Invasion Update: Tiebreaker Victory Condition

[Malok]

Objective: Eliminate invasion draws & provide incentive for competitive writing.

Staff Effort: Staff would have to take into consideration one more factor during invasion judging.

Suggestion: Implement a final, "tiebreaker" victory condition for Invasions.

Currently, the even number of victory conditions has caused the reality of "win by draw" for the defender. Furthermore, in cases where the judges believe both factions tied on a single condition (i.e. both factions weren't salty and thus there is no winner in the OOC category) there can also be an ultimate "win by draw." These factors discourage invasions from being launched.

I believe implementing a final victory condition as a tiebreaker is the answer. This victory condition would only be assessed during invasions where there is a draw - any other invasions where there is a clear winner would only use the existing four. This victory condition can be anything, but I personally suggest the following:

Tiebreaker: In the event that both factions are tied in victory conditions, an overall judgment of the flow of battle will determine the winner. In this category alone, PvP will be judged: such as victorious duels, Objectives seized, and who overall is winning the battle.

Thoughts: Invasions, by their very nature, are Competitive and can breed sodium from launch to conclusion. But one of the more discouraging aspects of Invasions, currently, is the reality that your opponent can win via draw. It is a simple frustration that I feel can be remedied with a tiebreaker victory condition.

Now, while I'd be happy with the tiebreaker being practically anything to prevent this reality, my preference would be taking actual PvP into consideration again. While story is important and is the lifeblood of Chaos, I feel the total emphasis on story alone devalues any skill brought to the table by invasion combatants. Perhaps it is the PvP centric background I have, but the thought of there being no gain to out writing an opponent doesn't feel appealing.

But, should this tiebreaker be implemented as suggested, those who have combat prowess would be rewarded when the scores are tied. Only.

What do you think?

 

[King Iedolas Solidor]

I think is a nice idea.

 

[Jsc]

But one of the more discouraging aspects of Invasions, currently, is the reality that your opponent can win via draw.

Nah. Draw means nothing changes. Which is fine.

I feel the total emphasis on story alone devalues any skill brought to the table by invasion combatants.

Nah. Story is skill. Though, I admit that most duels are not taught, fought, or formatted for easy reading. Which can give the appearance of duels having less "story" than most other post types, sure. Would love to hear what some actual Judges think about these two words. Skill vs Story.

Pass for now.

 

[Scherezade deWinter]

Draw means nothing changes. Which is fine.

A Draw essentially means the invading faction lost. Same outcome, same consequences (or lack thereof). Let's, to begin with, call it what it is.

I feel the total emphasis on story alone devalues any skill brought to the table by invasion combatants.

I wouldn't phrase it like that, but I agree with the general idea - the current invasion format is a major anti-attraction thing for those who are yearning pvp. That said, while I think your idea is great, I don't think it'll satisfy the pvp'ers blood thirst, seeing as this won't even be present in every invasion judging. I'm still all for this idea though.

 

[Judah Lesan]

I remember when the map game was the life blood of Chaos... I cannot agree with this more. It may mean more sodium in those situations, but at least PvP will count for something again... after all that is how wars are often won.

 

[Gilamar Skirata]

Yes for me