EDH points scoring system
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on March 7, 2019, 11:41 p.m. by RoarMaster
So there has been talk of using a points scoring system in an upcomming Commander Tourney down at the nearby LGS, and I was wondering what sort of points scoring lists you all might have seen or used.
Did you like using a points list? What did you like or dislike about it?
The intention of switching to a points scoring system at the store is to make the tourney more inclusive for a variety of skill levels and deck values.
Hopefully the newer players will have a chance to accumulate points towards winning, even if they do not finish first(by being last man standing).
So far we have been considering the list berryjon had used in his slowgrow league, which I will c/p below.
For that matter, if you have any suggestions yourself there berryjon, that would be awesome too.
+4/+3/+2/+1 for 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Place at each table. If there are less than four people at the table, then drop the last placing points. No punishment for being short on players! +1 for being the first player to deal combat damage to another player. +1 for dealing lethal Commander Damage. +1 for casting your Commander 4 or more times. +2 if your Commander is a Planeswalker (because you can't get the previous bonus point). +1 for Saving another player. Defined as preventing another player from leaving the game due to the actions of a third party. -1 for attacking the player in Last Place (once per table). -1 for killing all remaining (2+) players on the same turn. -1 for not casting your Commander. -1 for winning the game due to an Infinite Combo. -4 for being an asshole. Yes. This is a serious line.
If anyone has any points lists they could suggest, that would be awesome! Thanks to erryone in advance! :D
DrukenReaps says... #3
Honestly I'm pretty much in agreement with cdkime but if you would prefer not to go his way than I would make at least one change.
GET RID OF THIS: "-1 for winning the game due to an Infinite Combo"
Under your system people already lose a point for killing off multiple players in a single turn so the combo players are just going to get a double whammy on their points in your system...
I get that people don't like playing against combo. It creates a feel bad but if you go and punish every feel bad thing in the game you are going to have a much longer list of negative points.
Further as a combo player I just wouldn't play with you guys if you are going to punish me so much for how I like to play... Maybe you don't have many combo players in your area but the ones you do have are going to get annoyed and just walk away.
A points value system should NOT be designed to turn players away from your group.
March 8, 2019 1:25 a.m.
rshistorysmuf says... #4
You could do Turn 10 victory is 1pts and each turn thereafter earns another point. Any victory before turn 10 is a -1 per turn before 10.
To avoid infinite combos - which kind of suck. Re introduce mana burn back into the game.
Another method is a 5 pod where the victory conditions are to beat the 2 players opposite and bonus for saving you 2 neighbours.
March 8, 2019 3:02 a.m.
As has been stated above multiple times, points systems generally are a detriment more than a help. People end up building decks to optimise points rather than building strong decks. And being punished for infinite combo will just push a large player base away.
In the past we have had intro tournaments, which were designed for a more casual setting. Basically it was an opportunity for experienced players to play jank, while new players could just play. And it was advertised that way. Super relaxed. Plus a lot of the more experienced players could act as mediators to tell certain players that if they were trying to play too competitive decks that they would very quickly be on the receiving end of much worse ones. But there was a reliance on players not being dicks (sometimes hard to control I know).
We also had prizes for best deck (whether it be really well themed, or just pure jank) as well as best sport, which encouraged player not to be arseholes. And these were given out for both competitive and casual tournaments.
I think with tournaments, well defined goals for the tournament work better than points. And having people who can mediate for those few players who don't seem to get it (we all know at least one) is better than trying to enforce fun via points.
March 8, 2019 3:28 a.m.
For me, competitive and multiplayer magic are impossible to mix. There is a reason 1v1 commander exists and why MTGO commander is 1on1. I would say just make a 1v1 commander tournament using the french banlist or MTGO banlist.
That said, if you want to do such a thing, my advice is - use the point system you stated and collect feedback every week and revise it based on feedback. That is the only way this can be done right.
March 8, 2019 5 a.m.
Loki_Lulamen says... #7
I played in a tournament/league using similar rules.
The anti-combo rule is just toxic. It promotes bad play and an unhealthy format.
The rule that was presented was: -3pts for killing all opponents within one turn cycle.
