[boromirofborg]

My Vidiian deck was not a normal build, and I also am not a great player, but my game with Michael was also 1 turn away from it going the other direction as well, so there was some plan for speed solvers.


Ultimatly, I do think it's important for everyone to remember that:

- a single tournament is closer to ancedotal then hard data
- doubly so when it's a higher level one, players have known preferences, and theres a meta-meta-meta-game going on.

End of the day, we would honestly need to increase the total games played yearly by at least 10x to come close to having meaningful data, and even then, despite downloads, there is still a large amount of variance by nature of a card game.

[VictoryIsLife]

Hi all. I’ve purposefully taken a few days before replying to your feedback. Thanks for your contributions. I've tried to reply to everyone who dealt with my query.

@abargar1710 Thanks for the kind words. I have thought about lockout decks and those designed to not meet a win condition. I don’t see them as a serious issue, and I don’t think they can abuse my proposed scoring change. I think that over enough games they will be relegated to their natural place near the bottom of the ladder. I also don’t think that the desire to punish them with a MW justifies the punishment inherent in every other MW. If a lockout deck takes 45 min to setup, you should have got enough points for a MW yourself, and you deserve the FW points that I am advocating for.

@PantsOfTheTalShiar and @Mugato I didn’t realize that FLs got a point. All the more reason for a change. Perhaps we remove the single point for a FL? A ML as 2 points seems to high on a 4-point scale. I don’t want to change the entire point scale away from 4 in either direction. I do like W=4, True tie=2, ML=1, L=0 myself.

@Rachmaninoff thanks for the welcome and the willingness to demo a new system. As for the historical examples, I ran into some of these in verbal discussions at Worlds, and all I can say is that way too many variables have changed to make any of them super relevant today. A lot of the Modern ruleset changes have already curbed the excesses of the past. This is of course not to discount anyone’s experience playing or playing against degenerate decks!

@BoromirofBorg I agree that we need more games played annually to get meaningful tournament data.

So what are the next steps then? I would like to see some tournaments run under new scoring. Whether our typical run-of-the-mill tiny events will provide meaningful data or not remains to be seen. I’m willing to take onboard whatever data we can get.

I would like to make clear that my proposal is mainly for Modern. If changes to scoring MUST be applied to all formats I still don’t see an issue, but I haven’t played those formats (and I don’t intend to).

[Dukat]

My Vidiian deck was not a normal build, and I also am not a great player, but my game with Michael was also 1 turn away from it going the other direction as well, so there was some plan for speed solvers.


Ultimatly, I do think it's important for everyone to remember that:

- a single tournament is closer to ancedotal then hard data
- doubly so when it's a higher level one, players have known preferences, and theres a meta-meta-meta-game going on.

End of the day, we would honestly need to increase the total games played yearly by at least 10x to come close to having meaningful data, and even then, despite downloads, there is still a large amount of variance by nature of a card game.

Since we only have those very few tournaments, they are our data and not anectotical.

The sample size is just very small.

[BCSWowbagger]

So what are the next steps then? I would like to see some tournaments run under new scoring. Whether our typical run-of-the-mill tiny events will provide meaningful data or not remains to be seen. I’m willing to take onboard whatever data we can get.

As with most attempt to innovate, the next step is for people who are enthusiastic about the change to prove that it works. Run a few tournaments under this scoring rule. Note explicitly in the tournament description that you are using alternate scoring rules, and what those rules are. If the Department of Organized Play doesn't tell you to stop, you're good. Report your results out here on the forum and see if it inspires copycats. And have fun!