Just a question: what to do about people that have a great average rate with submitting 60K maso games?
          
| |
|
|
|
Good question, I think that for the first time we should allow any version, and lets see how it goes, and I agree raw points is the proper way of meassuring the scores.
| |
|
|
|
What about empires that have all the different parts in them? Like the Diplomats have people like myself submitting upper level games, Phoenix submitting Maso, and newcomers submitting lower level games. Do we base total scores regardless, and then have individual winners, or am I missing something?
  
| |
|
|
|
Ok, I think I understand. So, if say one alliance has strong submitters in each category, theoretically they could win each category?
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Forum or webspace to display the stats? If y'all are talking about a forum, don't we have one right here?  Not to be a naysayer, but I'm not in the mood to click all over webdom when we’ve just been given a separate forum for empires.
 
| |
|
Hi - just checking in (it's morning here in Australia  ). To echo ABT's question - well, if you have strong players in EVERY category, then yes, you could sweep the pool - but then, you'd deserve to, wouldn't you? Basically, we wanted to create 'winning' catagories everywhere, to give everyone a chance at something. An empire who is top-heavy with maso bombers will likely win the maso challenge, and of course has a good chance of winning the overall title - but others can vie for other titles.
kkid: thank God for you and your statbots 
I'm at work, but will try and finalise the ideas over the next 24 hours. My last post actually answers most of the questions about game version (any). We're getting there!
    
| |
|
|
|
I think that would work fine. We could post scores in there like several empires do in their own threads: i.e morning, evening updates. Hmm, will still need the statbot to keep track of everyones scores. Any other ideas?
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know that there will be a category for the maso players. I was just wondering how to handle people who can submit 13 60K maso games in 4 days (just look at the records of lothmorg the black of the guardian as an extreme example).
I personnally think that there should be a limitation about the number of games submitted by a single person and taken in account. Some thing like the top n submitted games. It maybe depends about of the size of the galaxy played (the larger the galaxy, the smaller the number of games).
And what about category for type of victory. In order to see some competition about cultural victory or tech victory. I know that this could wreck havok on some metaverse scores through 
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| I personnally think that there should be a limitation about the number of games submitted by a single person |
|
like one per day?
   
| |
|
If somebody has the tenacity to do 13 games in 4 days, they deserve the recognition and should not be penalised.
The more rules the more anal it becomes, then we'll start getting into RB like territory with it taking longer to read the rules than play the game.
| |
|
|
|
| We can pull the information from wherever the statbot is and post it to any thread, ie: "Alliance Tournament" thread |
|
| And what about category for type of victory. In order to see some competition about cultural victory or tech victory |
|
Basically, I'm thinking that we should just have a thread here to update folks. If kkid can do a statbot people can access (like the original MWC statbot) that's great, otherwise we'll just post progress scores to the thread here. It's got to be a public process to get people involved. Re: Phoenix's point - it would depend on what players want to do. I expect in a short competition, that everyone will go right on submitting military victories, but I would be happy to include other criteria in future challenges. Jaws is basically right - in a competition, you cant STOP people competing and active players get rewarded with the prizes, I guess. 
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
