Heroscapers

Heroscapers (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/index.php)
-   Competitive Armies Discussion (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=34)
-   -   Revising the Power Rankings (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=24903)

Messenger May 14th, 2009 04:03 PM

Revising the Power Rankings
 
Following the discussion over at the Most Over-rated unit discussion got me thinking if there isn't a better alternative to the Power Rankings. Specifically, the Matthias Maccabeus quote in the above link, as well as this quote from Jexik stood out (MM stands for Matthias Maccabeus, in case you didn't know):

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jexik (Post 821215)
What would the MM rankings look like?

Spider-poison continues to do a great job of maintaining the Power Rankings. But ultimately any decision to adjust the rankings comes down to his decision. As fair and knowledgable as he is (and he is both) it still comes down to his perception or play-style as to which units to adjust. And while he does take into consideration the discussion and dialogue of others, would it not be better if there was another way to determine the ranking of units on a more democratic basis?

I have some ideas as to how this could occur (something like college sports rankings mixed with a BoV-style panel), but I'd be interested in hearing everyone else's thoughts on the subject.

Cavalier May 14th, 2009 04:13 PM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
Any sort of ranking is going to be subjective, in my opinion.

Elginb May 14th, 2009 04:13 PM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
Maybe do it like the coaches polls in football? Maybe it would be limited to site contributors or something...

It would be nice if we could get some hard numbers to work with-- the winning percentages of certain units (I've heard Jexik make the point that some units gain a reputation for success merely because they're used a lot and their many losses don't get factored in). I imagine it would be hard to get tournament directors to compile those stats and submit them, but I bet you could get a more scientific result that way.

Also, it might be nice to match up the success of a unit relative to the skill of the player. For instance, the whole NESA thing could be used to weight the success of units that way.

Again, I don't know how labor intensive this would be-- I'm not a statistician or a tournament director; but it strikes me that if a routine were put in place, it might not be so difficult after a while.

Xn F M May 14th, 2009 04:37 PM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
Personally, I think the best way to go about it would be to set up an official comittee of people qualified to make those kinds of decisions, and have them work out amongst themselves the best way to manage Spider Poison's power rankings.

As far as setting something like that up goes, that's really more of a thing to handle via PM with him. IMHO.

Edit: I don't think I was entirely clear as to my opinion in my origional post. What I was trying to get at is that these are SP's rankings and if he wants to turn over control of them to the community it's entirely his decision. While I would like to see the power ranking become a community run endeavor, the power rankings are Spider Poison's baby, and we (as a community) should respect his wishes on how they are run.

CheddarLimbo May 14th, 2009 05:55 PM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
The bottom line is there's never going to be a "real" ranking, because (as Cav points out) every ranking is going to be subjective. It doesn't matter if its one qualified person, or twenty in a committee. Each player is still going to have to make up their own mind as to the value of each figure's worth.

So instead, I think I'll just do what I've always done when it comes to the figure rankings (or any other piece of information someone else delivers): I'll take it under advisement and understand that the information comes to me in a certain context. Then, I'll make up my own mind.

dok May 14th, 2009 06:01 PM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
Yeah, this seems like the proverbial solution in search of a problem.

I suppose the power rankings have become such an institution around here that having a "power ranking committee" that collects feedback and carefully, regularly updates things would be nice. But it's hardly necessary. spider_poison does a fine job on his own, and is pretty receptive to feedback.

Oestedb May 14th, 2009 06:21 PM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
I find very few people who disagree with Spider_Poison's rankings. If anything, it would be cool if Heroscapers had a way to enter win-loss records for every figure in an official tournament. Of course, even that would be subjective to the army each unit was played with as well as the competency of the player. I am the player that would probably not help the glads and blasts rise in rankings.

mccombju May 14th, 2009 06:26 PM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
There is no need for a power ranking committee.

As it stands, spider_poison functions as the arbiter of an unofficial heroscape community committee. By consulting with others and relying on tournament data (that is anectdotal in nature, focusing on big wins for certain armies), he iterates his rankings to be in accordance with the widely held opinions of the strategic leaders of Heroscape.

I think spider_poison would be very receptive to compelling arguments based on the data of a unit's tournament performance (i.e. if you really want to have a certain ranking adjusted, then compile some data to illustrate your point). Provided that the data is credible, it is likely that he would be more than willing to adjust a figure's ranking. I believe that this is the approach he has taken in the past.

dok May 14th, 2009 06:48 PM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mccombju (Post 821493)
I think spider_poison would be very receptive to compelling arguments based on the data of a unit's tournament performance (i.e. if you really want to have a certain ranking adjusted, then compile some data to illustrate your point). Provided that the data is credible, it is likely that he would be more than willing to adjust a figure's ranking. I believe that this is the approach he has taken in the past.

Yeah, this is not a hypothetical; he has been receptive to arguments to raise or lower figures, based both on theoryscape and tournament results.

killercactus May 15th, 2009 08:04 AM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
killercactus' rankings:

A+

Runa
Minions of Utgar
Nilfheim
Major Q10
Deathreavers

A

Zetacron
Airborne Elite
Marro Warriors

A-

......there are other figures?

Messenger May 15th, 2009 08:39 AM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by dok (Post 821511)
Quote:

Originally Posted by mccombju (Post 821493)
I think spider_poison would be very receptive to compelling arguments based on the data of a unit's tournament performance (i.e. if you really want to have a certain ranking adjusted, then compile some data to illustrate your point). Provided that the data is credible, it is likely that he would be more than willing to adjust a figure's ranking. I believe that this is the approach he has taken in the past.

Yeah, this is not a hypothetical; he has been receptive to arguments to raise or lower figures, based both on theoryscape and tournament results.

But what should he do when two arguments are posed, each compelling yet conflicting? One arguing for raising a unit, the other for lowering that same unit. The decision falls to one person which side to accept. A committee vote garners multiple views versus one person's particular leaning (however qualified that person may be).

Agent Minivann May 15th, 2009 08:41 AM

Re: Revising the Power Rankings
 
I don't really see a need. To do it committee style, or compiling win/loss records, or doing any kind of voting is going to be a lot of work. If you don't really like the rankings, post your own rankings. I think that the original will likely be the most popular if competing threads arise. It has held up pretty well over the months. It isn't the end all, be all of rankings, but there isn't a ranking system that will be.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:53 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.