What this means is that you can kill 2 people in your turn. Then the 3rd scoops to make you loose the points.
Rules like this work within a small playgroup of friends that have no "prizes" on the line. When it comes to a competitive tournament, they break down as it allows for vengeful plays and hating someone out of a game.
My advice is either play EDH with the current rule set and just give points for placing. or do 1v1.
March 8, 2019 5:48 a.m.
I'm personally a big combo player, and I have extremely similar rules in the casual tournaments I've played at, and I hate how that -1 always seems to be there for infinite combos. I think it all depends on how competitive everyone is. I have some very competitive decks that can win the value and attrition game, but they can also win by turn 4 combo if I want to. If everyone is playing things like meren value or ezuri claw of progress and roon, and there's that one player with turn-2 breakfast hulk, then yeah, punish them for that, because that becomes an incredibly monotonous game, but if there's a diverse meta, don't punish all the combo players, it makes us sad. :(
March 8, 2019 10:47 a.m.
RoarMaster says... #9
I pretty much agree with most of what everyone has said here. Admittedly, there are a few exceptions, but not worth degrading over.
Thanks everyone for your input! Our group has decided not to use a points system for the next tourney. Yall Rock! :)
March 9, 2019 3:45 a.m.
PlatinumOne says... #10
Loki_Lulamen: how is a person scooping the same as killing them? a person shouldn't lose points for that.
March 9, 2019 5:36 p.m.
Loki_Lulamen says... #11
@PlatinumOne, because that's how bad the enforcement was. I was playing a Grixis kiki-twin deck. When I was hit by this level of bad sportsmanship, I complained to the organiser and was told: "you combo'ed off. Tough."
As I said in my previous post. Certain rules in a tournament can breed horrendous toxicity and I now won't play in a tournament unless the rules are fair for all players and deck archetypes.
March 10, 2019 2:29 p.m.
As other people have said before in threads like this, Spikes can always game the system. Case in point:
I choose Marath as my commander. Doing combat damage first won't happen that often, but if I can get him on turn 2, I can probably get it done sometimes.
On my combo turn, I'm going to cast Marath a few thousand times, draw my deck, and give him haste to deal lethal commander damage.
I'll bring each other opponent down to 1 life, and mindslaver the next player. Hopefully I can kill the last player with his hand, and then save him. Technically, I'm saving the 2nd player from the 1st.
During the 2nd player's upkeep, I ping him with Marath.
During my next upkeep, I ping the last guy.
I get every possible point, without losing any. GG.
March 13, 2019 4:41 a.m.
IMMG54 - That's a good point, which I previously did not consider. There is an extra incentive to scoop even in situations where your losing is not guaranteed. After all, it might be better for your tournament ranking to take second place in that particular match if it prevents the first place player from getting too far ahead in the overall ratings.
I will have to remember this concerns next time I see this topic raised.
RoarMaster - be sure to let us know how the tournament went, and how you ultimately determined the winner without an achievement/punishment-based point system. It's a topic I find pretty interesting, so I always appreciate having more data!
Caerwyn says... #2
I stated this on Pattern Recognition #95, but to repeat my previous concern, I do not think it is the tournament organizer's place to determine how people can have fun. Many of these rules either punish people for playing a certain way, or reward people for playing a certain way.
I've heard some horror stories of tournaments with similar point systems, where the meta became more concerned with racking up incidental points than winning--after all, you could come in second, but if you hit enough point objectives, you actually came out ahead of your pod's winner. That's not particularly healthy for the meta.
All that said, if you are committed to a point system, then I think the following rules would be reasonable:
First place = 4 points, but no bonus points.
All other places = 0 points. However, second place can get up to three bonus points; third place up to two bonus points; last place, one bonus point.
There are a wide range of bonus points, fitting every single type of gamestyle. Each only provides 1 point. There are no point penalties, so you are not punishing anyone for their style.
This set of rules discourages players from trying to game the number of points--after all, if they build a sub-optimal point-farming deck, they'll never beat the first place player's score; conversely, if they win, they don't receive any additional benefit for having built a point-farming deck. As such, you really should build a deck designed just to win.
March 8, 2019 12:40 a.m.