texas Hold'em game where the hands were void if there wasn't a flush draw on the flop? How did we feel when we played our first KC/KC/Goons/Masquerade game prior to being aware of the combo?

Artificially limiting the rules of any game in a way that maximizes your advantage over the opponent seems lame in my opinion. And yes, I realize it's my opinion.
I'll concede that if all one does is use constraints to their advantage it could be viewed as out of the spirit of the game in the popular way that many people enjoy Dominion.  My play group occasionally plays predefined sets (usually the ones in the rule books, and sometimes people will just propose a custom set).  So I've taken that into my isotropic play and, in addition to playing random, I use predefined sets (like the starter set, custom sets, etc.).  Sure, I said "occasionally" regarding my playgroup.  However, predefined sets are in the rules, and therefore part of the game, and to some people, it's in the spirit of the game they enjoy.  I can't recall the URL but I've seen a web site listing predefined Dominion sets people have created.  I understand your points and your views - I respect that your opinion is probably popular opinion.  And I mostly share that opinion, except for that I also see the side that predefined sets are also part of the game, a valid way to play the game, one supported by isotropic, and there is at least a niche group of people that enjoy that way.
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +934
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
0

I'll throw in my support of sticking to predefined sets, if that's what someone wants to do.  Like tko, I totally respect anyone who doesn't like this or feels it's outside the spirit of Dominion as a whole.  And if someone does this only to climb the ratings ladder, that's kind of lame.

But to speak in favor, the fact is that some cards are more fun than others.  Most people prefer playing with some cards vs. others, and with some that difference might be enough to mean the difference between a fun game and an unfun one.  If someone loves Dominion purely for Grand Market, by all means, celebrate it.

The analogy to chess has a flaw, but, even so, it also offers an argument in favor.  The flaw is that the rules of Dominion specify that the kingdom cards can be chosen in any way, whereas the rules of Chess don't specify that a player may dictate any of his opponent's moves.

And yet, when one makes a proper study of Chess and gets serious about learning how to play it competitively, one will frequently study a particular opening at time, exhaustively and in great depth.  You don't explore one Sicilian variant, then move on to an English game, then a Queen's Gambit, and postpone refining your Sicilian study until it happens to come up again.

How do you study Dominion that way?  Play with specific kingdom cards over and over again, refining your study of them before moving on to other cards.  Since the rules of the game allow for this, whereas Chess doesn't, that study can be conducted in real live games, which is going to be more helpful than if you're just playing solitaire (in which case you really don't know if you're playing the optimal strategy) or against a computer program (none of which are nearly so good at Dominion as they can be at Chess).

As far as I can tell, the only reason this is an issue is that it leads to questionable placement in the ratings ladder.  But as that should be taken with a grain of salt anyway, who cares?
« Last Edit: July 27, 2011, 03:16:58 pm by rinkworks »
Logged

rod-

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 213
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
0

There are enough people that play "require=colony,platinum" that you can't really say claim that "require=grandmarket,peddler,etc" is unreasonable.

I don't play with any of them, but i'm sure some people do and are fine with either.  Live & Let Live
Logged

painted_cow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 151
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
0

Well, if I would always play with my best cards (high winrates, more experience, low luck factor) it will be very lame...same like only playing beginners and not any good player.

Btw I never saw "tat" in the lobby anytime, so I could not even ask for a game :-)
Logged

ackack

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
0

There are enough people that play "require=colony,platinum" that you can't really say claim that "require=grandmarket,peddler,etc" is unreasonable.

I prefer unrestricted games as well, but it's clear to me these two sets of restrictions are not remotely comparable.
Logged

play2draw

  • Guest
0

I don't care much about the drama on Isotropic. All I know is I'm 2-0 against the top player  8)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All
 

Page created in 0.136 seconds with 21 queries.