INNsomnia V Biweeklies - Memphis, TN - Next: Mar 10th.

[-Chad-]

Well since hopefully all the panelists will belong to different crews, I don't see how they would all ok a crew member to go in a certain spot without a reason =X

I don't think it'll be a huge problem.

 

[BMWfalco]

why don't we start nominating people to be on the panel. would you say one person from each crew and one person not in a crew that would be unbiased. crews are STFU, RUN7, DML, M&C, Bloodline, and any others that get a nomination.

what does everyone think about that?

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Sorry to bring this up again, but how do you propose to do the ranking? Are we doing a tournament series, just voting, or what?

 

[PrinceZane]

The first set of rankings will be determined by recent tournament performance, then to be updated as more tournaments happen.

I've watched a few of the power rank threads, and there is ALWAYS conflict no matter who the panelists are. This group was just my idea, it's nothing concrete.

 

[Lance87]

ATTENTION

Anyone want to buy a RBAD NEW PC ver. of Phantasy Star Universe? I bought it for $50 before I realized i don't have a DVD-ROM...I'll sell it for $30. Anyone interested?

 

[CCCP]

BMW- I kinda like that idea, but having so many crews, there aren't too many people who are unaffiliated.

 

[CO]

ATTENTION

Anyone want to buy a RBAD NEW PC ver. of Phantasy Star Universe? I bought it for $50 before I realized i don't have a DVD-ROM...I'll sell it for $30. Anyone interested?

I am going to make an offer you can't refuse. You can give it to me for my bday. Ah, Im just kidding. I'd buy it but I just spent money on presents.

 

[CCCP]

Lance- Sorry man, I am in the black ><

 

[lvl9]

Youre in luck lance! Ill buy it from you. but i dont know how i will get it from you? Mail it? I dont want to wait until this weekend to get it. and i wont be able to go to this biweekley anyway. I have to fly in the airshow.
P.S Im so cool

 

[-Chad-]

Dang Lance that really sucks... if I didn't already have it I'd defintally take you up on the offer.

 

[McCloud]

I have to say that power rankings should just be on overall performance and no factors that may have bias.

Thus Nite is easily number one in the tri state/quad state area.

1st place - 10 pts
2nd - 8
3rd - 6
4th - 4
5th - 2
6th - 2
7th (we always have a bunch) - 1
13th (we always have a bunch) - 1

Or something of the sort.

edit - comp specs for PSU, lance?

 

[shroom]

I think the Quad state would work well.

I have to say that power rankings should just be on overall performance and no factors that may have bias.

Thus Nite is easily number one in the tri state/quad state area.

1st place - 10 pts
2nd - 8
3rd - 6
4th - 4
5th - 2
6th - 2
7th (we always have a bunch) - 1
13th (we always have a bunch) - 1

Or something of the sort.

edit - comp specs for PSU, lance?

Having -1 point for anything would be bad. Maybe 0's but not -1. That would just suck to be ranked below someone just because you have been to more tournaments and lost.

Brainstorming-I Think there should be levels in the tournaments. Such as INN Biweekleys would be the lowest or second lowest level and there might be a rule requiring 16 people for this level. Then INN V would be an example of the highest level. The Higher tournaments should be worth a lot more than the smaller ones, 10 times atleast. If not then someone who played in a lot of smaller tournaments and always got in the top three could possibly end up with a very high rank without ever placing in a series tournament.

 

[Zee]

:O Anyone from New Jersey going to this?
:O I'll go if I hitch a ride or travel with ya by train/bus.

 

[McCloud]

Yeah well, we could always go with 0 if that proves to be a problem.

Now that I think about it, 0 might be a good idea for the lower places, but I still think 7th place should get cookie points.

 

[Lance87]

The specs for PSU just off the top of my head:

NVidia GeForce series graphics card, ATI something or other, 9GB free space, windows....save around $25 from buying it from the store! I'll be at the bi-weekly (maybe). Psh, i'd at least show up to collect my $30


PS- Who are Zee and Shroom? Did I miss their intro in my hiatus?

