Reply to thread

Players who think that finding the scoring paths within 20 minutes is more fun and prefer that to be a more significant factor to the tournament than executing them.  JPelter and Tann chimed in to that effect.  But if your own fun factor isn't affected, then hey, that's great.

Yes, the optimum 20-minute strategy for a table may not be obvious, and we may not have found it yet.  Or we might have and then there's no further room for improvement and that does discourage some players.  Whether we've reached these optima yet, or will do so within the tournament duration, is certainly an open question.  But there does have to exist an endpoint of optimum strategy that can't be further improved.

The rest of the argument seems to be semantics.  One obviously can't score as much without CC's 1M bonus bounty as with it, whether or not we call that narrow.  Maybe you can make top ten on Space Shuttle without multiball and you'd call that competitive, where I wouldn't.  We're agreeing on the principles, just arguing over the vocabulary.

That's exactly it.  If one points to a top 10 result achieved without say Bigfoot as evidence of competitiveness... that's only going to be true so as long as there aren't 10 players like me successfully doing the Bigfoot grinding.

I think you're probably right that you can guarantee enough Camera trips to get it... but executing that guarantee means wasting too much time shooting robots to light it instead of something more lucrative.  If I get the camera collect bonus timed right by happenstance to rescore 400M worth of PB Mania, I'm going to have more time available to score more points elsewhere than someone who has to do more work for that same camera award.