|
Maps & Scenarios Battlegrounds and scenarios |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Re: WARGROUNDS of SCAPE (WoS) - discussion thread
Quote:
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Re: WARGROUNDS of SCAPE (WoS) - discussion thread
Just finished building Dignan's Cage Match. Used some of my custom terrain.
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WARGROUNDS of SCAPE (WoS) - discussion thread
Amazing solution to the eye sore of uncapped pillars
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Re: WARGROUNDS of SCAPE (WoS) - discussion thread
Do I understand correctly that this is a one-phase voting process? No nomination phase, just voting?
Interesting. The advantage of efficiency is obvious. I can see, however, a situation where a late-voting judge torpedoes a map that one or two of his colleagues have been testing, and that might lead to some frustration. If I'm reading it correctly. It's a trade-off, and I'm sure a well-considered one. Good luck, guys! |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Re: WARGROUNDS of SCAPE (WoS) - discussion thread
Quote:
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Re: WARGROUNDS of SCAPE (WoS) - discussion thread
It's an interesting innovation. I'm not saying it's a bad idea; I like how it streamlines the process. I think you are, however, somewhat more likely to have a situation where judges A, B, C, D, and E all consider a map, and judge A gives it a . Then Judges B and C invest time into testing it for a few weeks, then Judge F finally gets around to looking at it and decides it's not worth testing, so he throws a into the pit and it's over. Under a two-stage process, B and C do not invest the time until F has already been heard. Or outvoted, for the purpose of advancing to the testing stage.
On the other hand, that scenario is probably not going to come up very often. And you will be able to turn around maps much faster, apparently, because you have less voting to do. And if Judge B does not like it when Judge F torpedoes a map he's been testing, then next time Judge B could just send a PM or a tag to @Judge F, and tickle a vote out of him, and problem solved. I'm just musing about your process, not trying to be critical. Last edited by Dad_Scaper; September 15th, 2014 at 11:34 AM. |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
Re: WARGROUNDS of SCAPE (WoS) - discussion thread
I wonder if the choice of "judge F" there was accidental.
Anyway, it took you only until the end of your first paragraph to argue against yourself. I'm not saying it doesn't slightly increase the likelihood of this scenario, but it's not that significant of an increase. FWIW I've seen this exact scenario play out w.r.t. one of my maps, more than once, in BoV. Once a judge whose vote wasn't required to get things to review (got enough YtRs without him) voted no after yes votes had come in. In another case a yes to induct vote was posted a few days after the requisite no to induct votes had been received. |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
Re: WARGROUNDS of SCAPE (WoS) - discussion thread
Quote:
Ignore dok's "arguing against yourself" line. He's just trying to push your buttons, because we know you love having your buttons pushed. Thanks for even taking the time to read our by-laws! Yes, I think you capture our intentions exactly: we think the streamlined efficiency and faster processing to be gained by eliminating the separate nomination phase should more than make up for any possible disadvantages. That's the plan anyway... |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Re: WARGROUNDS of SCAPE (WoS) - discussion thread
I wouldn't say I'm exactly trying to push D_S's buttons here. D_S and I communicate privately and regularly (including on this subject) so I think he knows when I mean to push his buttons.
Just pointing out that, as he noted, a judge can be outvoted in the BoV process (or, as I add, just not vote at all in the first stage) so this same issue can present itself in a two-stage process. The only way to truly prevent this sort of thing is to parcel out assignments to individual judges. As I understand it, this is the new SoV approach. For now, in WoS, we are giving the judges liberty to review as they see fit, with some internal communication so judges know if a review is coming on a given map. |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
Re: WARGROUNDS of SCAPE (WoS) - discussion thread
Don't worry about it, Typhon. I wasn't arguing against myself. (a) I wasn't arguing with anyone, and (b) even if I had been trying to argue with dok, I wasn't actually arguing against myself. I reread that post & still have no idea what he was talking about.
It's too early in the morning for dok to be intoxicated, so I'm not sure why he's so excitable. Regardless, I let it pass. I imagine that the advantage of streamlining will outweigh the potential disadvantage of clouding the timing of when testing is done, however, if I was working on this project I would be mindful of that wrinkle before I invested significant time in testing a map. . Carry on.
Spoiler Alert!
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Out of Warehouse Scape Found At Thread | lefton4ya | Sightings and Sales | 5 | April 9th, 2012 09:26 AM |
SoCal Marvel/Classic Scape Tourney!!! Discussion Thread | Leotheanimal87 | Events | 22 | August 27th, 2011 12:47 PM |
The scape value thread. | Kaemon Awa 123 | Scapers Online | 14 | September 4th, 2010 10:17 AM |