Determining Team Strength

[hclixinarcadia]

I'm trying to come up with a simple formula to calculate team strength so I can group tournament players accordingly. Player experience is a factor as well as certain power pieces that are on the team.

For starters, let's say that there are three levels of experience: Experienced, Average, Beginner. Say you get 10 points if you're experienced, 5 if average and 0 if you're a beginner.

How would you then assign points for the following power pieces:

WS Cosmic Spidey
Ic 251 Vet Supes
Cr 100 Supes
AA Superman Prime
Cr Darkseid
AA Metron
AA Zoom
SI Thing
SI Dr. Strange
BB Shazam! and Black Adam
WS Bullseye
SV Thanos
DC75 Doomsday
SI 105 Dr. Doom
SI 008b Ms. Marvel Skrull
SI Namor

How many points should these be?

are there any that should be removed/added?

Maybe a good point system scheme is to use the actual points of these power pieces and increase by 50% if you are experienced, 25% if you are average and leave as is if you are a beginner.

[kujonomore]

Rating by teams will never be completely fair, you'd probably do better trying to comprehensively rate the player.

years playing
Tournaments played
Average number of games per month
Number of figures owned
Theme/Fun/Min Max/Cheeser (rated by the others in the group)

You coule gweet a good composite number and try to keep your initial pairings within xxx points of each other.

[hclixinarcadia]

Rating by teams will never be completely fair, you'd probably do better trying to comprehensively rate the player.

years playing
Tournaments played
Average number of games per month
Number of figures owned
Theme/Fun/Min Max/Cheeser (rated by the others in the group)

You coule gweet a good composite number and try to keep your initial pairings within xxx points of each other.

True, but a beginner using Cosmic Spidey should probably go up against the experienced ones right? So, maybe not a point system per figure but just an overall rating for a team: Cheese, Average, Fun and then modify that with the experience level?

[Faster Than Flash]

There are 2 types of players:

Play for fun

Play to win


Those are your groups.
It is very simple to tell which is which.
(asking them which group they are in is not simple, since people who play to win, enjoying winning, and thus are playing for fun)

Just remember:


Fun

Win

You'll be fine.

[ZZZ]

Don't forget to include ratings for different interactions:
SI Namor is great. SI Namor with a cheap TKer is better. How about with the Meteorite SO, or the Tombstone? What about Namor with or without supporting figures (OW/PC/Perplex...)?

There are too many different variables to include to be able to accurately point characters based on their strength...TAs, feats, Special Objects, other characters on the team, Map, Theme Teams, Opposing characters, and many others...

[hclixinarcadia]

There are 2 types of players:

Play for fun

Play to win


Those are your groups.
It is very simple to tell which is which.
(asking them which group they are in is not simple, since people who play to win, enjoying winning, and thus are playing for fun)

Just remember:


Fun

Win

You'll be fine.
good point. Some people though play to win and yet are not careful enough with their gameplay that they often lose.

Maybe we have two levels Expert and Amateur and categorize accordingly?

People that play to win and do win go in the Expert level. People that play for fun and do win go in the Expert level. Everyone else goes in the Amateur level.

[RavenProject]

I'm trying to come up with a simple formula to calculate team strength so I can group tournament players accordingly. Player experience is a factor as well as certain power pieces that are on the team.
Very curious... what will you be doing with this degree of classification?

-J

[hclixinarcadia]

Don't forget to include ratings for different interactions:
SI Namor is great. SI Namor with a cheap TKer is better. How about with the Meteorite SO, or the Tombstone? What about Namor with or without supporting figures (OW/PC/Perplex...)?

There are too many different variables to include to be able to accurately point characters based on their strength...TAs, feats, Special Objects, other characters on the team, Map, Theme Teams, Opposing characters, and many others...

Yup and that's most likely why Kujonomore said rating by team strength will never be fair. And, as I suggested, maybe we just eyeball and give the team a 1, 2, or 3 point rating, and same with the player, 1, 2, or 3 points based on experience level, and another 1, 2, or 3 points based on winning percentage.

[hclixinarcadia]

Very curious... what will you be doing with this degree of classification?

-J

I going to host a quad tournament and group players according to this rating. The objective is to have groups that have about the same level of skill/experience/team strength.

