Re: [VANILLA-LIST:3149] Re: Continuous scoring

[Dave Ahn <ahn@vec.wfubmc.edu>]

On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 04:36:36PM -0700, Tom Holub wrote:
> > 
> > Yes, I am.  But so do you.  Shortening the gametime to 60 minutes also
> > makes the game results more predictable because irrelevant portions of
> > the game are simply cut out.  Both ideas yield the same result: a more
> > interesting game.
> 
> No, as I said in my initial message, shortening the gametime to 60 minutes
> makes game results LESS predictable.  The greatest level of variability
> is 5-10 minutes into the game; the lowest level is 90 minutes in.  
> The shorter the game is, the higher the variability.

I disagree.  Why?  In a 90 minute game, the first 30 minutes are the most
volatile because both teams start with so many armies.  In a 60 minute
game, the first 20 minutes might be the most volatile.  However, the
degree of volatility in the shorter game will be smaller because both
teams start with fewer armies to drive the variability.

The next 45 minutes of a 90 minute game are usually spent rebuilding the
stash and basically maintaining an even game in preparation of the final
push.  This would be reduced to 25 minutes in a 60 minute game.  That's
roughly 1/2 of each game.

The last absolute 15 minutes in both 90 and 60 minute games are used for
the push.  That's 1/6 of the long game but 1/4 of the short game.

I conclude that the absolute variability is lower in the shorter game,
so it is more predictable.  The relative variability is also slightly
lower in the shorter game because you spend a bigger percentage of the
game spent in the final push.

> 
> > > You have a fallacy in your thinking here.  A team that is behind 15-5 in
> > > planets but has 25 armies is not behind by 5 planets in the same way that a
> > > team with no armies is.
> > 
> > I intentionally said "successfully delivering 25 armies" as opposed to
> > "being up by 25 armies" to avoid this misunderstanding.  Oh well.
> 
> It's not really possible to come back from 5 planets in 10 minutes if you
> don't have a stash.

The point was that a team sitting down 5 planets for 80 minutes while the
enemy rewls their front due makes for an extremely dull game when it is
far easier for the losing team to regain those 5 planets than it is for
the winning team to hold on to them.  This is why stronger teams collapse
into passive mode even though they should be pushing the advantage.

Personally, I find it absurd that teams are sitting on 60 armies for 60
minutes maintaining 10-10 only to push in the end to win 11-8-1 with a
30 army stockpile still in their posession.

> I didn't see any more hoarding this season than previously.  The only
> game where we faced massive hoarding was against TGW, which could have
> played us straight up but instead decided to sit in core.

I saw plenty of this in non-TGW teams when I subbed for scrimmages.  I
see a lot of it in the DL this season, too.  I don't know how this
compares to last season, but it's definitely a shift in general strategy
from years ago.

> Perhaps you should switch teams.

TGW has dissolved.  I am taking a hiatus from the INL this season.
If anyone needs non-INL subs, look me up.

> > Given two equal teams, the advantage should be close or equal to zero, so
> > your scenario wouldn't happen.
> 
> If the advantage is close or equal to zero, then your system is a no-op.

So we find a minimum value for the advantage so that it is not a no-op but
it isn't an insurmountable advantage, either.

> The point is, it's nearly impossible to go up 12-7-1 against a team which
> is trying to keep the game at 10-10 and no more.  They can hoard armies
> and reinforce or retake planets in their own space; what are you going
> to do against that?

Assuming a half planet handicap advantage, if a team loses two rounds of
handicap, then they shouldn't be able to win unless they get 12-7-1.  Yes,
this may be almost impossible, but that is the penalty they pay for
conceding the first 2/3 of the game.  Perhaps next time they would alter
their strategy so that they won't sit in core + 60 armies waiting for
the last 15 minutes to start.  Which is the whole point of this discussion.

-- 
Dave Ahn <ahn@vec.wfubmc.edu>        |  "When you were born, you cried and the
                                     |  world rejoiced.  Try to live your life
Virtual Endoscopy Center             |  so that when you die, you will rejoice
Wake Forest Univ. School of Medicine |  and the world will cry."  -1/2 jj^2