I don’t like the idea of being forced into your hill game in head to head play. I think it’s fine to have the option of choosing it, but being required to seems unnecessary to me.
To me, it would make sense that you play on 1 player’s hill, then the other player’s hill and if tied after that, randomly select a 3rd hill.
I still don’t like it. There are a number of factors that can lead to which game ends up being your hill in qualifying. That shouldn’t dictate which game you have to keep playing throughout playoffs.
I agree. In the scenario that a player conquers two hills, they should not be deciding based on which game they would prefer to play in the finals
Joe: Thanks for the thoughts on having to remove a game. I am thinking if it goes down hour 1 replace it. After first hour it just stays with standings as is.
Jdelz: I think you are right. I didn’t give enough weight that you might be king of the hill of a game you don’t like. So for finals you can choose either your hill or a random game. I wanted to have a “homefield” element but not at the detriment of someone on it.
locked or can player still be droped if they hit 3?
What if some is top on 2 removed games?
So how’s this, coin flip to decide which player has choice of their hill or other machine for game one, other player choses game two. For game three, if needed, game is random among all others that are neither players’ hills nor were used in games 1 or 2 (if different), but choice of position goes to whichever player had a higher % margin of victory in games 1 and 2.
% margin of victory is not an ideal stat (e.g. Bride of Pinbot if one player gets the billion)
The question is use a usually-good stat or go random for position choice as well. Other options include giving choice to the player that got their King score earliest during qualifying.
set it to 99% and you get it all the time