Lifever wrote: ↑
Tue Sep 21, 2021 11:21 am
Some seasoned players told me, classic swiss sys with w/l ratio is better.
It is a WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP tournament after all, not a triplet of matches with an overall score!
I didn't really see the difference, but thought about it.
Wandering the Bavarian Alps this hazy morning I realized: They are right. It is a good argument once you think about it.
This is based on my own experience in the last 1y tourney:
The CURRENT scoring system (as good as it may be after getting rid of problems) will count every point from round 1.
I started as a Panzer General veteran, but Panzer Corps MP newbie in the 2018 tournament and wanted to see how tough other guys are. I never thought I would even play in the top league.
So although my early results were quite impressive in context and showed strong play, every good play also had at least a minor mistake attached. I attacked as a defender too much and lost str instead of losing nothing. I overextended and had to replace units. Common occurences, but intolerable - it was not the best version of me from the start. Some things were just executed poorly because I did not know the mechanics or messed them up.
I lacked the experience to know what a unit can barely do or barely fails to do. So I had to learn it by trial under fire - the most exciting experience.
I can say even years later that I learned a lot in that tournament and will never regret being a part of it. It contributed to my life - probably more than 5 years of university ever did (ok, economics & statistics was a stupid choice in hindsight - or was it?)
That tournament was real - something that a lot of players shared and agreed on since this one started. They remember it fondly as a great experience.
The competition was real, the organizers love for the materia was real and the feeling was real.
Now with the point based scoring system, I would not have been able to close the gap to elite players. I would not have learned as many lessons.
As a result I would never have won. I would have lacked incentive to go on. I would have quit somewhere in the middle, knowing that I won't make it to the mountain top regardless of the results of the top guys.
I also would never have played them and learned from them!
The incentive of being just one win away from closing the gap... or being "in reach" on the scoreboard motivates to no end.
This is the most important evolution, a learning mind can live through - working and adapting under pressure. You find unique solutions and crawl the extra mile to find them. "How does he do that?" Improving bit by bit, forging your own strategic masterpiece.
I think it would be frustrating for a lot of players who learn on the fly to be out just because one or two early rounds were not played ideal.
A narrow, hard fought battle should not lead to anybody limping through the rest of a year without chance to place top level.
It should be a steep learning curve that rewards incentive and strategic thinking on the fly...
Rewards for learning out of mistakes and chances for redemption next round.
That is a true winner in real life and should be the leading player for the Panzer Corps 2 MP Truppe: The PzC2 World Champion.
Therefore I would argue the best scoring system is the one that keeps players in reach of the top prize.
It means MORE COMPETITION for the top prize for a longer period of time.
A point based scoring system keeps the guys who start great in a league of their own for the rest of the tournament.
It is more fitting for a very professional environment - i.e heavy prizes that reward for the effort of time spent.
Everybody comes in top prepared, there are qualifying rounds, ...
Unfortunately this is not where strategy esports is right now!
= W/L >>> points
W/L seems the far better emotional experience, but also the better method to determine a champion.
In other words - what kind of a champion would you salute to?
TYPE A - THE FIGHTER
A guy who beats his opponents as fast and brutal as he possibly can - going for the win, sealing the deal
(vice versa for defence masters: A guy who springs the trap so effectively that the attacker gets bitten in the end.)
TYPE B - THE ACCOUNTANT
B) A guy who plans his way through the map based on which objectives start to net him points as early as possible
In gameplay both ways are close to each other, but there is a stark difference in detail!
For veterans and seasoned winners it makes little difference. They get paired with the other top guys and duke it out amongst them.
A win is a win...
Look at history and you will see - nobody talks about the details, losses or objectives met.
Win is all that matters.
The world champion should be a guy who won the most battles.
That's the guy I salute in the end.
= W/L >>> points
Feel free to digest or disagree