Re: Continuous scoring

[Dave Ahn <ahn@vec.wfubmc.edu>]

On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:07:55AM -0700, Tom Holub wrote:
> 
> You also are assuming that we don't care about the effect on the 
> predictability of games.  Your system makes game results more predictable;
> the existing predictability is already too high.

Yes, I am.  But so do you.  Shortening the gametime to 60 minutes also
makes the game results more predictable because irrelevant portions of
the game are simply cut out.  Both ideas yield the same result: a more
interesting game.

> You have a fallacy in your thinking here.  A team that is behind 15-5 in
> planets but has 25 armies is not behind by 5 planets in the same way that a
> team with no armies is.

I intentionally said "successfully delivering 25 armies" as opposed to
"being up by 25 armies" to avoid this misunderstanding.  Oh well.

> Trading control of territory for consolidation of resources is not just
> a netrek strategy, it's a war strategy, and often an effective one.

Yes, it is.  However, it is seems to be the _only_ effective strategy in
use now between two reasonably equal Netrek teams.  If football had a
strategy that consistently outperformed others like in Netrek, it would
become a lot less interesting.

> Again, with this kind of system the game is over 30 minutes before the
> end.  Emprical evidence shows that 11-8-1 or closer is the expected
> score between two reasonably equal teams in a 90-minute game.  If behind
> behind 11-8-1 is now a winning condition, you've now given the team that's
> AHEAD a great incentive to play passively and store armies; how are you
> going to get a 12-7-1 advantage against a team that just controls their
> front and never tries to drop armies in your space?

Given two equal teams, the advantage should be close or equal to zero, so
your scenario wouldn't happen.  If one team dominates during opening, then
the opposing team has the incentive to aggressively win the mid-game to
negate the advantage.  Even if one team gains both handicaps going into
the end-game, the granularity of the advantage should be relative to the
degree of dominance.  I used the fixed half-planet handicap to illustrate
the point.

You have valid observations about this system, but I think that some of
them are overstated or at least addressable.

-- 
Dave Ahn <ahn@vec.wfubmc.edu>        |  "When you were born, you cried and the
                                     |  world rejoiced.  Try to live your life
Virtual Endoscopy Center             |  so that when you die, you will rejoice
Wake Forest Univ. School of Medicine |  and the world will cry."  -1/2 jj^2