GAC - points or score?

Defenderbuss
115 posts Member
edited June 17
Would it not be fairer basing the our group league table on total score rather than the points based system.

It’s not my thing gac, but for someone else who keen, for 2 out of 3 match’s my opponent in the final might of been slogging it out. My previous 2 opponents forgot to attack. I won mine on gp.

We are both on the same points here, all I need to do is now turn up for the final. Which, at this point I’m not complaining. Rules are rules.

A score base system give me the the choice now. Even if I get to the final, I’m not going to win if my opponent has attacked because his score is higher.

It simply gets reset at the end of each gac.
Post edited by Kyno on

Replies

  • flip side to this, person a wins 2 battles against people that went full offence and left their defences very light, so person a can basically max put banners.
    person b wins 2 battles against people that went full defence, he can't full clear but because opponents have hardly anything to attack with he wins.
    a and b could be equally matched but because of their opponents they have vastly different scores.
    same applies to those that have more gls than their opponent, took me 3 battles to kill slkr and I'd used my see to beat their rey, still very low banner wins though.
  • Your right. Can’t argue. It’s not exactly unfair now. Just a shout.
  • Waqui
    8496 posts Member
    If you win all 3 rounds you've performed better than the other 7 in your group - disregarding how many championship points you scored.
    If you win the final round why should your opponent end on 1st place even if they scored more championship points than you? You beat them.
  • Score is used for global leaderboard. Number of wins for ranking in the individual bracket. Seems fine to me.
  • Kyno
    30531 posts Moderator
    Score is used for global leaderboard. Number of wins for ranking in the individual bracket. Seems fine to me.

    This.

    You may win the battle without attacking, but due to not gaining points you are losing the war in the end.
  • Not if your gp is higher.
  • crzydroid
    5750 posts Moderator
    Wait, what is this about? You want a way to win GAC just based on an over-inflated roster without even attacking at all? That's not the way it works.
  • Not sure if you’ve read my post. I am not **** about gac, it’s not my thing. I am one of them who will put a defence down and leave it. Could care less if I finish bottom. I’ll still get the rewards. It’s all I’m **** about. Win or lose, I still get the rewards.

    Usually though, I don’t finish last. I don’t attack but don’t finish last. The last match I might have dable if I’m in the final because I’ve had a higher gp than previous opponent who didn’t attack.

    There’s no incentive for me to attack, I’m doing well at the minute without attacking.
  • crzydroid
    5750 posts Moderator
    Not sure if you’ve read my post. I am not **** about gac, it’s not my thing. I am one of them who will put a defence down and leave it. Could care less if I finish bottom. I’ll still get the rewards. It’s all I’m **** about. Win or lose, I still get the rewards.

    Usually though, I don’t finish last. I don’t attack but don’t finish last. The last match I might have dable if I’m in the final because I’ve had a higher gp than previous opponent who didn’t attack.

    There’s no incentive for me to attack, I’m doing well at the minute without attacking.

    I tried to read your post, but it was extremely difficult to follow.

    I still don't know what you want. If you don't fight, and your opponent doesn't fight, what exactly is your problem with the gp tie-breaker?
  • It’s only a debate/discussion.

    We currently use point for win system at the moment. Nothing wrong with it, apart from I’m sat here winning and doing nothing for it.

    Would a different way of winning points incentivise me to attack more?

    *Just a discussion.
Sign In or Register to comment.