Re: Discussion on scoring systems ...

I know, self-responding - on reflection, the inequality of survivor points
actually encourages needlessly eliminating players, since it denies them
points, and denying points to someone is almost as good as earning your own.
 On that basis alone, I'm not digging it.

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Sloth <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Sam Tyler <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > RE: A.  While people are venomous in face to face play, I don’t find that
> in a lot of my on-line play experience.  To be sure, there are exceptions.
> The biggest problem I have as a GM and as a player is that people don’t talk
> after 1901.  As a GM, I see the number of press go down by much more than
> half, even in “super” games with people who are well known.  I wanted
> something to promote more communication and this seemed a good way to do
> that.
>
> Some people are just more efficient in their communication :)
>
> > I don’t understand “an unlevel playing field” in “E”.  Could you provide
> an example?
>
> Game 1: One player is eliminated.  That player gets 0 pts, everyone else
> gets 100 pts, for a total of 600 pts.
> Game 2: Four people are eliminated.  The first person eliminated gets 0
> pts, the three survivors get 100 pts, and everyone else gets 0 >= X > 100
> pts, for a total of 300 >= N > 600 pts.  N cannot be 600, so survivor pts
> between the two boards are unequal.
>
> Personally, I don't really see this as a downside - players *should* get
> punished for killing players, since it actually takes them further away from
> a solo.  :)
> --
>
> Jonathan Swift  - "May you live every day of your life."
>



-- 

Samuel Goldwyn<http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/s/samuel_goldwyn.html>
- "I'm willing to admit that I may not always be right, but I am never
wrong."