Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Ok, here's the final scores, based on what we've talked about so far, who is supposed to get 1st?

Player A-9 Points     7 Diff
Player B-9 Points     5 Diff
Player C-9 Points     3 Diff
Player D-9 Points     1 Diff

Here's the setup:
Player A lost to player B (somehow I missed this at the tournament...)
Player B lost to player C
Player C lost to player D

So
The order should have been, and was awarded as:
D gets 1st
C gets 2nd
B gets 3rd

Right?

This is just my 4.9 cents (inflation):

Because nobody beat all opponents that were tied, you go to the next tiebreaker: LS differential.

1st - A
2nd - B
3rd - C
4th - D

Now something I would like to see happen with tournament scoring is a breakdown of redeemed souls gained while being blocked versus those gained with no block ("free" souls).  I would like to have LS differential only look at redeemed souls gained while being blocked.  That's just my 6.3 cents.

This is just my 4.9 cents (inflation):

Because nobody beat all opponents that were tied, you go to the next tiebreaker: LS differential.

1st - A
2nd - B
3rd - C
4th - D

Now something I would like to see happen with tournament scoring is a breakdown of redeemed souls gained while being blocked versus those gained with no block ("free" souls).  I would like to have LS differential only look at redeemed souls gained while being blocked.  That's just my 6.3 cents.

I agree that's the way it should be, but I'm not certain if that's the way it is. The issue with that method is that sure D>C>B>A in terms of victories, however, there is someone out there who more than likely lost to A, B, and/or C but managed to win vs. D. Thus if this is person E, and say they lost to person A, then we have a loop: E>D>C>B>A>E. So just because E had another loss or two, it makes person A's "strength of schedule" less but it also makes person D's loss more "dramatic" since he was the only one who lost to someone outside of the top 4.

Honestly, I think head-to-head is a great way to solve one-on-one matchups of victory points. But I think that unless someone defeated everyone else that is tied in victory points with them if there are more than 2 people tied, then we have to go to LS differential as the easiest and most straightforward method. It's not perfect, but for a game that is about fun and fellowship, I don't think it has to be.

How would u define walk by?
What would TGT count as? Other ignore abilities?

I'm not sold on LS differential being so important someone could play weaker opponents the entire tournament u know

They can't possibly be playing "weaker" opponents all tournament if they keep winning. True, they may end up playing more weaker opponents than others if they lose early instead of later on, but such is the nature of the Swiss-style tournament setup. As I said, it's not perfect, but there is no truly "perfect" tournament system aside from single-elimination, but that would definitely be detrimental to fun and fellowship in most cases.

Let's try my proposal again

    1 - How many victory points do they have?
              (the more the better)
    2 - How many games did they play against ranked players (top 3 including ties)?
              (the more the better)
    3 - What was their winning % in those games?
              (the more the better)
    4 - What was their LS differential?
              (the more the better)

1 - Victory Points - They are all tied at 9, move on to the next question.
2 - Strength of Schedule - B & C played 2 top players, A and D only played 1.
3 - Success at the Top -
          3a - B & C are both 50% against top players.
          3b - A is 0% against top players.  D is 100% against top players.
4 - LS Differential - B has higher LS diff than C.

Rankings B, C, D, A

Note: I don't think it works this time.  It is obvious to everyone that A should be last since they NEVER beat a top player.  And I agree that D should be in 3rd because they played easier competition to get their VPs (only 1 game against top players).  However, I think that C should be above B due to the head-to-head win considering all other factors 1-3 are tied.  That should count more than LS Differential.  Therefore I need to add another question to my proposal.

Revised Proposal:
    1 - How many victory points do they have?
              (the more the better)
    2 - How many games did they play against ranked players (top 3 including ties)?
              (the more the better)
    3 - What was their winning % in those games?
              (the more the better)
    4 - Which player won head-to-head in their specific game?
              (the winner is higher)
    5 - What was their LS differential?
              (the more the better)

New Rankings: C, B, D, A

From the way they ruled NE Regs I agree with the way Techno did it because when scores are tied head-to head comes before differential. I'm not sure if this is under discussion but that's how the final results ended up.