You aren't comparing apples with apples. The problem is that you are taking results from a competition that promotes extremely aggressive play and then calculating what would happen with a scoring system that doesn't promote aggressive play.philqw78 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 10, 2018 7:16 amI thought the scoring was supposed to promote aggressive play.No, the primary purpose is to win the competition - this can be achieved by winning or drawing, or even losing
It can be seen above that it doesn't. It promotes draws. So get an unbreakable army and hope your enemy suicides on it (I remember Sp(O) DBM).
Or get one that is hard to catch and run around your enemy picking bits off using your prowess at just staying out of charge reach
3-1-0 for tournaments based upon and backed up by the game's scoring system works (since all you have said against it is either irrelevant, inaccurate or invented)
If you had the 3-1-0 scoring system at the challenge you would get different results. I've played in many more 3-1-0 competitions than you have and believe me, it's not a good scoring system. There were very good reasons why we moved away from it and all players were happy that we had - I think that tells a story doesn't it?