Valuation of Team Performances

UncleBob · Post by **UncleBob** » Sun May 31, 2009 9:05 am

This isn't a real new concept, but I didn't know where else to post it.

This is a little helper to measure the performance of a team, which I've been using with delight for about 40 games. I just like that kind of stuff.
Add together all Star player points (including MVP) your team has earned during the match and compare it with the table I put up, to find out how your team did.

5-8: Lousy
9-11: Poor
12-16: Mediocre
17-19: Excellent
20+: AWESOME!

As said I developed this table over a course of 40 games. Awesome happened just as often as Lousy and most times the teams achieved 12-16 SPP. So by all the stats I have this table is fine.

A more simple but just as funny table about the status of your team.
Compare your teams total Fan-Factor with the table below.

0-2: Unknown
3-5: Local team
6-8: Established
9-11: National Story
12+ Legend

I did this just by doing the math. A win is 3D6 and a common result of 10,5, 2D6 is in common 7 and the rest builds up on those two numbers. To become legend a team needs a winning streak and a final, a little better than the common result, roll.

Pug · Post by **Pug** » Sun May 31, 2009 11:16 am

This sounds fun! Im going to take this and add it to my league "Stato" page for my team Excel roster!

I'll have to work out what they rated from previous games!

Pug · Post by **Pug** » Sun May 31, 2009 11:33 am

RIght for the Rat-Eye Tigers (Human) playing in the Phat Kats Blood Bowl League.

5-8: Lousy
9-11: Poor
12-16: Mediocre
17-19: Excellent
20+: AWESOME!

Game 1 = Lousy
Game 2 = AWESOME!
Game 3 = Mediocre
Game 4 = Excellent
Game 5 = Poor
Game 6 = AWESOME!
Game 7 = AWESOME!
Game 8 = Poor
Game 9 = Excellent
Game 10 = Excellent
Game 11 = Mediocre
Game 12 = Mediocre
Game 13 = Lousy
Game 14 = Mediocre
Game 15 = Excellent
Game 16 = Mediocre

UncleBob · Post by **UncleBob** » Sun May 31, 2009 1:38 pm

Thanks Pug, especially for your stats. Looks like the table does not only work inside my own league.
2 Lousy, 2 Poor, 5 Mediocre, 4 Excellent, 3 Awesome.
Sounds good to me.

Lictor · Post by **Lictor** » Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:30 am

As a stats freak I will be posting up my info soon enough with this.

stormmaster1 · Post by **stormmaster1** » Tue Jun 02, 2009 9:17 am

How does it compare between races? I imagine Elves and Skaven probably have more lousy and awesome compared to bashers.

UncleBob · Post by **UncleBob** » Tue Jun 02, 2009 1:35 pm

I'll just post the whole data I've got (but I excluded the dungeonbowl games).

Halfling: Lousy: 4, Poor: 1, Mediocre: 4
Goblin: Lousy: 1, Poor: 3, Mediocre: 2, Excellent: 1, Awesome: 1
Necromantic: Lousy: 2, Poor: 3, Mediocre: 2, Excellent: 1
Human: Lousy: 3, Poor: 1, Mediocre: 3, Excellent: 1, Awesome: 1
Khemri: Lousy: 1, Mediocre: 3, Excellent: 1, Awesome: 3
High Elf: Lousy: 2, Poor: 1, Mediocre: 3, Excellent: 1, Awesome: 1
Chaos Dwarf: Mediocre: 6, Awesome: 3
Orc: Lousy: 1, Poor: 2, Mediocre: 3, Excellent: 1, Awesome: 1
Nurgle: Poor: 1, Mediocre: 6, Excellent: 1
Dwarf: Mediocre: 4, Excellent: 4
Norse: Lousy: 1, Poor: 1, Mediocre: 3, Excellent: 2, Awesome: 1
Lizardman: Poor: 2, Mediocre: 3, Excellent: 3, Awesome: 2
Skaven: Lousy: 2, Poor: 3, Mediocre: 2, Excellent: 2, Awesome: 1
Chaos: Poor: 4, Mediocre: 3, Excellent: 2, Awesome: 1
Wood Elf: Poor: 2, Mediocre: 4, Excellent: 3, Awesome: 1
Dark Elf: Lousy: 1, Mediocre: 4, Excellent: 2, Awesome: 2

Well, after a quick glance it seems stormmaster1 is right with lousy (scorer) but wrong with awesome (almost equal, but in favour of bashers).
If you trust my data, that is.

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:26 pm

looks like Chaos Dwarves are the way to go with your league

Pug · Post by **Pug** » Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:57 pm

Tweak it for teirs?

UncleBob · Post by **UncleBob** » Thu Jun 04, 2009 7:33 am

Actually the Chaos Dwarf team is doing fine but not dominating. They are just capable of scoring twice and causing two CAS so they always come out of it with about 15 SPP. But they loose sometimes 3-2. So they always perform well, but doesn't always win.
Note, this is not a win/ loose record.

Geoff Watson · Post by **Geoff Watson** » Thu Jun 04, 2009 10:33 am

My Human team (SLOBB Open) has had one Lousy game and two AWESOME! games.

I can't find the details for each match, but my Wood Elf team (SLOBB) averages out to AWESOME! (192 SPP over 9 matches, including the dead guy).

You should probably have another category above AWESOME!.

Geoff.

Pug · Post by **Pug** » Thu Jun 04, 2009 11:17 am

How about "HISTORIC!!"

UncleBob · Post by **UncleBob** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 11:35 am

That's exactly what I was afraid of. 192 SPP in 9 matches is 21,3 SPP per match. Now the table is as I suspected to easy to beat or you're to good.

Actually I can't make a change at this point. It works in my games (which are tight on defence), and to make a dramatic change would need more data to check if it's the table or the coach.

The only thing I can suggest is that everyone gives it a try and if similar problems occure to make adjustments.

In case of the 21,3 SPP per match my first impulse was to lift Awesome! from 20 to 22.
On second thought if other teams doesn't play up to that standard as well, it's just a Wood Elf thing.
Third thought, 21,3 SPP means 5,4 TD, or 4 TD and 4 COMP, or 3 TD, 2 CAS and 3 COMP and so on. In my opinion that's Awesome!.

Basically this tables tries to define a decisive performans. If that's what the team does every game, so it is. I really would only suggest a change when the Awesome! result becomes a regular one in the whole league.

Geoff Watson · Post by **Geoff Watson** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 9:57 pm

I found the details for the Wood Elf matches,
The results are:
one Poor, three Excellent, five AWESOME.

There's a 35 SPP match that is pushing the average up.

Geoff.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:06 pm

depednds how you judge awesome/excellence

I've had some 1-0 wins with no casualties with my dark elves that I thought they played excellent in

table doesn't represent that either

would have to get really complex to be of accurate representation