OK. I know there was a typo in the latest tournament rules release, but I am not clear I even understood the old ones. As I understand it:
Is this correct? I guess I am confused by the less than 12-point thing.
I'm not huge into tournament stuff, but I think your second line should be
Time runs out, person with highest score win by more than 12 = Win = 5 points
5= Win, which is either tabling your opponent or by earning 12 points more from them than they have of yours by the time limit
3= Modified Win, which is earning 11-1 points more from them than they have of you by the time limit
1= Tie, which is earning 0 points more from them than they have of you by the time limit
0= Loss, wherein your opponent has earned enough points to either Win or Modified Win.
Personally, I think it would be more fair at 5/4/2/0 than 5/3/1/0, as the current gap unfairly boosts a few incredibly-difficult-to-kill ships, while simultaneously preventing a losing player from attempting to tie (and also enabling Fortressing to have more weight against the opponent), but that's just me.
It also means that an individual round will result in 5 or 4 points being added between the two players, rather than the current system of 5, 3, or 2 points being added between the two players.
My system's weighting means that a player who has tied in two matches is tied with a player who has a modified win and a complete loss, rather than the current system's weight which means that a player who has tied is as out-of-the-running as a player who has lost.
Seriously. The current system says that if you had won by more than 12 points, you can lose four games in a row before a player who ties every game catches up. And that's clearly faulty.
On the other side of the coin, a player with at least one victory will be better than someone else that could not even get one win...
I like the idea that a ModWin and a Tie are just less than a Full Win no matter what.
Devil's advocate.
On the other side of the coin, a player with at least one victory will be better than someone else that could not even get one win...
I like the idea that a ModWin and a Tie are just less than a Full Win no matter what.
Devil's advocate.
But are they really? Although it may not matter because match points would be used how about we compare MOV over five games:
Tie five times (extremely unlikely) has MOV = 500
Have a 1-4 record you could be looking at as having a MOV as low as 106 although it could be as high as 596 and those extremes only average 351.
Are we so sure the player with one win actually is better than the player who somehow tied five games?