Originally Posted by
Amamin
You say that the rule is out of touch with the community, but I literally, during that event, had someone tell me that when they see someone always winning and hoarding all the event points then there's no point in competing. We started with I think 7 players and ended up with just 4, and the other two weren't the original players we started with. That meant 5 players outright left in the middle of the event. If we let players have +15 every set and lock out every other newer player then people just won't play.
"Git gud" is always an answer of course but nobody will get good if they won't play events since they never win anything anyway. Having fun isn't always just about winning, but there's nothing fun about always losing either. I understand that it feels like you're being punished for being really good at the game, but that's not the case. It's just that people who can't win points will think its futile to even participate, so they don't. Even you don't like it when you don't win points, which drove you to make this suggestion. I think +3 is a good balance of keeping events as fun to as many people as possible while still making them reasonably competitive.
I think that pretty much sums up what I personally think about the 3-point max rule. Of course, I don't speak for the other ETs.