Having -1 point for anything would be bad. Maybe 0's but not -1. That would just suck to be ranked below someone just because you have been to more tournaments and lost.

That's the point, competitiveness raises skill awareness = strive to get better. That's what has kept this game alive for so long.

 

[shroom]

I just thought of this also How about a very small point number for just going to a tourney for example .001. Then two players who need a lot of practice are both at .003 would both be more like to show even though .004 isnt going to matter in the big picture, which it shouldn't, but it would for people like them in their minor rivalries thus adding competiveness and possibly slightly bigger tourneys. That would also keep people who never win a match in a touney from being ranked above people who are better but can only get to a few tourneys.

 

[Handorin]

Uhh, think he meant add a point, not take away a point. It was a dash, not a negative. (Look at all the other places)

 

[shroom]

strike my first few sentences from the last page then but the rest stays the same. I know I am so stupid.

PS- Who are Zee and Shroom? Did I miss their intro in my hiatus?

I am a smasher from University of Fayetteville. I main marth and IC.

 

[Lance87]

Welcome dudes.

Anyways, I think that the people who go to tournaments deserve to be placed higher than a non-attendee.

example:
JCPwn is good as hell but why should he be on our ranking when he never comes? .0002323 points are arbitrary. The general point of a Power Ranking aren't for every single person to be included, just a group of panelists agreeing on current skill levels at recent tournaments. A point system would work but it would most likely be INN-specific and exclude certain important factors.

 

[IHSB wearing a moustache]

Well, I'm not from around here and I just joined these boards, so obviously I'm what you'd call a unbiased outsider. So, in my completely objective opinion, you guys should use a SWD contest as the basis for the power rankings. This seems to be the most fair way to decide skill. I've never met any of you, though, so I have no way of knowing who would win this, but I'm sure the best man/woman/shemale would. That is all.

 

[ihavespaceblondes]

Well, I'm not from around here and I just joined these boards, so obviously I'm what you'd call a unbiased outsider. So, in my completely objective opinion, you guys should use a SWD contest as the basis for the power rankings. This seems to be the most fair way to decide skill. I've never met any of you, though, so I have no way of knowing who would win this, but I'm sure the best man/woman/shemale would. That is all.

This man is a genius.

 

[shroom]

I said something about the decimal thing from the MLG rules It might be for Halo2 or Halo2 and Smash but either way. There is a first round rule were first get .08 and last gets .01.

Im not saying that it shouldn't help your rank by just going to tournaments even if you do bad just that there should be enough balance to keep the rankings actually told how people ranked. If it was 10 for first and 1 for last there would be some horrible player with 25 points from recieving last in 25 tourneys and another player who got first twice has 20.

Simply put I just think there should be some fool proofing to make sure all the top ten in rankings will actually be good players and not someone who has a lot of money to burn and time to travel.

This man is a genius.

funny

 

[-Chad-]

That is why the power rankings are done by a group of panelists who talk about it and debate about who deserves to be where.

 

[shroom]

Chad

The idea was to have a group of panelist who set out the rules and decide how much each of the tournaments are worth. The Panelist shouldnt be able to switch the rankings. The reason for points is to make a set way to measure rank. There would be so much bickering between people if the pannelist said where people were to be. I could here it now " OH MY GOD they put so and so behind him/her/shemale" (IHSB still funny and what about all the hefemales?) Its much harder to argue when there is a set of atleast semi fool proof rules to go by.

 

[ihavespaceblondes]

I prefer the way Pwnzone was doing it before: making it up randomly, and putting people who complain about it at number 1 to shut them up. It seemed to work really well, and no one important could get their feelings hurt.

 

[Lucifer (Zero's Cat)]

I agree with IHSB Wearing a Moustache! Except....well, ok, maybe not just SWDs...SWDs and YYGs! Most glitch moves wins!

ihavespaceballs- Yea, Scrib did make good power rankings, didn't he?

