Skip to main content

Special: SOS Adepticon 2019

Special: SOS Adepticon 2019

DISCLAIMER: 

This article is an examination of how the finals of Adepticon would have looked if they had cut to top 2 using a Strength of Schedule ("SOS" from now on) instead of GW's idiotic tiebreaker system ("GWITS").  It is not meant as a condemnation of any player.  It is not meant to imply that any player did not deserve their spot in the tournament.  It is only meant to point out the failures of GW's system.

The best solution to this would be to change the final cut to include all players with perfect match records.  There were five of these at Adepticon, so three players who never lost a match didn't even get a chance to play for 1st.  The two who did get to play were chosen by GWITS - a system that is deeply flawed in that it rewards players for playing against opponents who are much less successful than they are.  SOS, on the other hand, rewards players for playing against stronger opponents, and is widely used in most competitive game/sport formats.

Once again, big congratulations to all the undefeated players for kicking ass in a very large tournament, you should have all been included in the final cut!  However, with a top-2 cut, this isn't going to happen most of the time.  If GW won't fix their top-2 cut (due to time restrictions, a reasonable objection), they really should use SOS. 

(For a detailed discussion of why SOS is a better system than GWITS, please see the discussion here.)

The GWITS final round standings:

According to the GWITS, the players were ranked thusly after the final round (player names will not be used, in an attempt to reduce the perception that I am slamming on any given person).
  1. Thorns of the Briar Queen (Thorns A)
  2. Stormsire's Cursebreakers (Cursebreakers)
  3. Thorns of the Briar Queen (Thorns B)
  4. Magore's Fiends (Fiends)
  5. Spiteclaw's Swarm (Swarm)
Tiebreakers for each player - the factors that determined who among the 12 point players would be in 1st-5th place - are listed below, in this format: Warband - Game Losses - Total Glory Differential.

WarbandLossesGlory Diff
Thorns A089
Cursebreakers081
Thorns B054
Fiends1not calculated
Swarm2not calculated

Thus, at the end of round four, Thorns A and Cursebreakers went to the final match. 

The SOS final round standings:

If the tournament had used SOS instead of GWITS, the tiebreakers would have been:
  1. Opponents' match record percentages
  2. Player's game record percentage
  3. Opponents' game record percentages
A full explanation of the DCI's SOS system - used by Magic the Gathering, can be found here.

In that case, the tiebreakers for each player would have looked more like this:

WarbandOMW%PGW%OGW%
Thorns A52.00%100.00%52.00%
Cursebreakers58.25%not calculatednot calculated
Thorns B52.00%100.00%53.67%
Fiends64.50%not calculatednot calculated
Swarm62.50%not calculatednot calculated

When we use these tiebreakers, the rankings after the final round would have been:
  1. Fiends
  2. Swarm
  3. Cursebreakers
  4. Thorns B
  5. Thorns A
This means that the final would have been Fiends and Swarm, who played against the most successful (ie. hardest) opponents among those who had 12 points at the end of round 4.  It's worth noting that unlike LVO, the Adepticon tiebreakers did not result in a perfect reversal of SOS tiebreakers, but you can see that  players who faced generally weaker opponents ranked higher in GWITS and lower in SOS.  And that is problematic for a game that once billed itself as "The Ultimate Competitive Miniatures Game" (GW has since removed "competitive" from most of its descriptions of Shadespire).



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Special: The WurmStat

Special: The WurmStat TL;DR: Don't count on the damage reduction saving your "tail" very often - but it is a nice bonus that adds to the already solid survivability of the Trichinosis Team. A Mistake and A Warning Oops, wrong button. In our last article , we mentioned that there might be some times when it's beneficial to put Substance Siphon on Fecula, even if it didn't increase the number of dice that she's rolling on defense.  We arrived at that conclusion by doing a few specific calculations on attacks and defenses and factoring in the damage reduction ability of the Wurmstat.  In these specific cases, there were very slight improvements to the average damage Fecula would take against those attacks.  Upon realizing this, we got very excited to see how much benefit Fecula (and the other Barfbois) would gain from switching to dodges against all attacks .  So we did a prodigious amount of math. As it turns out, switching from blocks to

Special: Vassal

Decision: Should You Play Shadespire on Vassal? TL; DR: Yeah, it's pretty good - especially if you're in North America. Prologue Prior to picking up Shadespire, I played Legend of the Five Rings (the AEG version) for 20 years.  When FFG bought the game and rebooted it, I gave it a fair shake, and then decided to part ways with my oldest hobby.  A month before Gencon 2018, I decided to play Shadespire instead of L5R, and haven't put it down since. When I was playing L5R regularly, my playgroup traveled several times a year to play in large regional tournaments.  I had assumed this would be the case with Shadespire as well, but as most North American players can attest to - tournaments are pretty scarce in these parts.  (Whereas in England, you can't swing a soggy umbrella without hitting a Shadespire tournament). So, to keep up skill for the few tournaments I can attend ( SCO is next!), I started looking for ways to play online.  Luckily, a few wee

Cardiology: Substance Siphon

Decision: Should You Play Substance Siphon? TL;DR: Fecula, Ammis, and Rastus can all make impressive use of Siphon.  Other warbands that focus on keeping a single model alive may wish to invest in it as well, while Lost Pages and Tomes decks - with their dearth of available upgrade slots - may consider it as a 1-shot, late game defensive bomb. (Author's Note: Special thanks to Underworlds Deckers for having the best way to view warband cards online; and to the maker of Thing Counter , an app that has drastically reduced my workload for articles like this one.) Factor: The Basics Let's start off simple, with an exploration of just how useful this card is on its own for your average fighter.  For that, we'll need a chart: Normal 1D 2D 3D 1B 2B 1H 64% 74% 80% 69% 80% 2H 41% 53% 63% 46% 61% 3H 26% 39% 49% 30% 46% 1S 75% 81% 85% 78% 84% 2S 56% 65% 72% 60% 70% 3S 42% 52% 60% 45% 57% 4S 31% 41% 50% 34% 46% 2L 28% 43% 55% 34% 52% The above chart sho