Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Team RoboRally fun-league update

Expand Messages
  • Founder.
    Last week, we ended the session with 6 playing a 40-minute TeamRR. Especially interesting since the top 4 in the league were all there, so new top-spot StuartF
    Message 1 of 3 , Apr 19, 2008
      Last week, we ended the session with 6 playing a 40-minute TeamRR.
      Especially interesting since the top 4 in the league were all there,
      so new top-spot StuartF was against second and third AndrewM and
      JosepA, with 4th-lying BobR therefore on StuartF's side, plus FelixK,
      while AndrewM and JosepA had StaniaM on their side, StaniaM being a
      first-timer being advised by TomasP as a pair playing one spot. Nice
      way to get a new player playing without spending half-an-hour
      on "rules", just for one player in 6 who hasn't played before,IMHO,
      neat.

      Anyway, with or without TomasP helping her, StaniaM played well.

      She defended their base, and saw off FelixK from trying for it,
      inflicting enough damage on him and others to score as MVP. Her team-
      mate AndrewM ran quickly to get a flag, and even quicker to plant it
      in the middle-base to score a win for them. Team-mate JosepA did
      rather less this time - but still more than any of the
      opposing "Good Guys" did!

      The "Good Guys" were BobR, StuartF and FelixK. How shall I put
      this? We were creamed! FelixK had a good go at taking the Bad Guys'
      flag, but was beaten off by StaniaM, helped by the fact that an
      adjacent wall stopped him from pushing her off, see below.

      StuartF went to defend middle-base, but had bad cards and swung along
      a double-conveyor, to little effect. At least he could blame the
      cards. BobR screwed up one order, got into a cul-de-sac, and
      contributed about zero for the Good Guys. If there were a LVP, BobR
      would have got it ...

      Anyway, that's why the rules pit first against second and third. So
      Stuart lost his top-spot, to AndrewM, topspot now having gone from
      JosepA to AndrewM to StuartF to AndrewM.

      BobR and FelixK drift down, while StaniaM enters the table in fourth
      spot.

      TWEAK to Rules: From now on, any of the 3 flag-bases cancels not
      only any walls IN the square they cover, but also any walls running
      along their edge in adjacent squares. (I am taking FelixK's
      suggestion that this would have made a big difference in that game,
      and would be better in future in games, making it slightly easier
      when you pre-place the 3 flag-bases in hope of a fair game.

      TWEAK to layout: In the last two games, we have experimented with an
      L-shape board and a T-shape board, instead of 3-boards-in-a-line. I
      now agree with FelixK: these make it more soliary-race, since you are
      less often facing each other in opposite directions. So there was
      less mayhem in the last two games, less clashing in the climax. So
      we'll henceforth prefer 3-boards-in-a-row,all facing each other, at
      least when the teams are 3-each.

      I'll update the league soon - but AndrewM has retaken topspot from
      StuartF.
    • Founder.
      Game 6 of 13 April 2008: AndrewM......Won, Survived,Flag planted...6 pts StaniaM......Won, Survived, MVP...........6 pts JosepA.......Won,
      Message 2 of 3 , Apr 20, 2008
        Game 6 of 13 April 2008:

        AndrewM......Won, Survived,Flag planted...6 pts
        StaniaM......Won, Survived, MVP...........6 pts
        JosepA.......Won, Survived................5 pts

        BobR.........Lost, Survived...............1 pt
        StuartF......Lost, Survived...............1 pt
        FelixK.......Lost, Survived...............1 pt

        So the updated league table looks as below: AndrewM re-regains
        topspot from StuartF; JosepA regains third spot from BobR. StaniaM
        enters the league in 4th place ... thus demonstrating that the
        formula allows a new player to shoot up into contention, but probably
        not to take topspot in one go.

