Hi!

So far what we use is based upon battle results win-draw-loss, in that order.
Win beats everything.
Loss is the worst.
Draw is better than loss.

Whenever there is a tie at the end of the day, we add up summa goals claimed in all battles to decide whoose bigger.
If that is tie, then we flip a specific lucky coin created in a very infamous Empire.

This may not be the fastest method, altough we cut the battles in TURN 4, so there is no roll for 5th. In this case the draw remains, without tiebreak stuff.

The reason why we use this, beacuse it's reeeeeeeaaally simple.

_________________
Epic Commander of the Prassium Invasion Troops 214th Regiment
***Action is our prayer. Victory is our offering.***

The last few tournaments I've been to here in Sweden has blatantly stolen and used the epic uk scoring system.

Yes, the EpicUK scoring system is what we use in our tournaments here in Norrköing. I really like it!

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

Epic UK scoring:

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

I do like the UK system, but I will admit I tend not to think about it during a game. I have been caught out by this recently, when the game was obviously going my way and I was able to win in the third, but afterwards I realised what I should have done was deliberately let it go to 4 turns so I could clean up all the goals and win by a bigger points margin. This is pretty rare though. Basically if you can get an extra 2 goals next turn, you should let it go to another turn (if you want to take the risk of course!).

If I were designing one from scratch I'd probably borrow the football system, similar to commissar holt's. That is:

Win = 3 points
Draw = 1 point
Players with equal points totals are separated by goal difference, then goals scored. I'd probably also include bonus goals for winning earlier like above.

The only difference in the end to the epic UK system would be that it guarantees that it is always better to win - it's not possible for win/loss/loss to be better than win/win/win.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

I prefer the football system as its clear and simple. Tiebreaker are Objectives, then Vicotry Points. Fast, simple and efficient.

_________________
My blog - A man without a mountain of unpainted lead is no real man!

With respect the only circumstance where a WLL record could beat a WWW record in the Epic UK system is for three wins player to win all his games by 1 goal in the 5th turn or more, while the losing player would have to Win 4-0 in 3 and lose by one goal in the 5th turn for both his loses. Lottery odds for that ever happening at an event.

The basis of having a variety of points is to provide a more granular sort so match ups are easier for the TO to generate, and believe me if you field is 12 or less trying to stop repeat games between players is hard enough.

_________________
@MephistonAG for all sorts of twitter madness

If objectives are a tie breaker then a player that could win 2-0 in turn three, but has his opponent in so much trouble that a 5-0 is nearly guaranteed with another turn would back off, not win in turn three, and batter his opponent in turn four.

This has happened to me before the UK adopted the sliding score system, and it really isn't any fun for the poor player getting beat up to improve another players tie break. I welcome any system that tries to discourage such gamesmanship.

_________________
@MephistonAG for all sorts of twitter madness

In the tournaments I hosted and played, there was never such an issue. Perhaps I just didn't notice. Both systems have their issues. Not perfectly sure which system is the best :/

_________________
My blog - A man without a mountain of unpainted lead is no real man!

I haven't got much experience with large Epic tournaments outside of a couple in Berlin, but from other games (Warhammer, Warmachine, Netrunner) I've really come to appreciate simple win-loss-tie systems, with strength of schedule as tie breaker if necessary.
I dislike any system which affects how you play the game, which any system that tries to quantify something beyond win or lose does. Strength of schedule is almost always granular enough, and while it says something about how you played it's not something you can affect with your army list or in-game decisions.

_________________
- Ulrik

Odd that in the both the US and UK WM/H communities strength of schedule is becoming rather unpopular as the first sort for events.

As others have said there is no perfect system. I like the UK scoring as it rewards winning your game in the 3rd turn, and gives a small boost to losing in 4th turn or more.

_________________
@MephistonAG for all sorts of twitter madness

yeah the system employed in the Euro championship doesn't incentivise you to try and lose by as small a margin as possible... in fact to save time, if the writing is on the wall, you may as well concede the game to keep the schedule ticking over..... some of the very best games I've played have been real head-scratching losses 'how can I stop him winning this turn and drag it to turn 4?' there is literally no point trying to do this with the alternative system

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator