CTA Tournament @ Wargames Workshop, Milton Keynes 17th Feb

[Burger]

@Burger - Its another approach but a "Draw" is quite rare so I reckon it will mainly end up in 3 points or none...but then again it is very simple so does appeal to me! Btw Burger - I thought Reaverman's idea was more than just tourney scoring and involved changing how you play a tournament (i.e. play it like a league with everyone playing everyone else rather than a swiss tourney...although that could take some time so a mini league (like groups in the world cup) followed by knockout))

Yes but in a 4-game tournament this isn't really practical. The Swiss matching system with this scoring system, should work fine. Yes draws are rare... maybe say that a game is a "draw" if the VP difference is between 0 and 4?

And yeah, sorry for thread hijacking :lol:

 

[Triggy]

3 points for a win and 1 for a draw have been tried by Games Workshop over this last year to widespread dislike. It is a simple system but it really penalises anyone who doesn't get wins in, particularly over only 3-6 games. One failure to win and you're completely out of the running. Not to mention that there's no need to penalise the draw by making it only one third of the value of a win, rather than one half.

The method that only counts VPs has also been tried by the WPS before and fails even more spectacularly as high scoring draws or losses gain far more points than hard fought but low scoring victories!

The best systems in general have relatively straighforward systems that allow people to gain or lose ground on other people if the right results happen to keep everyone interested right until the end

Hash - thanks, your previous system was fine in principle, it just didn't have enough "breadth" to differentiate between minor wins and major wins.

 

[TGT]

I have to say I like this format...a couple of print offs around the tourney space would also help

0-1 difference = 10-10
2-3 difference = 11-9
4-6 difference = 12-8
7-10 difference = 13-7
11-15 difference = 14-6
16-20 difference = 15-5
21-25 difference = 16-4
26-30 difference = 17-3
31-35 difference = 18-2
36-40 difference = 19-1
41+ difference = 20-0

 

[Silvereye]

The method that only counts VPs has also been tried by the WPS before and fails even more spectacularly as high scoring draws or losses gain far more points than hard fought but low scoring victories

So why not just add the difference in VPs? Winner gets +some, Loser gets -some. Over the course of 4-6 games, you will need to consistently win well to pull ahead fo the pack.

 

[Triggy]

Agreed, that method would work too. It would reward players with minor wins and penalise those with minor defeats a bit more but that's a philosophical choice rather than a bad thing