TimmerB123 wrote:
NickName wrote:
I've never felt like the 60 minute time limit was enough for the typical SWM player to complete a 200 point game which was one of two reasons I opposed moving the championship to 200 points.
So the typical player is going to have to play a bit less cautiously than they prefer. Playing quickly well is a skill as much as anything else in the game. Now it's one that's being rewarded fairly heavily. Players not interested in developing that skill are unfortunately going to suffer a lot of 2 point wins.
I pulled this from another thread, but obviously it is relevant. I agree with what Nickname is saying here.
Perhaps it is simply a perspective change. Don't think of it as being punished for a 2 point win. Think of it was being awarded with a three point win. You did something awesome - you get an extra point.
Exactly. Like I told Brad yesterday, I would 100% support a 200 or 2 ruling from a judge, or a judge willing to look at a game at time and award 3 based on a clear winner being able to be determined (like a 187-100) with one piece left at low hps, or a couple of commanders left still in the back, where clearly the guy is going to win in another round or two. Either situation is acceptable to me. What is not acceptable are people reporting full wins that were 187-102 without the judge deciding that.
As the head judge, you have the power to award a full win when you deem it necessary, but that doesn't mean you have to use that power other than the issue of slow play. I'm totally fine with that. Sounds like for Gencon, we are better off going the strict route of 200 or 2, that's fine with me. It adds even another level of encouragement to finish games fully in the time limit for both players, and will hurt those players who either won't play fast enough. At Gencon we can/will have slips to sign. I'm not really sure what you all think this would actually do, but it's not an issue to have them.
Honestly, I think a much bigger issue is not this point is related to the top 4/8 games. Sure, a slow player could be eliminated in the swiss by this, but how do you stop it in the top 4/8? I've seen this actually be a potential problem without an easy fix. Generally however, the people who make the top 4/8 aren't the type of players who are really playing slow, but there it does exist that there is no motivation outside of extreme slow play/DQ threat for a player in this position.