        >
        > > PLAYER.......Points....Played..Prev Rating...New Rating
        > >
        > > 1) AndrewM.......20........4........3.500........4.000
        > >
        > > 2) StuartF.......21........5........4.000........3.500
        >
        > > 3) JosepA........16........4........2.780........3.200
        > >
        > > 4) StaniaM........6........1........N/A..........3.000
        >
        > > 5) MartialC.......8........2........1.000........2.667
        > >
        > > 6) BobR..........18........6........2.833........2.571
        >
        > > 7) TomasP.........5........1........N/A..........2.500
        >
        > > 8) GeorgeY........5........1........2.500........2.500
        > >
        > > 9) NeilP..........5........1........2.500........2.500
        > >
        > > 10)AttilaW........6........2........2.500.........2.000
        > >
        > > 11)FelixK.........5........2........2.000.........1.667
        > >.
        > > 12)DaveB..........6........3........1.500.........1.500
        > >
        > > 13)KeithD.........2........1........1.000.........1.000
        > >
        > > 14)HenningS.......1.........1........N/A..........0.500
        > >
        > > 15)RichardB........1........1........0.500........0.500
        >
        > > 16)AllanM..........1........2........0.333.........0.333
        > >
        > > 17)RobertF.........0........1........0.000.........0.000
        > >
        > > 18)MichaelY........0........1........0.000.........0.000
        > >
        > > 19)MichalK.........0........1........0.000.........0.000

        The league formula makes it nicely volatile. E.g if AllanM, lying
        16th, played and scored 6 points as Stania just did, his rating would
        go up from 0.333 to 2.333, raising him to 10th, perhaps 8th if some
        others lost and slipped down; do it a second time, and he'd rise to
        3.250 and probably 3rd spot ...

        For those who are interested in such things, the formula is:
        cumulated points divided by games played+1. If a tie, league-position
        goes to the most recent having a result.

        MVP is fairly new. Most Valuable Player. It is an extra point for the
        player who inflicts most damage on the opposition, minus damage
        inflicted on friendlies.

        > Bob.










        --- In lbgc@..., "Founder." <bobroscow@...> wrote:
        >
        > Last week, we ended the session with 6 playing a 40-minute TeamRR.
        > Especially interesting since the top 4 in the league were all
        there,
        > so new top-spot StuartF was against second and third AndrewM and
        > JosepA, with 4th-lying BobR therefore on StuartF's side, plus
        FelixK,
        > while AndrewM and JosepA had StaniaM on their side, StaniaM being a
        > first-timer being advised by TomasP as a pair playing one spot.
        Nice
        > way to get a new player playing without spending half-an-hour
        > on "rules", just for one player in 6 who hasn't played before,IMHO,
        > neat.
        >
        > Anyway, with or without TomasP helping her, StaniaM played well.
        >
        > She defended their base, and saw off FelixK from trying for it,
        > inflicting enough damage on him and others to score as MVP. Her
        team-
        > mate AndrewM ran quickly to get a flag, and even quicker to plant
        it
        > in the middle-base to score a win for them. Team-mate JosepA did
        > rather less this time - but still more than any of the
        > opposing "Good Guys" did!
        >
        > The "Good Guys" were BobR, StuartF and FelixK. How shall I put
        > this? We were creamed! FelixK had a good go at taking the Bad
        Guys'
        > flag, but was beaten off by StaniaM, helped by the fact that an
        > adjacent wall stopped him from pushing her off, see below.
        >
        > StuartF went to defend middle-base, but had bad cards and swung
        along
        > a double-conveyor, to little effect. At least he could blame the
        > cards. BobR screwed up one order, got into a cul-de-sac, and
        > contributed about zero for the Good Guys. If there were a LVP,
        BobR
        > would have got it ...
        >
        > Anyway, that's why the rules pit first against second and third.
        So
        > Stuart lost his top-spot, to AndrewM, topspot now having gone from
        > JosepA to AndrewM to StuartF to AndrewM.
        >
        > BobR and FelixK drift down, while StaniaM enters the table in
        fourth
        > spot.
        >
        > TWEAK to Rules: From now on, any of the 3 flag-bases cancels not
        > only any walls IN the square they cover, but also any walls running
        > along their edge in adjacent squares. (I am taking FelixK's
        > suggestion that this would have made a big difference in that game,
        > and would be better in future in games, making it slightly easier
        > when you pre-place the 3 flag-bases in hope of a fair game.
        >
        > TWEAK to layout: In the last two games, we have experimented with
        an
        > L-shape board and a T-shape board, instead of 3-boards-in-a-line. I
        > now agree with FelixK: these make it more soliary-race, since you
        are
        > less often facing each other in opposite directions. So there was
        > less mayhem in the last two games, less clashing in the climax. So
        > we'll henceforth prefer 3-boards-in-a-row,all facing each other, at
        > least when the teams are 3-each.
        >
        > I'll update the league soon - but AndrewM has retaken topspot from
        > StuartF.
        >
      • Felix Krul
        Hi Bob, thanks for your sympathy to give me a point, but do you remember how I was transported into the double laser, still rotating, glowing,.? = I
        Message 3 of 3 , Apr 20, 2008

