SCORING

[klanx171]

Im going to start by agreeing with mosberg on his idea about qualitative scoring. In Europa Twilight we have a very crude system in that regard by having 'tournament points' which give 3 points for a win of any kind, 2 points for a draw and 1 point for a loss; and battle points which is based on the actual points scored for men and vehicles destroyed (and for any point based VHs in the game) which then can give an accurate indication of actually how each side scored (also provided in the breakdown at the end of games by the program).

This is not a perfect system and can be improved but in ET players that have lost battles due to not fulfilling the victory condition of that battle has still gotten more battle points than the victor and thus one one table they are lower down but on the other (the battle points table) they rate and rank much higher and the person at the top of one table is not the same as the other.

This system was put in place to try and account for the qualitative differences I noticed in battle outcomes and to compensate players who lost strategically but may have won tactically. If such an idea could be extended into Mosbergs concept then we would have (IMHO) a system which notes both skill and outcome and rewards both as in several ET battles players sought to deny their opponents as many kills as possible and as such could not play a toe to toe style of play, attempting to preserve units to deny as many points to their Op as possible to get a win.

This was due to some battles being VH point based (noted as Take and Hold) and others being solely on battle points (noted as Search and Destroy). These differing battle types helped also to change play styles and again not perfect did allow different skill styles to come into play and avoid the WW1 style slug fests that often come about.