GAC ranking is irrational

"Waqui;c-2202106" wrote:

"GIJippo;c-2201848" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2201843" wrote:
You're ranked by championship score - disregarding how you scored it. Completing more feats could make up for winning fewer rounds or battles. You may not like it but how is that ranking irrational?

If you want to make sure that you're able to clear your opponent's defenses save enough for your offense.

I'm not asking for help on how to make sure I clear the defense.

Then why do you complain about not being able to clear your opponents' defense?
If you want a higher score and rank clear their defenses. It's quite simple, really.

No, I don't like it and yes it is irrational. It's irrational for the same reason no other competitive structure offers a path to ranking above others who are undefeated when you have LOST. Do you understand this? Yes, it's "the way it is". And "the way it is" is stupid, hence the post. Thanks.

I understand that you feel you should rank higher. However, at the same time you don't feel the need to score more championship points - the metric by which you are ranked. That's not exactly rational thinking.

I didn't complain about not being able to clear defense. Not sure where you got that from. I pointed out that your opponent can lose on purpose and prevent you from ranking by setting all hard D that nobody trying to win would do. This is "griefing" and wouldn't be allowed in a competitive setting set up by people who know better. You were too busy trying to argue that you didn't even READ.

So what is your case for this system? Can you explain why it is better than a system that doesn't allow people to grief their opponent? Are you saying that it is logical that I should have to expect someone to throw their whole top 30 on defense every time? That is poor quality control of a competitive environment. I know you know it and you are arguing just to argue because you're on the internet.