BlueRenner said:
Of course, you could use the idea of dropping the lower 50% of the games... but that just adds another layer of complexity into a system that's already a bit awkward. I think a new scoring metric is needed here.
- Bill
You nailed it. Keep it simple. However, the rest of your post was so complex I couldn't even follow you. Maybe you were you being facetious.
Anyway, Take a step back and forget about all the formulas and percentages for a minute. Ask yourself, who should be declared the winner.
The winner is the person who can achieve a victory condition and do it farther in front of the others in the same category.
Now, if there were 100 entries in each category, taking the top 50% or top 10 might be good idea, but there are not that many. So, keep it simple. Just count how many turns ahead of #2 you are. Now let's look at how elegant this plays out.
1. As people post their best times you can easily figure out how many turns you are ahead.
2. Submitting really bad (or even bogus) victory years doesn't effect anything.
3. If, for example, you're ahead 5 turns in the Space race, you are encouraged to play other victories and get within 4 turns of conquest, etc.
4. This rewards players for playing the harder win conditions. (Fewer competing entries)
5. It rewards players for playing the longer win conditions. (If conquest can be won in 40 turns, it can probably be won in 41 turns. Neither of these games took much thought or effort and don't deserve to be the ultimate winner. They probably won't with only a 1 turn lead.)
6. If you're the only one to win a culture victory in say 2000 AD. You're ahead of #2 by 50 turns (2050 AD). You will win this gauntlet (and should) unless someone else finishes a culture win too. Let's say someone is currently winning with a 10 turn lead in Diplomatic. It would be smart for them to try to get a culture win.
Now, if only one person achieves a Domination win in 1990AD too, they would win over the single culture person because the year is father ahead of the next (2050).
7. If you're ahead in one victory, you are now encouraged to share your strategy on the other win conditions so that players #1 and #2 finish closely. If someone pulls off a culture win, I can see the message board rallying to get someone else on the score board in culture. It's horrible to say "If you're the only one to win culture, you lose cus you're zero turns ahead of the average."
This could be the most fun/active gauntlet ever if we get it right.
I think this scoring system not only declares the correct winner, but encourages people to play all the win conditions. Sound good? Simple? or did I confuse you?