True, but maybe you give a bonus of 2 MOV for destroying a ship.

I don't know that the game is really designed to work where damage dealt, as opposed to ships destroyed, is an accurate way to determine the winner. Certain ships are designed to take damage as they give damage (like B-Wings). Besides, the impact on the effectiveness of certain upgrades (Chopper, Feedback Array, Darth Vader, ect.) would really be reduced.

A damaged ship can be repaired in many cases. A few holes may affect its performance but can still be an easy fix.

A ship that is destroyed is one that you never need to worry about bothering you again. Maybe it can be rebuilt but that is not a quick or cheap process.

If this is a game based on dogfighting the results definitely should NOT depend on how much damage you do to ships. The half points for half damage on a large ship is one thing that may be needed to help keep them 'honest' but making every point of damage done to anything is crazy.

I would get rid of Modified Win, give 2 points for a Draw, and (if Large-Boost were properly nerfed) get rid of the Large-MoV rule.

If the Hounds Tooth title is equipped, you must destroy the Nastah Pup to get the second half of the YV-666's points.

I've post this before but I'd like to see the tournament scoring system move more towards what is used in Armada. Each match is worth 10 points that gets divided between the two players. For games that are a draw or a modified win in X-Wing each player would get 5 points. Tabling an opponent without losing a ship awards the winner the full 10 points. There are a few tiers for score difference that fall between those two extremes.

That seems like it would make getting enough points to secure a win and then playing evasively until time expires a strategy that might clinch some wins but might make it hard to make the cut.

You do realise that moving to the Armada system is almost perfectly correlated with MoV, right? I am going to assume you don't, otherwise you would (or should have) mentioned that instead. To get to a 10-0 scoring system all you do is take the MoV scores and divide by 20.

This is the Armada tournament score table scaled from a 400 point game to a 100 point game (and capped since there is no way to exceed a 100 point difference in score).

The difference between this and just using MoV as the tournament score is that this isn't a flat progression. There's no reason that it would need to stay a 10 point per match system or even keep the same distribution.

I really don't like how X-Wing handles modified wins. It punishes the winner for not winning by enough and does nothing to reward the loser for keeping the game so close and draws are for all intents and purposes the same as a loss. I'd consider something like this an improvement over the current tournament scoring:

5/0 Full win

3/1 Modified Win

2/2 Draw

I wouldn't mind putting in another tier or so.

Immediately after the set up phase, if you deployed a large-base ship with a Primary Weapon Turret with upgrades costing more than 45 points, all your ships are immediately destroyed and removed from play...

The only change I would like to see is this:

A draw that results from no ships destroyed (or half destroyed) by either player results in zero points for both. In other words, if both players refuse to engage or attempt an arranged draw, it counts as a loss for both players. I don't mind concessions, because the player who concedes is strictly worse off, but arranged draws are something I would prefer to discourage.

The only change I would like to see is this:

A draw that results from no ships destroyed (or half destroyed) by either player results in zero points for both. In other words, if both players refuse to engage or attempt an arranged draw, it counts as a loss for both players. I don't mind concessions, because the player who concedes is strictly worse off, but arranged draws are something I would prefer to discourage.

If you have two players who agree to draw that would do nothing to stop it. Each just flies all the ships off the board during the same round.

Why not change go a base 10 system to give it more precision in scoring?

Base 10 system:

Win / Loss - 10 / 0

Modified Win / Loss 7 / 3

Draw 5 / 5

It rewards players who can hang in to the end, gives scoring more granularity, and you can still handle MoV normally.

Here is a suggestion of mine for discussion from Nova Squadron Episode 20. I reposting it here, but here is the link. It starts on Thread #33

It's simple.

Take the cost of the ship / (hull+shields+ upgrades which increase them) and Round down. We'll call this Damage Value These are points you earn for each point of damage enemy ships have on them at the end of the game. This means if he heals a shield with R2 or some other method you won't get the points. Warhammer Fantasy, 40k and many other games have been doing this for years now. This is one the main ways to stop 2 ship meta and bring balance back to the game.

Examples:

Academy Tie Fighter 12 points, 3 hull, 0 shields. This means at the end of the game 12/(3+0) = 4 Damage Value

Obsidian Tie Fighter 17 points , 3 hull, 0 shields, +1 Shield Upgrade. This means you earn 4 mov points for each damage caused 17/(3+1)=4.25 Rounded down to 4 Damage Value

Soontir Fel 33 points, 3 Hull, +1 Hull Upgrade, Push the Limit. This means you earn 8 mov points for each damage caused. 33/(3+1)=8.25 Round down to 8 Damage Value

If people cannot do this type of simple math, I'm not sure they should be playing this game. I don't understand why some of your co hosts think this is so difficult to implement or use.

Ton's of games use this for their tournaments and it makes sense.

Sure you will have cases where people run away so you don't get full points, but that happens now. At least you get some type of rewards for 60 minutes of gaming, but you lost because his big ship had one hull left on it. In some cases we have to drive 4 hours to play, and it's so frustrating when people run away, so you cannot have a chance to win. I feel your pain.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/138033-nova-squadron-radio-%E2%80%93-episode-20-%E2%80%9Cwave-4-rebels%E2%80%9D/page-2?hl=+nova%20+squadron%20+radio

Besides the logistics of implementing this, the effect it would have on the meta would be profound.

Bwings, Ywings, YV666s, Shuttles, Kwings, Z95s, Xwings, and any other 1-2 agi ship would go the way of the dodo bird. Ships with High HP and low agi would surrender MOV points like like a screen door submarine takes on water. Players would rapidly understand the problem and adjust. Much like they did when the MOV scoring rules changed for large based ships (though TLTs had equally as much to do with that).

Every Imperial list would have Soontir Fel. He would just tank all his MOV point and protect them with AT, Stealth and a token stack. You'd see Whisper once the TLT Ywings faded away. You'd still see tie fighters often, simply because they are cheap and with 3AGI and an evade action they can still tank away some points.

Scum ships would almost all be IG88s. Z95s can't protect their MOV points well enough. You'd actually probably see some Starvipers backed by AT. I think the Scyks would still sit on the shelf, sure they can protect MOVs like ties, but the fact that they are a bit more expensive probably still relegates them to the bench.

Rebel lists would almost exclusively be regen and PTL Corran. Every other Rebel ship is designed to take damage and keep on ticking, but that would by definition cause a massive MOV leak. Maybe you'll see some Awing lists, but if you are going to run Awings, maybe just run Fel. Rebels would be at a severe disadvantage in almost all tie breakers.

Frankly, the game has probably swung too far in damage mitigation. There are some ships that are simply too good at damage mitigation. Players are already using those ships very frequently. If we start over rewarding those ships by shifting to a partial MOV system, we will simply see they at each and every game we play. That doesn't sound like a lot of fun.

While partial MOV plans sound fair at first glance, I think the unintended consequences of such a system would be drastic. Some ships are designed from the start not to mitigate damage, but to absord damage and survive on their total HP. Those ships would have little place in a partial MOV environment.

The nashta pup is worth 6 points for scorring purposes.

Draws are rare, and the super low points awarded for them is really only a problem in conjunction with modified wins.

Either make a Draw worth 2 points, so that a Draw and a Modified Win together is like winning a game at that tasty 5pt threshold; or just eliminate the Modified Win. I'm perfectly comfortable in a world where winning by 1 point is the same as winning.

That all being said, if we're going to keep the modified win, as a reduction of points based on "not winning by that much", then the consolation for a modified loss should probably be 1 point. After all, why if a modified win is worth less than a full win, why isn't a modified loss worth more than a full loss?

If you want people to fight to the bitter end, giving points for modified losses isn't the way to do it (why would I throw my remaining ship into the teeth of your superior force, since that's just likely to result in a full loss?).

I'd make it so that a loss is a loss, but your "MOV" score is just how many points you destroyed (obviously calling it MOV at that point doesn't make sense).

That way, throwing your last ship into the maw of the other force hoping to land that lucky shot makes sense, since it doesn't cost you anything (no loss of tournament points, no loss of tiebreaker points, possible gain of tiebreaker points).

I also wouldn't mind some kind of system where you can go over 100 points, but you're handing that number of points squared to your opponent when it comes to determining who won.

So:

Your battle points = squad point cost of all opponent's destroyed ships - your squad cost in excess of 100 (if any) squared
(Not sure if total destruction of a sub-100 point squad should give a full 100 or not; same for half-health large ships, would need more thought)

The winner is the player with the higher battle points. Ties go to the player with initiative (to balance out tied-PS arc dodgers).

Tournament points = +N if you win where N is the number of rounds of swiss, +1 if you destroy all the opponent's ships (very difficult for the loser to get this, but possible)
Tiebreaker = sum of battle points

This results in an effective ranking by number of wins, followed by number of wiped out lists, followed by battle points.

I think these rules promote engagement and destruction. They allow fitting in that one last upgrade, except at an increasingly steep cost (making it harder to win, since you're docked battle points for them). They don't do anything to address getting ahead on points, and then running away, but I'm okay with that.