|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/29/2008
Posts: 1,784
Location: Canada
|
juice man wrote:Jack was telling me about this game, at one point Jack said something like "You're not going to be giving me any shots, are you?" To which the reply was, I think "Championship play, Jack. Championship play." And Bill was/is right. That is the way to play if you reach the top eight. Unfortunately, yes it is. And this is exactly the problem: in the playoffs we currently have a scenario where exactly this sort of play is "right." I wonder if the Judge should be given the authority to rule a game as a double-loss (similar to a TW game that goes over time) if certain conditions are not met (such as scoring less than 50pts of kills or else intentional avoidance of engagement, which is only inches away from Stalling, ie cheating). If he rules a double-loss, then the player who lost their game that round but scored the most points would advance to take this place in the next round. Extreme, I know. But if non-engagement is "right," then I'm not interested in playing. And this is coming from a guy who can never get enough of SWM! 
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
You wouldn't even need a judge for that. Each round, just advance the players who have the most points in the match. Obviously, anyone with 200 points advances. If a match doesn't finish, then there's a chance a loser may have scored more points than the winner of that match. The 200-150 loser advances instead of the 40-30 winner. Then re-seed after each round.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator, Rules Guy
Joined: 8/24/2008
Posts: 5,201
|
Well, I am a big fan of adding rounds and or time to such games. If engagement doesn't actually happen to the last ten minutes, then too bad.
I'm also debating not telling them how much time is left in the final rounds.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/29/2008
Posts: 1,784
Location: Canada
|
There is merit to all 3 of those options.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator, Rules Guy
Joined: 8/24/2008
Posts: 5,201
|
Not so much the last one, since in the finals, there tended to be multiple people keeping track of time.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/30/2008
Posts: 1,288
|
Having advancement based on score instead of winning/losing opens the door to a lot more collision. If I'm playing a buddy in the top 8 (which happened to me in the quarterfinals), if the game is obviously going to time (which it did), the apparent loser would be tempted to run his remaining pieces forward into death traps to just give his friend a chance to score more points. Like in my game with Ricky, instead of killing his Anakin Solo, I could have let him take an AoO on my Jan Ors to kill her and then had Lobot run up to get killed also. That would have given him a lot more points and increased his likelihood of moving on.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/29/2008
Posts: 1,784
Location: Canada
|
Echo24 wrote:Having advancement based on score instead of winning/losing opens the door to a lot more collision. If I'm playing a buddy in the top 8 (which happened to me in the quarterfinals), if the game is obviously going to time (which it did), the apparent loser would be tempted to run his remaining pieces forward into death traps to just give his friend a chance to score more points. Like in my game with Ricky, instead of killing his Anakin Solo, I could have let him take an AoO on my Jan Ors to kill her and then had Lobot run up to get killed also. That would have given him a lot more points and increased his likelihood of moving on. True. Likewise, if you know you're going to win, then you can also collude with a friend to allow him to score a lot of points so that he can stand a better chance of advancing as well. There just has to be some way to motivate players to play for a full win in the playoffs. A full win obviously won't always be possible, given various matchups, but there needs to be some sort of incentive if it's going to happen more often.
|
|
|
Guest |