4 ms·

Surely this is flawed as there is no motivation to try and score? All 3 teams could just sit back and essentially do nothing all game. Goals are often conceded

Surely this is flawed as there is no motivation to try and score? All 3 teams could just sit back and essentially do nothing all game. Goals are often conceded on the counter attack in regular soccer so by going for, what is essentially a futile, an attack on an opponents goal they have a much higher risk of conceding.

simonbarker87 8y ago
I think the fun here is that 2 teams can join forces and hammer the other side by having twice as many player, at some point there will be a betrayal and one of those teams will break the alliance.
- YokoZar 8y ago
  Yeah but why bother? By teaming up they don't win they just make the third team lose. The more effort they invest in that the more tired they'll be when they finally decide to face eachother.
  - jcoffland 8y ago
    The only way to win is by making the other teams lose.
dTal 8y ago
I agree, that scoring system is flawed as it provides no motivation to attack at all. For example, take a game where one team just defends heavily, and the other two teams decide to ignore them and have a proper game between themselves (and trade a few goals). The defensive team would be rewarding for being boring. A better system might be if a team's final score were determined by subtracting their concessions from their goals. Or, if you want to tweak the style of play between offensive and defensive, applying some coefficient between goals and concessions (e.g. concessions subtract 2 while goals add 1). In a way, this is already the system, except the 'goal coefficient' is zero which is clearly unbalanced.
- tomglynch 8y ago
  It wouldn't occur like you say - The two teams trading a few goals would quickly realise they were both losing and attack the defensive team together.
- skykooler 8y ago
  If that is happening, both "active" teams are now incentivized to attack the defensive team (because they are winning). So by being "boring" you essentially force the other teams into an alliance against you.
flurdy 8y ago
Like real football. Except you have to make sure you score in both the other team's goals to make sure they concede more than you. And I expect once someone score then you can't sit back again as the result is uneven. If the pitch is small enough it will still be an interesting match, as you have 3 parties you can't rely/trust the others enough to just park the bus and camp.

simonbarker87 8y ago

I think the fun here is that 2 teams can join forces and hammer the other side by having twice as many player, at some point there will be a betrayal and one of those teams will break the alliance.

YokoZar 8y ago
Yeah but why bother? By teaming up they don't win they just make the third team lose. The more effort they invest in that the more tired they'll be when they finally decide to face eachother.
- jcoffland 8y ago
  The only way to win is by making the other teams lose.

dTal 8y ago

I agree, that scoring system is flawed as it provides no motivation to attack at all. For example, take a game where one team just defends heavily, and the other two teams decide to ignore them and have a proper game between themselves (and trade a few goals). The defensive team would be rewarding for being boring. A better system might be if a team's final score were determined by subtracting their concessions from their goals. Or, if you want to tweak the style of play between offensive and defensive, applying some coefficient between goals and concessions (e.g. concessions subtract 2 while goals add 1). In a way, this is already the system, except the 'goal coefficient' is zero which is clearly unbalanced.

tomglynch 8y ago
It wouldn't occur like you say - The two teams trading a few goals would quickly realise they were both losing and attack the defensive team together.
skykooler 8y ago
If that is happening, both "active" teams are now incentivized to attack the defensive team (because they are winning). So by being "boring" you essentially force the other teams into an alliance against you.

flurdy 8y ago

Like real football. Except you have to make sure you score in both the other team's goals to make sure they concede more than you. And I expect once someone score then you can't sit back again as the result is uneven. If the pitch is small enough it will still be an interesting match, as you have 3 parties you can't rely/trust the others enough to just park the bus and camp.