Also, in the future, tournaments can be divided into: Open and Reserve where the Reserve section has a limit as to the level. And then prizes are given out separately for each section so that the players with lower ratings have a chance to win 1st place.

Another option if there aren't enough players for two sections, is to have one big section and provide prizes to players that score high under certain levels.

In chess tournaments for example, there are prizes for players with ratings under 1800, under 1600, under 1000. So, a certain player may not have won the tournament but if they did best out of the ones under 1600, they get a prize.

[ZZZ]

Yup and that's most likely why Kujonomore said rating by team strength will never be fair. And, as I suggested, maybe we just eyeball and give the team a 1, 2, or 3 point rating, and same with the player, 1, 2, or 3 points based on experience level, and another 1, 2, or 3 points based on winning percentage.
Even then, there are likely aspects of teams that you may not see at first...What happens when you have the same team in the hands of a 1 and a 3 player? For the more experienced player, the team may be a 3 but it might be a 1 for the beginner. Team strength is subjective as well. And what happens when you rate a team as a 2 and then the player plays it in a way you didn't see and the rating should be higher? It is a nice idea, but there are far too many variables to account for to make it a fair system, IMO.

[presidentluthor]

Don't forget, newer/ less experienced players get better playing more experienced players.

[hclixinarcadia]

Even then, there are likely aspects of teams that you may not see at first...What happens when you have the same team in the hands of a 1 and a 3 player? For the more experienced player, the team may be a 3 but it might be a 1 for the beginner. Team strength is subjective as well. And what happens when you rate a team as a 2 and then the player plays it in a way you didn't see and the rating should be higher? It is a nice idea, but there are far too many variables to account for to make it a fair system, IMO.

Yup, you are correct on all points.

Then rather than use a formula that attempts provide exact ratings, I'll use a simple point assignment system based on three factors:
experience level
winning percentage
team strength

1-3 with 3 being the highest. For the teams, I'll use my better judgement and assign it myself, for experience level and winning percentage, if I don't know who they are, I will have to ask the players themselves.

[hclixinarcadia]

Don't forget, newer/ less experienced players get better playing more experienced players.

True, but they also get discouraged if they take a whooping.

People will have the option to play up a level.

[Faster Than Flash]

Don't forget, newer/ less experienced players get better playing more experienced players.

QTF

Unless they get owned.
Then they learn nothing.

Pair the fun players with fun players.

If a new player wants to learn how to play competitively - stick him with the experts

[hclixinarcadia]

Pair the fun players with fun players.

If a new player wants to learn how to play competitively - stick him with the experts

yes, this is pretty much how it will be. I take a look at the teams and rate them:

competitive = 3, e.g Thing/Metron
fun = 1, e.g. Seven Soldiers theme, Young Justice theme
a combo of both = 2, e.g Metron/5 Gleeks

Then I look at the player themselves,
expert = 3, won a lot of tournaments
average = 2, won some, lose some
beginner = 1, never won

as well as how long they've been playing
a long time = 3, more than 2 years
average = 2, 1-2 years
new player = 1, less than 1 year

then I total them up and group by total points.

Let's take a look at hypothetical players:

Player A
he's been around for a while and usually fields a fun team but has won tournaments when he fields a competitive one. Let's say he brought a fun team this time, he would rate a 2+2+3 = 7.

Player B
has been around for a while, almost always wins tournaments, but he brings a fun team, then he would be a 2+3+3=8

Player C
started playing less than 3 yrs ago, has won some and lost some tournaments, and brings a competitive team, then he would be a 2+2+3 = 7

Player D
wins a lot, has been playing for a while, brings a competitive team, 3+3+3 = 9

Player E
started playing less than 3 years ago but rarely anymore, hasn't won any tournaments, but brings a competitive team, 3+1+1 = 5

Player F
started playing less than 3 years ago, has won many tournaments and brings a competitive team, 3+3+2=8

Player G
barely just started, hasn't won any tournaments and brings a semi-competitive team, 2+1+1=4

so, out of those, we put them in order according to rating:
D, 9
F, 8
B, 8
A, 7
C, 7
E, 5
G, 4

In that case, Group 1 would be D, F, B, and A (because he brought a competitive team), then in Group 2, either C, E, and G

That's how I would group them.