Have there ever been mass complaints about the matchmaking crating unfair matches due to coach skill? I don't think I've ever read such a complaint by anyone.
I don't understand why it's considered necessary to handicap good coaches when there's literally no evidence to suggest playing against a good coach is a negative experience.
I'd imagine people were still complaining about TV difference during season XI because there were still TV imbalances occurring, just less frequently.
I don't see how speaking to the people behind TrueSkill makes TV+ any more appropriate or not. It might have been interesting but it isn't relevant to Bloodbowl. If fair matches were the only thing that made games fun and interesting then you could reduce the game to a coin toss and that would be more fun and interesting yet that isn't something people find particularly fun.
It's more complicated than that, and involves understanding the way the game is designed and works. You've made a change that results in matches being less predictable and you've made an effort to verify that the change has that affect which is fine. It can't be used as an argument for why that was a good thing in the first place.
I don't think data on its own can judge whether a greater number of people are having fun or not. Looking at concessions is flawed because people are heavily punished for conceding.
I feel like I've noticed a difference between season 11 and 12. I assume season 12 is using TV+? I assumed season 11 was better due to more people spinning over the Christmas break. Hadn't considered the matchmaking might have been altered, why would I?
Did you actually read the TrueSkill article? It's designed to rank and match players in games where there are multiple players per match and resources are equalised. It dosen't have an obvious application to Champions Ladder where you are matching teams instead of players and resources are not equalised.
When resources are equalised it follows that matching players of equal skill will produce better matchups. It simply becomes a matter of finding the correct skill level for each player. This makes TrueSkill very similar to Elo, just that it can be applied to a variety of different game modes that have more than 2 players in each match.
So actually there's nothing in the Microsoft article that supports your method of using TV+ matchmaking.
It all comes down to the entirely subjective belief that adding in a handicapping system is good for the ladder. How are you going to measure that objectively or do you think it's your right to impose it on the ladder? (perhaps it is, you are one of the main admins).
Well no, it is not more interesting.
What stream are you referring to? If you mean the community discussion stream then yes, I was one of the ones to say how much I disliked the idea of using TV+. I fundamentally disagree with increasing tv mismatches to make games less predictable.
I've had more tv mismatches this season and I don't like that.
Out of interest, which seasons of CCL used TV Matchmaking and which used TV+ Matchmaking?
Fixing the matchmaking so it actually creates TV balanced match ups would be a great start.
Except TV-matching makes for worse matchups than TVPlus-matching. We know this is the case.
Only in your mind. Everyone who actually plays in the ladder agrees it is awful. While I appreciate your work as an admin, you are totally wrong on TV+.