Treadmill look above. I'm recomending that the scores are then divided by the numbers present. Do you think that is fairer now?
Haha hate to be the thorn in The side but the same problem persists.
We could get max 18 points off of Texas that's 6 points average. Next time if they have all 4 and they play someone who uses only 3 like us that's a max of 36 points total and an average of 12, so we are still screwed. I think it should be averaged between the number of matches played.
Texas will only have 2 players for the whole tournie now as Tama Tones doesn't want to play.
I need to be on a comp to discuss this in greater detail.
Okay some quick math shows that going on averages:
EU 23/5 = 4.6 = 5
USA 22/4 =5.5 = 6
Virginia 16/3 = 5.3 = 5
Texas 2/2 = 1
Does that seem fairer now?
We only had 3 members present. Shouldnt our score be divided by three?
Ahh, I get you now.
So, does this work better by putting in the score exactly (2.7 and 0.3) or if the scores were rounded up, thus giving you 2.5 and Texas 0.5?
By that reckoning, EU had 1.53 and USA got 1.46, so we'd both be on 1.5 which would be an approximate draw.
Where did you get this method/idea from, Tread?
EDIT: Okay, i've got this now. Points won divided by games played. It's best to keep it as 2.7, 0.3, 1.5 and 1.5.
Thanks Tread I think you're right, the previous point system only works on the basis thatt every team has the exact number of players.
me two tics and i'll update the table.
U didn't know treadmill works for NASA?
I still think my way makes sense because why does Europe win but really ties America?
This is blowing my mind.
Or if there is a 3 person team vs. a 5 person team, we just turn it into a 3 vs 3 (the 5 person team picks the top 3?) just throwing something in but it may be too late for that.