          Hi Bob,

           

          thanks for your sympathy to give me a point, but do you remember how I was transported into the double laser, still rotating, glowing,…?

          => I definitely didn’t survive!

           

          Cheers

           

          Felix

           


          From: sentto-16856586-489-1208687041-felixkrul=web.de@... [mailto:sentto-16856586-489-1208687041-felixkrul=web.de@...] On Behalf Of Founder.
          Sent: 20 April 2008 11:24
          To: lbgc@...
          Subject: [lbgc] Re: Team RoboRally fun-league update

           


          Game 6 of 13 April 2008:

          AndrewM..... .Won, Survived,Flag planted...6 pts
          StaniaM..... .Won, Survived, MVP......... ..6 pts
          JosepA...... .Won, Survived.... ......... ...5 pts

          BobR........ .Lost, Survived.... ......... ..1 pt
          StuartF..... .Lost, Survived.... ......... ..1 pt
          FelixK...... .Lost, Survived.... ......... ..1 pt

          So the updated league table looks as below: AndrewM re-regains
          topspot from StuartF; JosepA regains third spot from BobR. StaniaM
          enters the league in 4th place ... thus demonstrating that the
          formula allows a new player to shoot up into contention, but probably
          not to take topspot in one go.

          >
          > > PLAYER...... .Points.. ..Played. .Prev Rating...New
          Rating
          > >
          > > 1) AndrewM..... ..20..... ...4..... ...3.500. .......4. 000
          > >
          > > 2) StuartF..... ..21..... ...5..... ...4.000. .......3. 500
          >
          > > 3) JosepA...... ..16..... ...4..... ...2.780. .......3. 200
          > >
          > > 4) StaniaM..... ...6..... ...1..... ...N/A... .......3. 000
          >
          > > 5) MartialC.... ...8..... ...2..... ...1.000. .......2. 667
          > >
          > > 6) BobR........ ..18..... ...6..... ...2.833. .......2. 571
          >
          > > 7) TomasP...... ...5..... ...1..... ...N/A... .......2. 500
          >
          > > 8) GeorgeY..... ...5..... ...1..... ...2.500. .......2. 500
          > >
          > > 9) NeilP....... ...5..... ...1..... ...2.500. .......2. 500
          > >
          > > 10)AttilaW.. ......6.. ......2.. ......2.500. ........2. 000
          > >
          > > 11)FelixK... ......5.. ......2.. ......2.000. ........1. 667
          > >.
          > > 12)DaveB.... ......6.. ......3.. ......1.500. ........1. 500
          > >
          > > 13)KeithD... ......2.. ......1.. ......1.000. ........1. 000
          > >
          > > 14)HenningS. ......1.. .......1. .......N/ A........ ..0.500
          > >
          > > 15)RichardB. .......1. .......1. .......0. 500...... ..0.500
          >
          > > 16)AllanM... .......1. .......2. .......0. 333...... ...0.333
          > >
          > > 17)RobertF.. .......0. .......1. .......0. 000...... ...0.000
          > >
          > > 18)MichaelY. .......0. .......1. .......0. 000...... ...0.000
          > >
          > > 19)MichalK.. .......0. .......1. .......0. 000...... ...0.000

