View Full Version : Game scoring

David Brown
12-15-2011, 06:22 PM
Hi there gang

Page 13 Multi-Game Tournaments

Why not use this space at the top of the page to suggest an actual game scoring system.

I suggest the following, which is both zero-sum and allows some granularity to help avoid countbacks.


Tournaments consists of several rounds of games, each usually played to a time limit of one hour if there is no winner and loser. A Swiss chess competition format enables players potentially travelling long distances to play each round. Players compete each round for 25 tournament points (TP) and in subsequent rounds players with the nearest cumulated TPs are paired. Players should meet only once in the tournament if there are sufficient numbers.

The TP shared between players of a game must always total 25. The winner scores 25TP minus the score of the loser. The loser scores 1TP per element the victor counts as having lost. A loser canít claim more than 12TP if by some miracle they could claim more.

Where games are unfinished players score 12 TP + or Ė the difference in the count of elements lost. For example if one player had inflicted 3 losses but received 1 his TP will be 12 + 3 -1 for 14TP total, his opponent is 12 -3 +1 for 10TP. As games must total 25TP one extra point is given to the player with the higher score, if scores are equal a player losing their general concedes the extra point to a player with their general on table. If scores are still equal players roll a die for the extra point.

Bob Santamaria
12-15-2011, 06:26 PM
This still gives too many points to losers.

I prefer a chess type system, with a twist. A win equals 1 point. A loss equals quarter of a point. A draw equals 0 points.

Perhaps with some of Steve Webb's miniscule differentiators (factors of a thousandth or similar) based on element losses, etc.


Bob Santamaria
12-15-2011, 06:27 PM
It also gives far too many points to draws.

Draws should be dealt with harshly, preferably by the award of no points to those taking part.

12-15-2011, 06:29 PM
There are almost as many scoring schemes as there are tournaments. Dave Schlanger headed a committee that came up with one that has been use for almost 10 years at the Eastern US cons. Other folks have come up with theirs

Each of the members of the development team who actually run tournaments have a plan, so impossible to get agreement. Except for the reference to draws* in Phil's text, this is pretty generic. I suspect those who run tournaments will just do what they want, anyway.

*As Dave S pointed out quite well to Phil, "there are no draws in DBA" But he left that text in the section.

Rich Gause
12-15-2011, 06:50 PM
IMO A good tournament scoring system should make sure:
1)winners always score more than it is possible for a loser to score.
2)draws score no better than a loss
3) every element, camp, and general killed makes a difference to scoring.

I know the NASM system does that, most of the other scoring systems I have heard of do not but I am sure there must be some that do.

12-15-2011, 07:19 PM
It has been my experience that even if the official rules call their scoring system 'suggested' and not compulsory it becomes holy writ.

I tried to tweak the optional scoring system in Warrior to award more points for an actual finished battle with one side completely wiped out and was pilloried for my troubles.

Imagine if I had decreed that List Rules only apply to historical opponents. :p

Seriously though - DBA has many different scoring systems that are as much designed to suit the tournaments (which often have their own theme or tweak).

To me that is one of the charms of the game. Enough ink has been wasted on the economic motivations of non combatants and the number of times a die has to roll badly before it can be discarded.

Leave tournament scoring to the individual organisers please



12-15-2011, 08:14 PM
Scoring systems are very particular to the organizer of each tournament. In Spain we have 2 general ones coexisting, for example. One that only counts victory or loss (1 / 0 scoring system), with numbers of elements killed as the breaker of ties (or killed - own dead) and one that gives 8+element average to the winner and elements killed to the loser. Both work quite fine. We do not like the popular systems in the US, for example.


David Brown
12-15-2011, 08:56 PM
The author has included a section with the title 'multi-game tournaments' and includes a suggested time limit, pairing system, round draw system and hints at some features of game scoring he has heard of.

My view is if he is going to include a section on tournaments he should make it a tool kit where an organiser can use it do all the game-related admin. It might also be useful for a club night / league where players have no contact with exisiting competition tastes.

(He might usefully have canvassed the merits of pre-set vs player-generated terrain, open book vs theme comps.)

I suggested a zero-sum system which is a 'neutral' unbreakable one ideal for an organiser with limited experience or time to test a home-brew, as people have commented competition organisers will build their own system to massage some feature they think important.

By some fluke PB cautioned rightly against some bad systems, I played years of 6th and 7th ed where a multi-round comp was effectively determined by how thoroughly the good players clubbed out tyros in the openeing rounds.

DBM included a suggested 10-0 zero-sum game score and went on to be the most sucessfull competition set of rules ever, in any period (IM).

(OK that was also because it built on the elegance of DBA and made the game puzzle intricate enough that players could see their skills develop and be rewarded).



12-15-2011, 09:29 PM
Draws should be dealt with harshly, preferably by the award of no points to those taking part.

... and a good flogging :up


Bob Santamaria
12-15-2011, 09:36 PM
Zero sum systems encourage negative play

Rich Gause
12-15-2011, 10:28 PM
Does anybody have a scoring system other than NASM that:
1)winners always score more than it is possible for a loser to score.
2)draws score no better than a loss
3) every element, camp, and general killed makes a difference to scoring?

Xavis 1 point for a win 0 for a loss sounded promising if draws were scored as 0, and the tiebreaking count was winner kills minus losses for wins and losers kills for losses including camps and generals.