BHGS Scoring System for FoG V3

[petedalby]

We have used the 25-0 scoring system for many years for BHGS events and wish to get your view on any proposed change.

The former International Team Challenge and the Winchester based event Belgarum have a 30-0 scoring system which is designed to encourage and reward more aggressive play. In this system you receive twice the points for your opponents losses whilst adding the points left of your own army.

There has been a proposal to move to a 35-0 scoring system. This uses the ITC / Belgarum system and adds a bonus 5 points for sacking your opponent’s camp provided you’ve not lost your own. Or a bonus 5 points for breaking your opponent’s army provided your army is unbroken.

This poll will run until the end of February.

[ney63]

Im for the 35 0 option

Andy

[philqw78]

How do you score 35?

[petedalby]

How do you score 35?

By breaking your opponent's army with no loss to your own. So you keep 10 points from your own army - add double the losses from your opponent - another 20 and then add a 5 point bonus.

Looks like change is coming - 13 votes cast so far and only 1 of those is to stay with 25-0.

We will run with the majority view for Roll Call.

[petedalby]

So 1 week in and the votes are currently 2 to stay as we are. 8 prefer the ITC / Belgarum 30-0 whilst the majority - 13 - wish to move to 35-0.

Fortified camp anyone?

[hazelbark]

It may be useful to look back at 1-2 recent comps and see how the distribution changes. I realize that is imperfect as camp sacking likely was not recorded.

What is the reason to incentivize the sacking of the camp in draws?

[notrum]

Fortified camp anyone?

Win the game so it does not matter or do not leave it hanging out to be taken.

While Rollcall has been 900pts for the last couple of years, this years Britcon is 900pts singles so maybe a fortified camp?

[philqw78]

IMO incentivising camp sacking will make games/players more defensive. If you don't want to risk your camp you must defend it, then you don't have enough troops for attack, so defend and don't risk it

[terrys]

IMO incentivising camp sacking will make games/players more defensive. If you don't want to risk your camp you must defend it, then you don't have enough troops for attack, so defend and don't risk it

Or it makes your troops fight rather than running away and letting your opponent take it.
Alternatively - if you can't defend it than you'l have to either take your opponents camp or win the battle!

[philqw78]

IMO incentivising camp sacking will make games/players more defensive. If you don't want to risk your camp you must defend it, then you don't have enough troops for attack, so defend and don't risk it

Or it makes your troops fight rather than running away and letting your opponent take it.
Alternatively - if you can't defend it than you'l have to either take your opponents camp or win the battle!

If you can defend it you will, taking troops from the fight and building a defensive position for your up coming draw. Better than losing and better than giving your opponent a free 5 points.

If you can't then why lose some troops and the camp. Losing the camp becomes a massive cost so build defensive armies

[terrys]

If you can't then why lose some troops and the camp. Losing the camp becomes a massive cost so build defensive armies

and call a 10-10 draw - while other players are scoring 30+ points for fighting and winning a battle or up to 18pts for fighting and losing !!

You seem to think that not giving 5pts to your opponent is the main decider in choosing your army. If you play to win the loss of a camp is immaterial.

[philqw78]

It's not the people who play to win whose behaviour needs to change, it's those that don't want to lose

[hazelbark]

This uses the ITC / Belgarum system and adds a bonus 5 points for sacking your opponent’s camp provided you’ve not lost your own. Or a bonus 5 points for breaking your opponent’s army provided your army is unbroken.

Does this mean even if I lose I can get 5 points for the enemy camp? Or if I am broken I don't get those points?

[hazelbark]

It's not the people who play to win whose behaviour needs to change, it's those that don't want to lose

Phil we all need to change behavior. All the good books say so.

[terrys]

Does this mean even if I lose I can get 5 points for the enemy camp? Or if I am broken I don't get those points?

It depends upon what you mean by 'lose'

If your army is broken you don't get the points.
If you 'lose' because you opponent has killed more of your army than you have of his.

For example - you lose 8 attrition points but you only cause 4 attrition points on you opponent (including taking his camp) - currently the score would be 14-6 to your opponent.
Under the new scoring system you would get 2pts for what's left of your army, 4 pts doubled for killing points of his army plus 5 points for sacking his camp.
Your opponent would get 6 pts for what's left in his army, plus 8 pts doubled for killing points in your army.

So the scores would be:
You:.......... 2 + 4x2 + 5 = 15 pts
Opponent:.. 6 + 8x2 = 22 pts

[petedalby]

IMO incentivising camp sacking will make games/players more defensive.

So vote for one of the other options.

[philqw78]

The 35-0 option without plus 5 for camp isn't available

[prb4]

The 35-0 option without plus 5 for camp isn't available

Which is why I voted for 30-0, because I agree that giving 5 extra points for sacking the enemy camp MIGHT lead to defensive play.

[terrys]

Which is why I voted for 30-0, because I agree that giving 5 extra points for sacking the enemy camp MIGHT lead to defensive play.

But may equally lead to more aggressive play. An aggressive player MAY take the enemy camp in a drawn game, a defensive player never will.
Both the 30 and 35 point systems punish defensive play. Scoring 10 points from a game instead of a potential 30 or 35 is almost equivalent to losing.

When you setup your army to attack the enemy, there's nothing more frustrating than to see the him turn to the flank and march away into a corner - leaving you just the 2 attrition points for his camp. You then have to spend the rest of the game trying to get into a position to make an attack before time runs out. You'd at least get the benefit of the +5pts if he does that with the 35 point system - with the double score for the 2 attrition points you'd get a 17-9 draw instead of an 11-9 draw. Take a few more attrition points and you get can easily end up with a respectable 20+ points score.

[petedalby]

This is quite fascinating. Only 23 votes so far but over 430 views. So that's a lot of people sitting on the fence or some compulsive viewers!

Which is why I voted for 30-0, because I agree that giving 5 extra points for sacking the enemy camp MIGHT lead to defensive play.

As did I. But Terry makes a good case for 35-0. I set up the poll so that people can change their vote before the end. It will be interesting to see if anyone does so.