Pink Poogle Toy Forum

Ha! I am clever!

Having the keeper face the wall does work, but if you move the cursor to change browser window/tab he will move, although I haven't tired alt+tab yet so that might work.

What I do is move the cursor off the window, still lined up with the keeper. If you don't have it full screen, you can click on something else. (I use Avant, so I can just click on this page, and go back to my desktop and everything, am playing a game right now)

i've found that after winning a faceoff, if you sit there with the ball, the other players will also just sit there. so this can be used to waste time as well

*goes to get some 20 wins for Roo Island*

hmm....is this good? not for me....I like to think about my next move sometmes.

I think your goalie can safely "stare at the wall" for a while, while holding the ball. This will allow you an extra 5 seconds as many times as you need it.

For the first two rounds I picked my team purely on gut instinct, and failed miserably, despite winning a total of nearly 500 games. So this round I tried to think about it a bit. I decided that on the law of averages there must be roughly the same number of 'talented' players on each team, certainly not enough of a scew to make a real difference, so why did some teams have so many extra wins? The only thing I could think of is that they have more players and that as those players are staying on that team, the team with the greatest number of wins must have an advantage in the next round (assuming the people from the loosing teams spread themselves around). So I joined Krawk Island - only time will tell if that's the right reasoning!

No need to think too hard on it. TNT already said:

"The Altador Cup Committee bases scores on win/loss/tie record, point scores, individual performance, and a weighted average based on team membership. Translation: A team with more players has no advantage over a team with less players!"

I still think they been putting the weight on the wrong end tho.

500 games? Thats like... 1500 minutes... which is... 25 hours!

You played for 25 hours? Wow. Over two rounds. Six days. Over 4 hours a day.

And that's not including all the time between games.

It's not quite as much as that - I'm in almost the same time zone as Neopets and so the rounds start on Thursday evening giving me an extra 4 hours playing time per round. So I have 3 full days plus 4 hours or so. But as these have been weekends where I'm not doing much a couple of hours in the morning then another couple in the afternoon and/or evening is nothing really, especially as I'm usually up at 6am and don't go to bed until about 1am. I'm hoping for some decent individual prizes as well as team ones so I'm trying to give myself every opportunity to win them. If it doesn't happen then it won't be thru lack of trying.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying either of those teams won't definitely win and I refuse to actually give a solid prediction but I also can't help but feel that they're at a disadvantage...

Many of the players that were dragging down the teams who lost in the last round (ie, free riding, not actually playing and yet the scores were being calculated so a bigger team doesn't have an advantage - I assume the score is being divided between the number of players or something similar) will probably be doing, what seems to be, the "logical" thing to them and joining the teams from the previous rounds with the highest scores thereby theoretically dragging them down.

I believe that's what happened to Mystery Island in round 2. I look at the scores and believe that an absolutely impressive win is probably not as good for the purposes of the overall tournament as a simple win.

Are you suggesting that it's better to win 3-0 rather than 9-0? If so then what's the reasoning/evidence? I don't follow that at all.

No, they're saying that as a team, it's better to win by a couple thousand points, rather than a couple hundred thousand. Winning by that much attracks a fair amount of people who join and then not play/win much hoping that everyone else will keeping winning for them.

Yeah, that's exactly what I meant. IanB, I wasn't talking about any single game played I was talking about an overall round and how much a team as a whole scores.

Of the top 4 teams in round 1:
Mystery Island 769,323
Krawk Island 765,904
Lost Desert 739,504
Brightvale 714,322

Only one of them succeeded in winning the second round. Part of that has to do with the match-ups, Krawk Island and Mystery Island were put up against each other. But, I propose the other reason is that useless dead-weight players joined the teams that had done well thinking they could get a freeride to the next round and by doing so actually dragged the team down by adding the dead weight that the wins still had to be shared out to.

If you look at the scores at the end of the second round, the top teams in round 1 (that lost in round 2) had their scores from one round to the next drop substantially. Even Krawk Island that won round 2 had their score drop from round 1 to round 2. Whereas the other winning teams in round 2 actually had their scores increase from round 1 to the next.

The way I see it, useless players just want to try and get on the teams that are "good", they base the decision on how a team did in a previous round not realising that by doing so they're actually going to drag the team down in the next round. The not so useless players (the ones that will actually work and pull their weight) don't need the comfort of a supposedly "good" team and hence join whichever they prefer.

Suppose you could also claim that by winning with a substantial margin people don't believe they need to work as hard either. If everyone thought like that, they pretty much wouldn't have a score at all.