Finals are boring. Pt. 1: Slow Play

RebelMac wrote:

extrala wrote:

mirddes wrote:

KevinM wrote:

Sadly, I believe the majority of VTES players are either not good enough at VTES to comprehend this issue or completely uninterested in changing the current paradigm.

please explain this new paradigm

Read 3.7.5. "Final Round Scoring" of the VEKN Tournament Rules .

I just read those rules and I saw that player with highest ranking from preliminary will win in case of a tie. I have played card games since 1995 and I see it for a first time that preliminary have an impact on top 8 or finals. With this time limit player with highest ranking after gainig 1 VP will probably win the table. It's not good in my opinion.

Please explain WHY it is not good. or: Have you been reading this thread and the other threads involving this subject?

KevinM wrote:

RebelMac wrote:

extrala wrote:

mirddes wrote:

KevinM wrote:

Sadly, I believe the majority of VTES players are either not good enough at VTES to comprehend this issue or completely uninterested in changing the current paradigm.

please explain this new paradigm

Read 3.7.5. "Final Round Scoring" of the VEKN Tournament Rules .

I just read those rules and I saw that player with highest ranking from preliminary will win in case of a tie. I have played card games since 1995 and I see it for a first time that preliminary have an impact on top 8 or finals. With this time limit player with highest ranking after gainig 1 VP will probably win the table. It's not good in my opinion.

Please explain WHY it is not good. or: Have you been reading this thread and the other threads involving this subject?

Ok.
Primo: There are currently as I know two CCG which survived golden era of card games - Magic and Legend of the Five Rings. Those aren't multiplayer games like V:TES. In Magic players have to win two games to score 2-0 or 2-1 when time limit ends it'a a draw. In L5R (which I am playing) when time limit ends you decide a winner random (this is horrible). In top 32 and/or top 16 you will have a time limit of 80 minutes. Shall the match not conclude in a given time we use the Palmer rules:
* if the first game is not concluded – it is continued until the victor emerges and He is the one who shall pass;
* if the time is called during the second game - the match ends, the victor of the first game becomes the victor of the match;
* if the time is called during the third game – the players get additional 30 minutes, after that time if the match is not concluded, the victor of the first game becomes the victor of the match. So there is a time limit.

BUT

Secundo: In Magic in Top 8 there is no time limit. In L5R Top 8 and higher shall be player without time limits.

Tertio: In V:TES we have 5 players, game is complicated (like L5R not Magic) and most importantly you have to take serious decisions so there is a lot of thinking and consideretion. That's why games are long. So it should be time limit. But in case of Magic and L5R you are no longer taking in account plays from preliminary. Carte blanche. In case of V:TES there is a favour of player who had highest ranking from preliminary. He is in good position from the start. You are experienced V:TES player so tell me, wouldn't be it more fair (and it would promote agressive and faster play) to give a win in a case of tie to a player who scored first a VP in finals?

jhattara wrote:

If two players have performed equally well in the final (2-2, 1.5-1.5 or 0.5-0.5) the player that performed better in the preliminary rounds will have better performance throughout the tournament, thus making it logical to award the highest seed of the drawing players in the final the tournament victory. Anything else would be random.

I would say it is "reasonable" to award the highest seed the victory. It does not necessarily follow logically. Alternate tournament victory conditions could also be valid.

Jeff wrote:

jhattara wrote:

If two players have performed equally well in the final (2-2, 1.5-1.5 or 0.5-0.5) the player that performed better in the preliminary rounds will have better performance throughout the tournament, thus making it logical to award the highest seed of the drawing players in the final the tournament victory. Anything else would be random.

I would say it is "reasonable" to award the highest seed the victory. It does not necessarily follow logically. Alternate tournament victory conditions could also be valid.

I think this is well-said. But, may I ask: if awarding the highest seed the victory in the final in case of a tie does not necessarily follow logically, then to you, something else must. What is that something else, specifically?

karaoke contest