Request for scoring option: all non-winners are equal

[Romain672]

I will insist: read my last message.

Without a solution for what I said, this request can just go nowhere.

[MrBeardy]

He did read your post. He said it was a niche argument that doesn't happen in real life. People don't look at ELO. People stuck in last place just want the game to end and if they try and trade silly it will be to first place to get the game finished. However they will struggle to crazy trade as you can only exclusively offer when it's another person's trade when they give you the chance and it is difficult to signal trade intent outside of this. On the losing players own turn they could do big offers but all could try and accept however...People are reluctant to accept big too-good-to-be-true offers on other players turns because of risk of either a 7 roll or a monopoly card wiping out their gains before they get the benefit. So I don't think it very likely either.

Can you find some real life examples of this behaviour to support this hypothetical musing? Let's say just five examples?

[ChiefPointThief]

The real issue isn't the elo system but that catan itself is a flawed game.

[ufm]

If elo is important at all then only winning should matter. You should never play for 2nd place in pretty much any board game.

Official tournament rules using VPs as a tiebreaker:
https://www.catanstudio.com/wp-content/ ... s-2021.pdf

I mean, what all the fuss is about?

[MrBeardy]

If elo is important at all then only winning should matter. You should never play for 2nd place in pretty much any board game.

Official tournament rules using VPs as a tiebreaker:
https://www.catanstudio.com/wp-content/ ... s-2021.pdf

I mean, what all the fuss is about?

ikr? People get angsty about losing road and army at the death and coming last I think is the best way I can reason it. To me that's just seems like bad tactics though. But yeah, it does seem a fuss about nothing. Well done for finding official rules to support the use of VP.

[Stroom]

This is only for a tournament setting. In normal games this does not matter.

[Romain672]

Can you find some real life examples of this behaviour to support this hypo

Was this adressed to me?
If so, in Love Letter, player are totally playing for second place and not first one.

You don't have an example of what would happen if you do what was proposed by OP, but what I said just look like something which could happen.


I wanted to make all non-winners equal for a long time, but since I find my last argument, I kinda change totally my opinion into that. Look like there is no good solution, and what is present atm is pretty good.
The only other solution I saw in another post is to give points like +5 for first, +2 for second, +0 for third, +0 for forth, +0 for fifth. But this seem to just find a middle place between the propositions, and not really to find a good proposition.

ikr? People get angsty about losing road and army at the death and coming last I think is the best way I can reason it. To me that's just seems like bad tactics though. But yeah, it does seem a fuss about nothing. Well done for finding official rules to support the use of VP.

No, when I'm playing I try to win, I don't try to maximise my chance to finish second.
That feel so weird to make a play to annoy the third player and let the first one get a big advantage.
And I know lots of players think identical. It's pretty hard to know how much since some people will never be on the forum, and internet gave me what I wanted to hear by making people having similar opinion than me answering my other posts

[MrBeardy]

i was talking about catan I think, it's a while since i posted that. Not sure what love letter has to do with it. This is a catan forum thread after all!

[michaelHastriter]

I'd like the option