I started in Wave 3 and only attended one regional before Wave 4 and World's that year, but the 33 points required for a win really didn't have to do with people "boxing" up their list (I think the best lists from the Wave from that era of X-wing prove that) and had more to do with the fact that a 33 point difference led to more modified wins than they wanted.

Big ships holding onto MoV was actually an exploitation of the MoV system that you said was devalued when they went to 12 points and it made it very difficult for 4 ships lists to make it to the top. (BTW, 12 points counted as a full win, no a modified win -- minor difference but the difference is a TIE fighter).

I'm not sure what you are talking about regarding devaluing of MoV because the Advanced Structure maintains a top cut all the way through (p17). In events like the System Opens, we're still seeing that MoV matters as even though you make it to day 2, a poor MoV can drastically change your chances Day 2.

Anyway, I think that most people understand that it was a problem that Modified Wins essentially penalized you in both tournament points and tiebreakers since a Mod Win was based on the a low MoV. Now, a win is a win is a win.

Yup, a win is utter.

In the final you used to have to fight to the death so taking a deliberately low value list like a solo Whisper was pointless. You had to fight it out.

Now, 1 point more than your opponent is everything.

I started in Wave 3 and only attended one regional before Wave 4 and World's that year, but the 33 points required for a win really didn't have to do with people "boxing" up their list (I think the best lists from the Wave from that era of X-wing prove that) and had more to do with the fact that a 33 point difference led to more modified wins than they wanted. Big ships holding onto MoV was actually an exploitation of the MoV system that you said was devalued when they went to 12 points and it made it very difficult for 4 ships lists to make it to the top. (BTW, 12 points counted as a full win, no a modified win -- minor difference but the difference is a TIE fighter). I'm not sure what you are talking about regarding devaluing of MoV because the Advanced Structure maintains a top cut all the way through (p17). In events like the System Opens, we're still seeing that MoV matters as even though you make it to day 2, a poor MoV can drastically change your chances Day 2. Anyway, I think that most people understand that it was a problem that Modified Wins essentially penalized you in both tournament points and tiebreakers since a Mod Win was based on the a low MoV. Now, a win is a win is a win.

Yup, a win is utter.In the final you used to have to fight to the death so taking a deliberately low value list like a solo Whisper was pointless. You had to fight it out.Now, 1 point more than your opponent is everything.

Yah, Ill worry about that when someone actually MAKES It to the final and wins with that strategy. Im doubtful itll be as good as you might think.

Under the prior systems, the player with the most tournament points will have the highest MOV, under the new system, the player at the top may have only 600 MOV from 6 rounds whereas a 5 rounds winner could plausibly have MOV of 1089.

The person with the best tournament score didn't always have the best MoV. That may have tended to be the case but there was nothing about the previous tournament rules that made it so. Before the recent change it was possible to be undefeated (with no modified wins) in a 6 round tournament and end up with an MoV of 672. It was possible for someone with 2 wins and 4 losses to end up with a higher MoV than that.

More realistically than those extremes, a player that runs a list that gets a lot of wins but usually loses a lot of ships doing so may very well end up undefeated with a lower MoV than someone that kills a ton of stuff when they lose but when they win they win big that ends up losing a match or two.

Also back in the days before Full Wins only need a 12 point lead, Strength of Schedule was the primary tie breaker and MoV was secondary. Because of this, a Modified Win was worse for both the winner and the loser of the match than if the loser had been beaten more thoroughly.

Serious question what is the problem with ID'S?

To me? Not a darn thing. It rewarded players that usual had a tougher road. But people's heads exploded over it because apparently the point of going to a premier event is to play games and not worry about winning the event.

Well, remember that you can always concede if you've done well enough to make the final cut without having to play your last game.

I think the problem with the ID was always that there were plenty of instances where matchups were a determing factor players who were on the bubble and could take an ID to secure their spot because their opponent could as well. Meanwhile other players on the bubble were not only forced to play but were locked out by that situation.

--

With respect to Final Salvo, while it seems contrived, it seems like it was intended to create an imbalance so that it is always in the best interest of one player to bring the game to a conclusion.

The people locked out were behind because they had already lost. So why reward that rather then reward someone that had been performing better up to that point.

Because if, for example in a 5 round event, it should be the people who play best across 5 games, not 4 in this case. In sports, do the teams ahead in the standings get a freebie in the last game of the season if they're already ahead but could still be caught with a loss just because they've performed better by 1 game over someone else? Nope.

Well, in football, if a team has an amazing record going into the final, and secured top seed, they will play 2nd string to give the starters a bigger rest going into playoffs. So, that point is moot because it does happen. Now they have tried to change this attitude by scheduling a division game that week, but sometimes it just doesn't matter.

I was very specific in that if they could still be caught by the team behind then it's not fair, so it's not moot. What if one team is a single game behind, but owns the tie breaker in the football example? You wouldn't see them resting players then. The X-wing equivalent is being one win behind but having greater MOV. It's exactly the same.

I think a better comparison would be pool play such as the world Cup. Plenty of times two teams have played extremely boring games because winning does nothing and losing will eliminate you.