The New MS Scoring system, HOT or NoT?

[knobbs]

Originally posted by Super Fly
but when have u ever seen a score board like that?

Pretty much every event.

Look at any NPPL scoreboard. There are a group of teams in each '100s' level that usually means they won x number of games...i.e. between 300 and 400 points means you've probably won 3 games.

Originally posted by Dark Warrior
Excuse but how the hell do the top scores relate to the bottom ones
Assuming Team A won 6 games then they will have at least 18 not 6 pts

They don't, but they have the same logic. The top scores mean that the top teams all probably won 6 games. They'd all have that 18 score, and you'd have to go to "ED" to figure out the who's ahead, which is way more confusing in my book.

Originally posted by Intheno
however I can tell you that the NPPL decided not to run the system after applying the system to last seasons results. It threw up far to many draws.

Thank you, that proves my point exactly.

 

[Russell Smith]

We have re-scored div A at the last league event and it did change the order.
We did have to change it to suit our penalty system because the Mills use a 1v1 system and we use penalty points so it was hard to transpose the scores across.

We need a full result set where they use 1v1s and we will be able to check it then.
Another idea is I could make up typical scores for an event and see if the end order changes.
I think this would work best on a more games played, could produce to many copied results in only 8 games, like the football league.

Russ

 

[Intheno]

its not that the end order changes, as if you introduce enough variables, the placings stay the same, but they would still show the same score in the league table, and you then have a bunch of variables to explain, which in my opinion is more confusing than the current system of 100 max points. If the public can't understand the new scoring more easily, and at a glance, then there is no point changing as that was the original ethos behind the scoring, not that the Millennium would know the original ethos I suppose....

 

[Nick Brockdorff]

I was bored......

.....so I went and changed last years HB prelim results to the new system.

Here's how they compare:

Original scores:

Dynasty 696
Joy Division 696
Naughty Dogs 687
Team Rage 686
Smoke 645
Arsenal 605
Tonton Flingueur 597
Avalanche 526
Nexus 523
Redz Hurricanes 518
Bushwackers Intl. 469
Brass Eagle 451
Bad Company 416
XSV 387
Tippman Effect 350
Sedition 341
Godspeed 319
Tonton Acyd 319
Shockwave U.K. 259
Eclipse Factory 243
Triple Tap 160
Organized Crime 84

Under the new system:

Dynasty 21/30
Joy Division 21/30
Team Rage 21/24
Naughty Dogs 21/21
Smoke 20/20
Arsenal 18/16
Tonton Flingueur 18/15
Avalanche 15/14
Redz Hurricanes 15/8
Nexus 15/7
Bushwackers Intl. 14/9
Brass Eagle 13/18
Bad Company 12/-6
XSV 11/13
Tippman Effect 9/-1
Sedition 9/-7
Godspeed 9/-15
Tonton Acyd 9/-15
Shockwave U.K. 6/-11
Eclipse Factory 6/-15
Triple Tap 3/-24
Organized Crime 0/-28

Makes a few changes - in this instance not in terms of qualification, but it COULD have.

Loosing a game BIG, has a bigger impact in the new system... so the question is if teams will change their game... or if this is too little a change to actually have a severe impact on the way teams play?

One thing is certain... in those 1on2 or 1on3 situations - the lone player will to a greater degree try to salvage the 1 point - rather than trying make a game winning move, which he would have under the old system.... because that 1 point can mean a world of difference, when comparing to other teams that end up 5 and 3 (for instance) after the prelims.

So I think the end game will be slower and played more conservatively with the new system.

Nick

 

[Dark Warrior]

If it makes only a slight change then its still a good system
Just because we have been using the 100 point per game system does not mean its the best. In the UK the system has at least 3 different versions because of the different breakdown in how points are attained. The 3 point system is the way forward. My only change is that the 2 points goes to the team in possession of the flag end of story - fine detail - must has grabbed the flag, moved it into you possession and no more that 1 yard away from person in possession, person in possession must take possession of flag, therefore must grab the flag

 

[knobbs]

So the top 3 teams at HB all having the same score isn't an issue? Posting a score as 20/30 is supposed to be easier for the 'non-paintball audience' to understand? Choosing one team over another that have the same score based on something not even on the scoreboard is clear to that same audience?

Are you people on crack?

True, just because we've been using the 100 point system doesn't mean it's the best system, but the system as described here is garbage. Introducing a new system is supposed to fix a supposed problem by making scoring more understandable, not maek that problem worse!

 

[ascutt]

Knobbs

I just did the same calculation and Nick has made a mistake, the top four would be as follows:

Dynasty 21 / 30
Joy Division 21 /30
Team Rage 21 / 24
Naughty Dogs 21 /21

 

[Nick Brockdorff]

Yep....

....Scutty's right.... mistyped



Nick

 

[knobbs]

Typo or not, I still don't like it.

How is a major score and a minor score (with a tie breaker being a variant that can't even be seen in the play of this particular tournament) any less confusing than a number score?

I'm not convinced that the 100 point system is so cryptic anyway. It's just that the public doesn't know it. In Football (American) you get 6 points for a touchdown, 3 points for a field goal, 1 point for a PAT, or you can go for the 2 point conversion. That's not exactly easy to pick up immediately, but once you are told it's no big deal and millions of people seem to be okay with it when they watch on TV every week.

 

[fierce]

And even the MS delivers an example of the the new scoring system:

http://www.millennium-series.com/MS05ExampleNewScoring.pdf