Quote:
Originally Posted by sgreco
So all I have to say is: Any scoring system that ever gives people incentive to score on themselves at ANY point during ANY match needs to be re-evaluated.
What was wrong with the old days when the teams that won got the best seeds? What part of earning your seeding position isn't fair?
|
I think that if we're going to call it a competition/game, we should get the points we earned for winning a match. Yeah, I can see that being on a losing alliance isn't great all the time, but like - it's a game/competition. Not everything is even.
We thought of the idea of blocking our goals in a match to get zero points, just to prove a point that the system is just skewed strange.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EugeneF
Simple explaination: you want to beat your opponents, but only by a little.
|
Wasn't it like that last year? Or that's at least how I understood it (though I was just programmer and not anything with the field team).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koko Ed
How do you explain this to the average person off the street what's going on?
Whatever happened to making a game easy for the public to understand?
|
Yeah, I don't get this easier. If the smart kids (on my team/regional) can barely make sense of it, how can we expect a average person to? That doesn't make sense.
I don't know, it's just really confusing to me how things can be made so much to make everything seem "fair" in a competition where there are winners and losers. I can see where the GDC/Dean got the idea to make things "more fair" for the losing alliance, but at some point in life, we have to learn that not everything is rewarding in the big picture. In the team's picture, they learn so much only if they take advantage of it.
Still doesn't dwell with me, but like it is what it is. We have to make due with it.
-Tanner