$35.00
Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
11 Posts

Terra Mystica» Forums » Organized Play

Subject: [Cross Post - Closed] Additional tie-breaker in the league standings? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Vika
msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Hi all,
In some situations (happened to me this time) there can be a tie in the league on points as well as on number of 1st, 2nd, 3rd places. Currently this is broken by average percentage of winning scores, whereas it seems more fair to do it on personal matches within the league.
E g if out of two people tying one person beat the other one in both games, they should come ahead in the standings. Or this can be done on sum of points awarded to both in the 2 common games. Similar tie breaks are used in many other games tournaments.
If the tie is among 3 people (not sure there were cases) and/or there's no clear hierarchy - than this can be done on average percentage.
Usually resolving this wouldn't change much, but it would affect who's getting promoted if the tie is for the first place.
Also, probably more often, it's relevant for relegation.
too late for me this time, but at least it would be fairer for others in the future.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Kessels
Netherlands
Bussum
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Re: Additional tie-breaker in the league standings?
Of course this cannot be changed.....at least not mid season. Next season is ok

No seriously, as long as you are not competing against the same players in every single game, the outcome of the indivdidual scores can and will be impacted by the other players that you're not playing against in every single game too. So maybe the one that is closest to the winner in each game might have done a better job. But I get the arguments of individual balance too.

I believe in most soccer competitions they look at goal balance as a tie-breaker in leagues ranking before looking at individual games. Some people must have thought about this a long time.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Silly Words
Australia
flag msg tools
mbmb
Re: Additional tie-breaker in the league standings?

An interesting idea, but a bitch to implement. So much more work than the current implmentation.

What if it's a three way tie? Each have 2wins, 1 second, 1 third. Even if it's just a two way tie, then you have to write code saying "if it is even after using this criteria, then go to the percentage points again".

As this is all offered for free, I'm for the cheap and reliable solution.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthias Reitberger
Germany
Nürnberg
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Additional tie-breaker in the league standings?
I don't like this change. In this and the last season I am doing much better in games I start first or second. I think that's the main cause of loosing both games against my closest contender last season.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evil Roy
United Kingdom
Sutton
Surrey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Additional tie-breaker in the league standings?
I thought this same idea had been suggested and dismissed before.

If I remember correctly, the main arguments against it are that it's more complicated than the current method and doesn't work for three-way ties.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vika
msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Re: Additional tie-breaker in the league standings?
Evil Roy wrote:
I thought this same idea had been suggested and dismissed before.

If I remember correctly, the main arguments against it are that it's more complicated than the current method and doesn't work for three-way ties.


Ah, thanks. Found and read the other thread - https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1502218/snellman-league-sta...
Apologies for cross post then.

The main difference between these threads as the previous one mainly discusses various tiebreakers instead of (or swap order with) the current 2nd tie breaker on number of wins, 2nd, 3rd etc. This thread was proposing to have an extra one after this 2nd tiebreaker (or use the % one as a backup only in cases with no clear head-to-head comparison outcome).

Understand Daniel's point of view about simplicity and representation too. I guess you can do something like add another column to show where extra tie-breakers activated, though agree - it's not as sleek a design anymore.

Re: SillyWords, I think there can be relatively simple algorithm where you only use this if there is a clear head-to-head winner, same with a 3way-tie (one player did not lose all his games to the other two, second player did not lose to third one in their 2 games respectively). And if there's no clear head-to-head - use the remaining tie-breaker. Though after the first 2 tie-breakers are applied, I doubt we would ever get to a 3 way tie to be solved by the 3rd tie-breaker.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Stokes
United States
North Augusta
South Carolina
flag msg tools
Duck Season!
badge
I also believe that you met the King of the Forest, Mei, and meeting him is a sign of good luck.
mbmbmbmbmb
This recommendation is how tie breakers are determined in Swiss Style tournaments.

Break down of who wins in tie breaker situations:

1. Most Points
2. Number of times you beat those you tie in points with
3. Weight of opponents (this is irrelevant here since everyone plays everyone)
4. Difference in score
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dhrun
msg tools
You could argue different ways and at the end of the day it's a matter of taste, but personally I always found "direct compare" rather arbitrary and "average percentage of winning scores" the most meaningful tiebreaker.

Deviating from your topic..:
I do not care too much as long as the rules are not changed over and over again, but actually I would remove the current "number of better placings" tiebreaker and _only_ use "average percentage of winning scores".

I think the all-or-nothing types like Matthiaswhistle already have their way because victories and second places are rewarded much higher than 3rd over 4th places - which I do not consider especially objective, but appreciate from a dramaturgical point of view
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Wolfpacker
United States
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmb
Dhrun wrote:

Deviating from your topic..:
.... I would remove the current "number of better placings" tiebreaker and _only_ use "average percentage of winning scores".

I think the all-or-nothing types like Matthias whistle already have their way because victories and second places are rewarded much higher than 3rd over 4th places - which I do not consider especially objective, but appreciate from a dramaturgical point of view


LOL! Yeah! What if I'm 3rd place by only 1 point??!?!?!?!!!!!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert
Germany
Bocholt
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
JamesWolfpacker wrote:
Then you're third and the other player is second. That player may have put a lot of thought into beating you by just that one point...ninja
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mikael Johansson
Sweden
flag msg tools
I like the system as it is, but if it would be changed, I'd prefer the same change as Dhrun is suggesting, and for the same reasons. As victories are already rewarded so much, I find them overly rewarded when, for instance, 2-0-1-1 is beating 1-2-1-0 (which is, as I see it, usually a stronger achievment).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.