 

[-Chad-]

Chad

The idea was to have a group of panelist who set out the rules and decide how much each of the tournaments are worth. The Panelist shouldnt be able to switch the rankings. The reason for points is to make a set way to measure rank. There would be so much bickering between people if the pannelist said where people were to be. I could here it now " OH MY GOD they put so and so behind him/her/shemale" (IHSB still funny and what about all the hefemales?) Its much harder to argue when there is a set of atleast semi fool proof rules to go by.

Doesn't this kinda contradict what you just said in your last post

If someone doesn't like where they got put because they don't think it's fair then so what? It's not for them to decide, and it's not like the panelists are going to be like

"Well...we all don't like this guy right? So....let's move him off the rankings..."

"But won't they get kinda mad seeing how they won like 5 tournies in a row..?"

"NYAH!! I'M THE JUDGE!! YOU LOSE!"

I think most of us are sensible people and I would trust most any of us to make non ******** decisions about it.

 

[shroom]

This really needs its own thread. I would do it but I am to tired and lazy to do it tonight. Good night everyone.

Edit: I didnt see your post at first Chad. Basically I will just say it again my point was you cant contradict a well set up point system. Its like saying a soccer team won a game when they lost by 0-11.

I mean whatever method is made should be absolute. Where you can go back and say so and so is first because they got a total of 463 points the next closest was 322. Not because 5 of 8 people voted for him.

 

[Lucifer (Zero's Cat)]

I just thought of this also How about a very small point number for just going to a tourney for example .001. Then two players who need a lot of practice are both at .003 would both be more like to show even though .004 isnt going to matter in the big picture...

Getting points for showing up, then getting points for participating, all that will add up, too. So if I show up, and get .00X of a point, and then I get 5th, and get .0X of a point, I could easily catch someone who made first at one tourney, and then missed the next, by only making 7th next time. That does not sit well with me, cause I didn't do nearly as well as the person who made 1st, but suddenly I am ranked just as well as he/she/shemale is. One should be rewarded for good play, and improvement. Survival of the fittest, as it were.

 

[-Chad-]

Edit: I didnt see your post at first Chad. Basically I will just say it again my point was you cant contradict a well set up point system. Its like saying a soccer team won a game when they lost by 0-11.

I mean whatever method is made should be absolute. Where you can go back and say so and so is first because they got a total of 463 points the next closest was 322. Not because 5 of 8 people voted for him.

A point system isn't going to work in Melee, where attendance isn't mandatory and everyone will not be going to the same tounaments all the time. That is why no one has done a point system.

 

[shroom]

lucifer I think I didnt properly explain what I was trying to say. Pretty much I think the points for showing up would be the small so anyone could have a rank. The top ranks would be much higher. 1st would be a lot of points like 100 for a big tourney like INNV and 50 for seconds so to catch up to a really big win would either require a 2 very very good performance one strait out win. That MLG example applys to the first round in the MLG I would deffinetly suggest a much bigger window between first and 5th than 3/8.

Chad----I am going to quit argueing of a point system with you because we see it diffently. I will make a suggestion about something different though. No matter which system is used, A percentage of all big tournaments maybe only about 5-10% goes to a championship tournament open to the highest 16 that show up, not neccerarily the actual top 16. It would have to be set at a confienent time and place for both of the top two though because it wouldn't be a championship without them.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

I mean whatever method is made should be absolute.

There will never be an absolute method for this. But with both a point system and a panel its as close as it will get. If the group of panelists act like adults and dosent let feelings interfear with business, then it will work. Now as for people who can go to whatever tourney they please, the point system will work in their favor. So I say you chose a few tournaments that may be worth more points (and have time inbetween to save some money).

 

[Lucifer (Zero's Cat)]

Shroom- Problem with that method is that not only is a sizable chunk of INN is OOS people. Now, say DarkRain takes INNV. Where does he fit into ranking?! Being psychic, he already knows how good he is. He also knows that he would have screwed up the rankings by taking 1st, because making the highest ranked "local" person the highest point value in a large tourney like INN doesn't work out. Say Lvl9 makes it out of pools, and is highest in bracket. Say no one else made it outta pools. Lvl9 getting 100 points and Myztek not getting any because he didn't get out of pools is seriously flawed.

