For info, I have already voted (and won't change my vote), so I can look at current data and run preliminary computations of the results.
For the main award, we
currently have a few ties in the top 10:
- 2 games tied for positions 4-5,
- 3 games tied for positions 6-8.
The ranking should change anyway as a lot of votes are usually cast close to the deadline. However, there might still be ties in the end.
As with previous years, I have currently decided
not to opt for a tie-breaker, because it could get a bit arbitrary.
[HIDEPOSTS]
For instance, in the case of the tie at positions 4-5, if I specifically look at the ballots for these 2 games only, there is one voter who ranks both games, while all of the other voters only lists at most one of the two games.
If I
wrongly assume that only one person has played both games, then I could use this person's ranking to break the tie. However, other persons may have played both games, and some would have rank one of the two games at position 6 if I had offered a sixth choice. So, I should not dismiss ballots from people who have only listed one of the two games.
In the end, all things considered, the tie makes sense to me in this specific case.
Plus, I would rather trust the algorithm (Schulze method) and avoid introducing a possibly flawed tie-breaker.
[/HIDEPOSTS]
[HIDEPOSTS]
There is a similar situation with the tie at positions 6-8, albeit with 3 games and more people ranking two games (out of three).
Similarly, the tie makes sense to me after looking more closely at the data and assumptions behind the
ranked voting without point.
[/HIDEPOSTS]
Long story short, there may be ties, and I will do as with previous years: keep the ties as they are.