Casualities as tie breakers?

[aspie]

Tossing around a knock-out tournament idea, and wanted feedback on the validity and/or fairness of using the casualty count to determine games that are tied on touch downs scored.

Is this idea relatively fair on most teams or do some teams benefit more from this than others.

I have limited playing experience and was looking for feedback from the wider community?

[Digger Goreman]

Well, tournies should go extra halfs but I'm well aware of the extensive time that might entail....

So, using ideas from a past league I ran, we last used TDs scored and then casualties your team caused as tie-breakers....

You could use the values in the SPP system, straight-up, as a tie-breaker: 3 pts/td and 2 pts/cas.... So there is some precedent....

DG

[Grumbledook]

I think using touchdowns scored is unfair

should be touchdown difference, then cas difference imo

using just touchdowns scored gives a big advantage to the woodelves, skaven, pro elves etc

then using cas difference as well, some teams aren't hitting as much so have less chances to get as many cas (though typically they score more TD), though on the flip side those teams can either dodge away to get hit less, or perhaps have a big guy to hit back with

[Tripleskull]

Im guessing you would see alot of borring 1-1 games. Orcs, C dwarfs and dwarfs come to mind.

[Alamar]

Tossing around a knock-out tournament idea, and wanted feedback on the validity and/or fairness of using the casualty count to determine games that are tied on touch downs scored.

Is this idea relatively fair on most teams or do some teams benefit more from this than others.

I have limited playing experience and was looking for feedback from the wider community?

To answer your question directly I think that it's generally best to just play an "overtime" session to break any tournament / playoff deadlocks after 2 halves have been played and the score is still tied.

Using CAS counts may favor teams that are bashy [Orcs && Dwarves] while it may hurt teams like Elves who may not want to mix it up as much. On the other hand using total SPPs generated in the game might favor Elves a little too much because they tend to get way more Completions than other teams get CAS ....

I'd suggest just talking it over with your league, voting on what works best for you guys, and go from there. That system works pretty well ....

[Grumbledook]

what ever system you use will favour someone

extra time favours who receives the ball first who has the most players left

as I said with using cas difference AFTER TD difference its the most fair (if you have time restraints with regards to playing an extra half)

[mattgslater]

I can see having a no-OT or no-OT-in-the-first-round rule, especially if you're trying to squeeze multiple rounds into one day. If you're going to count Cas, make the tournament a point-total affair, with a separate meta-scoring system. This lets you get kind of creative.

For instance:
40 points for the winner
30 points each if tied
20 points for the loser
10 points if win by 2+ TDs
-10 points if held scoreless and lose by 2+ TDs.
2 points for each interception
2 points for each casualty inflicted
-4 points for each 41-58 on Cas table suffered*
-5 points for each 61-68 on Cas table suffered*
Minimum score: 0

* Results of 41-68 on the Cas table that are negated through a staffer, skill or card are counted as casualties but not as 41-68 results.

Want more options?
4 points for suffering 0 casualties
2 points for suffering exactly 1 casualty
-3 points for inflicting 0 casualties and losing the game.
-2 points for inflicting 0 casualties and tying the game.

[Grumbledook]

that will take some balancing ;]

[mattgslater]

Of course. It was off-the-top. Our league has tournaments following, but they're invitational and small, and besides postseason tournaments tend to have different structural concerns from one-off tourneys.

We sometimes do away with OT in elimination tourneys: the reg season is played for seeding, with all teams making the playoffs, playing highest vs. lowest like in the NFL. In the absence of OT, we give the lower-ranked player the onus of affirmatively winning; a tie goes to the higher seed as a reward for reg-season success. We've toyed with the idea of only eliminating the two lowest-ranking losing teams per round, rearranging seeding after each playoff round, using a tie to put both players in the middle seeding.

[Alamar]

what ever system you use will favour someone

extra time favours who receives the ball first who has the most players left

as I said with using cas difference AFTER TD difference its the most fair (if you have time restraints with regards to playing an extra half)

If the score is tied 2-2 how can there be a TD difference?? Isn't the caller talking about specific tiebreakers in an actual game???


If you need to get matches over with in a hurry and don't have time for OT then I'd recommend something like:
-- look at the TV of the players that can be fielded by both sides if there were to be an OT and let the high TV team win
-- a coin flip
-- use any of the other systems already recommended ...

[Pug]

Why not add TD Diff' and Cas Diff together to decide the winner?

Heavy hitters but low scorers could balance Heavy scorers and light hitters.?

[Grumbledook]

usually bashing teams that win would have got a few cas as well

as opposed to light teams that win, who perhaps didn't, or even won and got beat up as well

those two facts balance out the touchdown difference as the best first decider imo

[plasmoid]

I like these OT rules. Reasonably fast for tournaments.

Roll to see who chooses.
Offense sets up first.
If the offense hasn't scored by the end of its 5th turn, then the defense wins.

Cheers
Martin

[Warpstone]

Casualty Count is probably unfair because you're then penalizing teams for playing their positional game (i.e. agile teams).

There are lots of good ideas in this thread but the one I would adamantly argue that you don't use is: coin toss. It just leaves a really bad taste in everyone's mouth to have a 2-3 hour long commitment decided on a toss.

I've always wondered if a college football-style OT might work:
- offence sets up first at 7 squares away from the endzone.
- defence sets up
- offence gives a player the ball and then play resumes as normal for 2 turns.
- once the offence finishes its 2-turn attempt to score, the sides flip and the team that was originally on OT defence tries to score.

Maybe the amount of spaces away from an endzone is up for debate (don't want to make it too easy for speed teams), but it does give both teams a shot deciding the game with real play.

[Toby Wardman]

In TYBBL we use casualty difference or touchdown difference (cumulative over a season or tournament) as a tie-breaker. Whichever is better for each individual team. So, for instance, if a Wood Elf team has TD difference +6 and cas difference -5, and a Chaos team has -3/+7, the Chaos team gets ranked more highly (+7 beats +6).

This works reasonably well over the course of a season, and it means that neither bashy teams nor agile teams get an advantage. Not sure it would work brilliantly over a short tournament, though, as many of the numbers would be too close together.