I think Ryan is a liberal arts major who does a little visual basic on the side.

think about this fuckhead: your skill aint worth shit if you dont have luck, like your luck aint worth shit without skill. after some games luck distributes equally over all players. so stfu and play the game.

btw Christian Soldier??
are you living in the medieval ages? if you wanna play holy war I recommend you the game Stronghold Crusaders. You are retarded. The scoring system is good.

Wow, Shev looks slightly pissed off.

I could have said it in a friendly way to christiansoldier but shevar already got the message accross in a more to the point kinda way

Saying that luck 'evens out' is a dumb comment, regardless of how eloquently it was delivered. The same comment applies to any possible scoring system you can imagine. We could give out score purely by random draw at the end of the game. That would even out too...

The point is to have positive points correlate with the kind of play style that should be encouraged, wherein losing half the points the table is worth in round 2 has no correlation to skill.

I'm perfectly aware that the majority of humanity is to dimwitted to grasp this. Ryan can't, and he's above average.

Soldier, shevar (correctly) said that luck evens out. That doesn't mean points will have to even out as well.

How well you do with your good luck games and your good starting positions compared to how bad you do with your bad luck games and your bad starting positions will show in your points. If you are a skilled player, you will be able to maximize your gains in good games and also you will be able to minimize your losses in your bad games.

If you are not good enough, your score will stay 0. Depending on how good you are , your PPG will be higher.

This would be a good experiment to compare our skills: we both play 10 games where we both get exactly the same starts (also exactly the same start setups for the other players). I think if we both started the same 10 games (3 good starts/4 mediocre/3 bad) I am sure our points at the end would be very different... which means the current scoring system maybe isn't perfect but it certainly isn't retarded

I'm slightly with ChristianSoldier. Not that i think the system as a whole is retarded, but i definitely see his/her point. It always feels wrong when I start with the crappiest start ever, play my dice correctly, and get, say, second. Yet when I look at my points dom took such a huge chunk out of my score that I'm barely in the positives.

I certainly understand the idea of luck and starts evening out, but it often feels like a well played game doesn't receive the point reward it deserves. As it is, if one is playing for points at all, one is encouraged to play for dom rather than place. Sometimes that means attacking even when it's stupid to do so.

Here's a flaw I see.... settling is advantages. If you have a terrible start and grab as much dom as you can, when the dom bar comes up, it's often best to bail while you still have positive dom. I, personally, would much rather fight for a higher position, but fighting for the best position possible often hurts your score. That just doesn't feel right in my mind.

Sorry for the ramble :D.

What she said.

Debwa's got it. That sweet woman we wove fo being so smawt.

oh.... i thought everyone loved me for.................. other..... reasons