 

[shroom]

There will never be an absolute method for this. But with both a point system and a panel its as close as it will get. If the group of panelists act like adults and dosent let feelings interfear with business, then it will work. Now as for people who can go to whatever tourney they please, the point system will work in their favor. So I say you chose a few tournaments that may be worth more points (and have time inbetween to save some money).

By Absolute I meant measureable not oppinionate. You do have a point though neither method could actually be 100% accurate. Because of this I really think there should be a tournament set up at the end of every year/season with the top 2 people and whoever else that is high in rank and shows. This way we could pick one person as the best for that year/season.

Really if you could get the top four to show it would be a very accurate test as to who is the best. It could fix sll the point and pannel problems. Because if the best was in the top four Which he definitley should be he would win the tourney and have top rank for that season and then the next season could start.

Edit: Lucifer I was meaning that if someone like darkrain won then no one would get 100 points the people would get points corresponding to there place. Anyway I've decided either method would be bad if there was not some type of championship. Because the points or pannel could easily keep someone lower than there real rank if they never get a chance to play against the people above them.

 

[-Chad-]

...

You do realize that to get the "top 4" we have to do some kind of method of determining who the "top 4" is right?

 

[ihavespaceblondes]

Screw all this. ATTN: Everyone. A wizard has turned you into a Mudkip. Is this awesome? (y/n)

Everyone who says y gets 100 points.

 

[lvl9]

IHSB - Y
Lucifer- Youre too cool. Im glad that you know i have hidden skill that im afraid to let loose on the rest of the smashing populus.
Everyone else on the subject of rankings- Well we all know how it goes...
1st Nite
2nd Nite
3rd Nite
4th Nite
5th Nite
6th Nite
7th Nite
8th Nite
9th Lvl9
problem solved!

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Question. When brawl comes out will the rankings carry over or start new?

 

[PrinceZane]

Good debates all, sorry I was at work behind a firewall to get any comments in.

Both sides are putting up good arguments, here's my 2 cents.

Points:
Pros: good idea. I like a concrete structured enviornment. 1 + 2 = 3. Period. No arguments. No fuss. You show up, you kick butt, you walk away champ.
Cons: easy to only win a few majors and still be champ as opposed to the others who show up to all and support the tournament world in spirit of having fun and keeping the tourny running from 1 to the next, someone could be having an "off" night (or on fire) that is normally really really good (or not so...) and climbs in ranks at a high pointed tourney and finishes above someone that normally beats the other person 97/100 times

Panel:
Pros: don't have to worry about someone that's hot or not for 1 night, able to judge things on a consistant pattern seen by the individual, can rank people by patterns of progression rather than lucky streaks or unlucky placement on the tourney bracket
Cons: people letting personal opinions/emotions reflect in the placement of an individual in ranks, not knowing a particular person due to never have met or seen someone play.

Both have their ups and downs. Personally I prefer the panelist side. The list of panelists I suggested I'm sure are responsible and mature enough to not let petty stuff get in the way, and are diverse enough to cover and make arguments for or against someone in their region that others might not be familiar with.

I'll draw up the thread after a little more has been talked about this.

 

[McCloud]

Now that I think about it more, the only option to me seeems a combination of the 2 systems.. but for panelist side we cannot take into account overall "improvement", something that was an instant warning flag when I read it. Instead only consider who a person might have beaten in a tournament who ranks higher than them. e.g. player x beating the first ranked player... his ranking might go up.

For points system, perhaps not the system I mentioned but a simple tally of first place wins, 2nd, etc will determine primary rankings. Thus we have concrete stats to back up rankings.

I don't like the idea of "off/on" nights cause its a built in john. And I know I've said it a buncha times. But in the end if you got beat then you got beat. Kick *** next time. That's competition. You will lose sometimes because of upsets. Come back stronger.

btw ihsb: