|
|
With Googoolyeye about to explode from people not following his thread rules, here’s something to let the steam out his balloon. So now all you monkeys can give your speeches and what not in here. Fair Deal. Some stuff for reference:
Have fun chatting away!
|
|
|
|
|
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for this Lj….
However, the random discussion in my thread isn’t about sign-ups, it’s just about the competitions in general. Perhaps you can rename your title? The directory part seems out of place for a discussion thread.
Now if I can just get those 7 or so posts deleted….I wish I had forum mawd powahs just for that one thread >.>
|
|
|
|
|
So… is it like as soon as one ends the next one can start right away, if so Then Yay cuz i love Tournaments, and i still Have the burning rage of my hate for Drag Box API fail. I want to ake it out in skill for the next tournament( i Deleted my post in the other thread, now can some1 answer me.)
|
|
|
|
|
That’s a good question.
I think goog needs to answer it though, because he’s in charge of organizing these things.
Is there a time limit on how soon an organizer has to run their tourney before it gets offered to the next person in line, or something?
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by Ukos:Is there a time limit on how soon an organizer has to run their tourney before it gets offered to the next person in line, or something?
Originally posted by googoolyeye:
This thread is for controlling any chaos over the hosting and execution of gaming competitions.
It is required that you sign up for a spot in this thread if you would like to host a competition.
If you post a competition thread without first signing up here, that thread will be locked.
The rules! Please read these first.
Guidelines:
▪ Competitions must be open to the general public.
▪ There can only be one competition running at once (except in the situation listed below).
▪ A second competition may be started if the first lasts longer than 10 weeks.
▪ The competition must be completed within 13 weeks, or it will be closed.
▪ Competitions will take place on a first come, first served basis.
▪ Each person can only sign up for one competition at a time.
▪ If it’s your turn and you don’t begin sign-ups or a qualifying round within 7 days, your turn may be skipped for the next competition.
▪ Any who do not sign up using the provided template may or may not be able to host said competition.
Notes on this thread:
▪ Older posts in this thread may be deleted for the sake of cleanliness.
▪ This thread is exclusively for sign-ups. Please use other threads for discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
Strange, I re-read the rules not long ago. I seem to have skipped that one. Thanks. :P
|
|
|
|
|
Lol, googoolyeye, I know how it feels. I used to always have to deal with that in the Off-topic forums.
Hope this thread is successful, anyway. Perhaps it will teach people not to post in a thread where you’re specifically told not to post pointless commentary. Not sure why people don’t seem to get that. :P
edit:
Except for Ukos. He’s the exception. ;)
|
|
|
|
|
Well seeing as the first question was answered before I even saw it, what are your guy’s opinions?
Is 7 days too long to give?
|
|
|
|
|
can someone direct me to the original thread?
|
|
|
|
|
I had a thought about this the other day:
Basically, I was thinking that an optional 7-day wait until the next contest started would be fine, and would give the next organizer time to set up anything they still needed to do without feeling rushed, but that it might be a good idea to require the organizer of the new contest to make a statement that they either are or aren’t ready to run their tournament within a shorter time-limit.
I’d imagine that people would know whether or not they’d be ready to run their contest yet by the time the previous one ends, and getting them to either acknowledge that their contest will be coming shortly or state that they won’t be able to start it in the time limit given would probably make your life easier by eliminating some of the uncertainty.
As I type this, though, I’m questioning the necessity of having both time limits, but I figured I’d throw it out there because it seemed like a good idea when I thought it up. :P
Edit: Do you mean the contest sticky, hip?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by hiperson134:
can someone direct me to the original thread?
Here It’s stickied and it’s still not noticed T_T
@Ukos
The thread was primarily to get everything more organized and to minimize the amount of failed competitions. During the 7 day period, a post or shout from the next host stating their current status seems like a reasonable requirement(not sure this is the right word). Hopefully the upcoming host will acknowledge his/her current status on the competition, and either feel confident in starting it in 7 days, or letting their turn pass. Seems like a fair enough idea. I’ll add it in now.
Now, a question that sprouts from the previous one.
Ok, it sounded weird wording it the way I tried. How about this:
Host 1 is up next, with Host 2 and Host 3 going after
Host 1 acknowledges that his/her competition isn’t going to be ready in time, and so lets Host 2 go ahead. Should Host 1 completely lose his/her place in line, or should Host 1 be able to go in front of Host 3?
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I was wondering about that too.
If they are dropped completely from the line, it will be more frustrating for the person dropped, but might help ensure that people make sure they are ready by the time it is their turn.
On the other hand, it also might make more people say they’re ready when they aren’t really ready, so as not to lose their place completely.
Not dropping them completely would probably mean that they would be ready by the next chance, and would lead to a successful contest, as opposed to that organizer having to wait in line again – which, at the current line length, might not be something they’re particularly interested in doing.
However, if you’re going to go the “You don’t get eliminated for not being ready” route, I’d suggest making a limit to the number of times you can not be ready when it is your turn before you DO get dropped completely. A limit like one time, for example.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
I think 7 days is a fair requirement, and making sure that the host says if they’re ready is also a good idea. Also, I agree with what Ukos says about whether a host should be dropped completely or not.
Also, Goog, could you add something about picking good competition games in the guidelines? In the Kwest for the Holy K competition, a bunch of people have been complaining about bad game choices and quite a few quit the competition entirely because of it, so it might be a good idea to let future competition hosts know what to do to make a good competition. In the current list of hosts, there are a few people (Ukos stands out) who I know will pick good games and have a successful tournament, but I’m not sure of some other people, so yeah.
Here would be what I feel are some good guidelines for picking games in a tournament.
Good things to see in games (roughly in order of importance)
1. Games need to require skill, in the form of reflexes, timing, fast thinking, etc. The more skill required, the better.
2. Games should be short – less than 10 minutes per playthrough is ideal (there may be exceptions if the game is survival/endurance). If a game has permanent upgrades, it should not take more than 1-2 hours to acquire everything.
3. Games should be easy to learn and play, hard to master.
4. Games should have a working API with a high scores list. This is to deter screenshot editing/hacking and makes it harder for “sniping” to occur.
Bad things to see in games (again, roughly in order of importance)
1. Games should not be easily glitched/hacked.
2. Games should not give an advantage to those who lag their computers or give a disadvantage to people with slow computers.
3. Games should not be a test of endurance only (i.e. if it is a survival/endurance game, it should get harder over time or require a lot of skill to prevent people from getting infinitely high scores).
4. Games should not involve a high factor of luck.
5. Games should not give a large advantage to people who have played it before.
6. Games should not give a large advantage to people who have better skills in areas not usually associated with gaming (typing, math, knowledge of trivia etc.).
|
|
|
|
|
5. Games should not give a large advantage to people who have played it before.
When you have a competition of 100+ users, that rule becomes impossible to follow.
I also see no problem with people training to become better at a ‘new game’
once they’re introduced to it at the start of that competition’s round.
|
|
|
|
|
I’ve decided not to make them completely taken out of the line.
On the other hand, it also might make more people say they’re ready when they aren’t really ready, so as not to lose their place completely.
This is basically my reasoning. The whole idea of the sign-ups and whatnot was to cut back on failed competitions, as well as implementing a system with some sense of organization.
Regarding your post qzqxq:
Also, Goog, could you add something about picking good competition games in the guidelines?
When I was first writing up the sign-ups and guidelines, I pondered that exact question, whether to give tips on creating a good competition or not. I was primarily trying to get some organization done, not to help with the actual competition creation. But I do understand that game selection is important.
I get your point though, that one would think that others would do a poor job in game selection, I really do. I remember one reason why I didn’t put it in was because I didn’t want the thread to be the location for discussion on really anything, except the actual signing up part. I wanted to keep it clean.
I don’t think I’ll put it in stickied thread, but I think game selection would be a good topic for this thread however.
And your current guidelines for good games for a tournament are pretty spot-on. I don’t see anything glaringly missing.
Also, there once existed a group of competition consultants, the KFCC. Although they do not work as a team anymore (as far as I’m concerned), the group members are great resources when making your own competition. All of them have first hand experience hosting a competition (except for Marh) and in other aspects.
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by Hokage4354:
5. Games should not give a large advantage to people who have played it before.
When you have a competition of 100+ users, that rule becomes impossible to follow.
I also see no problem with people training to become better at a ‘new game’
once they’re introduced to it at the start of that competition’s round.
Of course, there will be people who have played it before, but my point was that the people who have played it before shouldn’t get a large advantage as to make it unfair for others. If people can became better at the game before the deadline, then it’s all good.
When I was first writing up the sign-ups and guidelines, I pondered that exact question, whether to give tips on creating a good competition or not. I was primarily trying to get some organization done, not to help with the actual competition creation.
Ok, thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
SlasherX is next in line, but he hasn’t logged in in 15 days.. That’ll be a week of waiting I presume.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, great… >.< Maybe we should just skip to the next in line?
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, we should skip him. XYTWO’s turn now, I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by Kioyoh:
SlasherX is next in line, but he hasn’t logged in in 15 days.. That’ll be a week of waiting I presume.
He should be skipped only if he does not appear within 1-3 days,otherwise then,i would skip him.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, at this point I doubt Slasher will show up. :/
|
|
|
|
|
No, he won’t, in the Kongregate Competition Sign-Ups & Directory he said:
Originally posted by SlasherX:
Hello. Do to real life problems (My dad taking away my internet for 2 months) I wish to have my tourney postponed to be after XYTWO. I’m sorry if this has caused an inconvenience for any of you.
|
|
|
|
|
when will the next tourney starttttttt? lol
|
