no, you need to set a max nunmbr of attempts for each score. Otherwise the scores are meaningless as the more you play teh more the scores even out (that is how avrages work)

Just set it up as a best fo 3.. simple.. no need for stupid math...

I am not saying this approach is better than any other approach or is even necessarily the best one to use, but I disagree that the scores would be meaningless with this approach. Yes, the more you play the more the scores would even out for a specific deck/strategy used by a player but that is what you want as the evening out is what removes the luck factor of a good draw from the encounter deck. If a player's deck/strategy is better than someone elses it should consistently end up with a higher score using this approach. Saying the scores are meaningless the more you play amounts to saying that one deck is no better than any other deck and it is just based on luck (i.e. whoever gets the best draw from the encounter deck).

booored said:

booored, could you expand on this in a more thoughtful way please? Sometimes your ideas get lost in your rather blunt tone.

Also, I'm just not sure what you're saying "no" to. A best of 3 is nice for a 2 hour tournament. I think what we're talking about here is finding a system that can accommodate a playing experience that reflects a slightly larger body of gaming. So, are you advocating a cap to the playing experience? Like 5 games, 7 games, 10 games? Those are all caps. Are you saying "no" to the idea of a variant that would allow for a minimum number of plays (3, 5, 10, whatever) and then the option of an open ended number of plays beyond that, continuing to measure for win ratio?

Also, insinuating that someone's ideas are "stupid" is a good way to shut down conversation. I'm hoping this forum can remain a place where the tone is set for ongoing and open conversation. Words like "stupid" about anything really don't help that.

booored said:

Boored, but that's quite the sense of big numbers influencing the average result - the more you play, the less luck is involved and you will get an average score that identifies the strength of your deck(s),

Pehaps for the next tournament we should still play a given number of games (I think 7 like in the last one might be a good number to start with) to prevent to make things overcomplicated, but those who want to play more games could post a second result for scientific purposes, so we could get an idea how the number of games played influences your total score (or how it has no influence at all).

Tournament posting is out there! Let me know if you have any questions!