sqwndw
I meant to suggest "smallest defeat" as a secondary tiebreaker for ties between three or more players: I would prefer a primary tiebreaker not based on culture points. E.g. "most wins". That would also address the issue you identify in your second bullet.
We've all been part of close games that we're essentially coin flips at the end. "smallest defeat" gives the nod to players who lost them, which I don't think is unfair, even if they had other huge losses. But, yes, it's a matter of taste. But it is definetely simpler, especially if measured in point difference and not percentage.
I also think that if you play to improve your tiebreaker in a game you've lost, playing to minimize point difference makes more sense than playing to maximize percentage. Whether you want the game to have an extra round could go both ways if you look at point difference, and it is much more in line with the objective of getting the most points.
"most wins" followed by "smallest defeat" is simple for players to figure out and doesn't interfere negatively with resignation.
Think about it 🙂
I'll enjoy the rest of this well-organised tournament.
