We are all familiar with the disadvantage of Draw-Size Scoring: it does not encourage the right type of play. In Draw-Size Scoring, a player that follows a 'carebear' strategy and achieves a draw with two equally big allies will be awarded more points than a player who wiped out everyone on its half of the board and got nearly a solo victory, but got stalemated by a combined effort of three players on the other side of the board. The only way the player who gets stalemated can increase its size of the pot is by moving its units back and allowing the other players to gang up on the smallest power, which is certainly not a fun aspect of the game.
Sum-Of-Squares Scoring does not have this disadvantages, but it does have its own problems. First off, it is difficult to quickly calculate how many points you would get rewarded under different endings of the game. Also, as a small power, your stakes in the game are extremely small and you have little incentive to put much more time effort in the game (but in Draw-Size Scoring, the small powers would be the ones ganged up on by everyone in the endgame, which is also not ideal). Lastly, in Sum-Of-Squares Scoring, there is almost never a proper time to end the game. Almost always, some player can gain by grabbing centers of some other player. As a consequence, Sum-Of-Squares Scoring games often end at quite random times, sometimes ending way too early and sometimes going on for a long time.

I have tried to think of a scoring system that doesn’t have any of the disadvantages that the other two scoring systems have, and I think that I have found such a system.

In this scoring system, there are two draw options players can vote for. If everyone votes for Draw option 1, then the game ends in a draw and players get points according to Draw-Size Scoring. If everyone votes for Draw option 2, then the game end in a draw, the player with the most supply centers on the board gets half the pot and the other half of the pot is divided between the other participants of the draw. The second Draw option is meant to be used when the game is in a stalemate.

Under this scoring system, a player is rewarded if he or she tries for a solo, because if this results in the game getting into a stalemate, that player at least gets awarded half the pot. Also, since this player in such a situation doesn’t care pointwise how many players are alive at the other side of the stalemate line, this player will not cooperate in an effort to gang up on the smallest power to decrease the pot size. Thus, this alternative scoring system does not have the disadvantages that Draw-Size Scoring has.

Under this scoring system, it is quite easy to calculate how many points you would be rewarded in different situations. Also, as a small power, you can always gain a decent size of the pot if you make it to the draw, which incentivizes small powers to keep putting effort into the game. Lastly, under this scoring system, there are logical moments in the game where one should draw – namely in a stalemate or if all participants agree to choose Draw option 1, which will likely happen right after an elimination. Thus, this alternative scoring system neither has the disadvantages of Sum-Of-Squares Scoring.

There are a few possible new disadvantages of this new scoring system, though.

One disadvantage can be that players will disagree about what draw option to use. For example, it could happen that a game is stalemated and the biggest power on the board has a Draw vote 2 up, while the rest of the board is voting for Draw vote 1, and everybody refuses to vote for anything else. To prevent such situation from occurring, it must be made clear in which situations which Draw vote is appropriate. There are ways to do this. In vDiplomacy, before the start of a nonanonymous Choose Your Country game, there is always a standard message in global chat saying ‘Negotiations before the start of the game are not allowed’. Similarly, under this scoring system, there could be a standard global message saying ‘This is a '...'-Scoring game. Remember to vote 'Draw option 2' if the game is in a stalemate position’ or something similar, so that all players are on the same line. Of course, mods can always force draw games, like they do now too sometimes.

One effect that this scoring system would have is that, when it is clear that no one can solo, some players will start attacking everybody anyway, purely in order to become the biggest power and get into a stalemate to get half of the pot. Something similar now happens in Sum-Of-Squares Scoring games. Dependent on your preferred gamestyle, this could be a disadvantage, but maybe some players will instead like it.

One disadvantage is that it can be confusing to have two draw options. To that I agree. The question is whether this outweighs the advantages.

Another disadvantage is that it would cost some programming effort to implement another voting option, I reckon.


What do you think of this scoring system?