Originally posted by Digi
There's an inherent...uneasiness I think we'd all feel with letting people judge after competing. I trust my own lack of bias, but even I wouldn't volunteer to do that. I have very pre-set ideas about various plans as a result of my competing, and trying to remove them entirely and letting only the in-thread debates determine it would be hard even with the best of intentions.For what it's worth, I don't think judges are the primary issue at this point.
A little paranoid IMO and completely contrary to my experience but Whatever, it was just an offer. As I see it There are ways for every player (save myself) to take this thing, and judgements should always be on the arguments presented and nothing else which is usually pretty clear in statements as to why decisions were made.
Like i've said my experience on Tourneys on several other sites over the years is that in most the Players ( and viewers/readers) are the Judges. They're open for all forum members to place a judgement. For the most part them means you get Judged by all the other players in a Tourney. Based on what most post in giving their judgements I have never seen an issue with that (in fact most that I've lost i expected to).
As a side to that I've also seen on most other sites after a good debate a reasonable percentage where one player simply concedes s/he has been outplayed or is unable to counter. In a Tourney I'm currently running elsewhere and competing in the first round had 26 players. Only three battles in the first round actually got to votes. Three no shows meant three easy wins. So 7 out of 13 battles were actually conceded by a player without the need for votes after a healthy debate
Another one I played a few months back on Ledger my team was all stealth and tact type players while my opponent was all muscle and endurance. The decision was pretty much unanimous that I lost because of the battle field. the fight was in an open desert and where there wasn't the cover for my covert team to take advantage of or the nooks that they could play their head games with. While my opponent had a distinct advantage in endurance and strength that made him more likely to be able to do what he set out to. Now I pointed out in that the amount of exertion he was planning would mean his guy's would dehydrate faster while my plan to move slow and cautious (as my characters would) would mean we wouldn't, But i didn't do a hard sell on that because I thought it was obvious. I deserved the loss that I got by not actually stressing how his tactics were simply not viable. The points of every Judge/other player were completely valid.
It's my experience that Tourneys get the fairest and most open minded debaters there are on the net or the forum in question, rarely the need to worry about bias. I've also never seen anything that even needed a mod to step in on in a tourney ANYWHERE
Originally posted by beatboks
[b]It's my experience that Tourneys get the fairest and most open minded debaters there are on the net or the forum in question, rarely the need to worry about bias. I've also never seen anything that even needed a mod to step in on in a tourney ANYWHERE [/B]
Heh. Welcome to KMC.
Who was Curryman's assistant, Bentley/PR/Badabing?
We could just send things to them and/or they could take the helm in his stead cause the rules are there in plain sight, Curryman is too busy with real life atm so someone has to step up. I would but obviously cannot.
All someone has to do is post OPs. Writeup legality shouldn't even be an issue that only Curryman can asses. Clearly (no offense)
Originally posted by psycho gundam
Who was Curryman's assistant, Bentley/PR/Badabing?We could just send things to them and/or they could take the helm in his stead cause the rules are there in plain sight, Curryman is too busy with real life atm so someone has to step up. I would but obviously cannot.
All someone has to do is post OPs. Writeup legality shouldn't even be an issue that only Curryman can asses. Clearly (no offense)
Originally it was Oliver North. So, technically, there's no official second in command. Bentley has offered. I'd be ok with that.
While I appreciate the match posting, I'm away from home over the long weekend, plus a day on either side, so I only have a few days to do this. I've also stated that I'd be out over Labor Day several times in this thread for a period of weeks, so hopefully it's not without warning.
Depending on PG's posting schedule, I really don't want to leave him the last three or so posts by getting all of mine in by Wed. So I'm going to request a fairly substantial extension, probably until next Thursday (Sept. 5), give or take a day.
{edit} it's also unclear what PG's recent post was...should it have been in the writeup? Is it his first post? Just need clarification. Thanks.
I thinks its fine. His post is something he wanted to be included to his opening prep/strat, but got lost in miscommunication. And as such should not be counted as his first post.
I simply would have re-written the entire thing, to include the changes. But bare with him, Psycho is a bit slow. peaches