          The league formula makes it nicely volatile. E.g if AllanM, lying
          16th, played and scored 6 points as Stania just did, his rating would
          go up from 0.333 to 2.333, raising him to 10th, perhaps 8th if some
          others lost and slipped down; do it a second time, and he'd rise to
          3.250 and probably 3rd spot ...

          For those who are interested in such things, the formula is:
          cumulated points divided by games played+1. If a tie, league-position
          goes to the most recent having a result.

          MVP is fairly new. Most Valuable Player. It is an extra point for the
          player who inflicts most damage on the opposition, minus damage
          inflicted on friendlies.

          > Bob.

          --- In lbgc@yahoogroups. co.uk, "Founder." <bobroscow@. ..> wrote:
          >
          > Last week, we ended the session with 6 playing a 40-minute TeamRR.
          > Especially interesting since the top 4 in the league were all
          there,
          > so new top-spot StuartF was against second and third AndrewM and
          > JosepA, with 4th-lying BobR therefore on StuartF's side, plus
          FelixK,
          > while AndrewM and JosepA had StaniaM on their side, StaniaM being a
          > first-timer being advised by TomasP as a pair playing one spot.
          Nice
          > way to get a new player playing without spending half-an-hour
          > on "rules", just for one player in 6 who hasn't played
          before,IMHO,
          > neat.
          >
          > Anyway, with or without TomasP helping her, StaniaM played well.
          >
          > She defended their base, and saw off FelixK from trying for it,
          > inflicting enough damage on him and others to score as MVP. Her
          team-
          > mate AndrewM ran quickly to get a flag, and even quicker to plant
          it
          > in the middle-base to score a win for them. Team-mate JosepA did
          > rather less this time - but still more than any of the
          > opposing "Good Guys" did!
          >
          > The "Good Guys" were BobR, StuartF and FelixK. How shall I put
          > this? We were creamed! FelixK had a good go at taking the Bad
          Guys'
          > flag, but was beaten off by StaniaM, helped by the fact that an
          > adjacent wall stopped him from pushing her off, see below.
          >
          > StuartF went to defend middle-base, but had bad cards and swung
          along
          > a double-conveyor, to little effect. At least he could blame the
          > cards. BobR screwed up one order, got into a cul-de-sac, and
          > contributed about zero for the Good Guys. If there were a LVP,
          BobR
          > would have got it ...
          >
          > Anyway, that's why the rules pit first against second and third.
          So
          > Stuart lost his top-spot, to AndrewM, topspot now having gone from
          > JosepA to AndrewM to StuartF to AndrewM.
          >
          > BobR and FelixK drift down, while StaniaM enters the table in
          fourth
          > spot.
          >
          > TWEAK to Rules: From now on, any of the 3 flag-bases cancels not
          > only any walls IN the square they cover, but also any walls running
          > along their edge in adjacent squares. (I am taking FelixK's
          > suggestion that this would have made a big difference in that game,
          > and would be better in future in games, making it slightly easier
          > when you pre-place the 3 flag-bases in hope of a fair game.
          >
          > TWEAK to layout: In the last two games, we have experimented with
          an
          > L-shape board and a T-shape board, instead of 3-boards-in- a-line. I
          > now agree with FelixK: these make it more soliary-race, since you
          are
          > less often facing each other in opposite directions. So there was
          > less mayhem in the last two games, less clashing in the climax. So
          > we'll henceforth prefer 3-boards-in- a-row,all facing each other, at
          > least when the teams are 3-each.
          >
          > I'll update the league soon - but AndrewM has retaken topspot from
          > StuartF.
          >

        Your message has been successfully submitted and will be delivered to recipients shortly.