English Amiga Board

English Amiga Board (http://eab.abime.net/index.php)
-   EAB's competition (http://eab.abime.net/forumdisplay.php?f=85)
-   -   Change the voting system (http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=44847)

Akira 18 May 2009 19:53

Change the voting system
 
Please, I beg for two things to be banned from the competition voting:

1 - Double vote power
2 - Vote arrangement between members.


It took TWO PEOPLE to decide the game we are going to play in this round 6.
You might as well make it that the winner of the competition chooses the next game, because the voting power anybody else has is null.

No complaints about the game chosen, but I feel cheated as part of a voting system.

TCD 18 May 2009 20:10

I think you refer to the EMPL, since you mention round 6...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akira (Post 549443)
1 - Double vote power

http://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p=...&postcount=113 :rolleyes Read the first post in the voting thread again and maybe you see that is was already removed before you asked for it the first time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akira (Post 549443)
2 - Vote arrangement between members.

Vote arrangement? Well blade and I did that on X-Out some time ago, but since then I can't remember that anyone arranged any votes. Because we haven't got many players (or voters) in the EMPL it likely to happen that a game wins with two top votes. That surely doesn't mean that your vote isn't important since Gunstar Heroes would have been chosen with only one point more.

Akira 18 May 2009 20:24

Scratch my first claim, then, or change it for something more fair.
As I said, it took two people to decide the game to be played! How can that be?

Graham Humphrey 18 May 2009 20:26

Two people voted for it in first place. No other game was voted for in the same way.

Really don't see the problem with this one?

Graham Humphrey 18 May 2009 20:35

Expanding on that a little...

Just done a quick count. Eight people voted for round 6 of the EMPL. 22 people voted for round 5 of the Super League.

That's it in a nutshell I think. Nothing wrong with the voting system, just less numbers means a couple of first-place votes can beat everything else. With more people taking part that doesn't happen.

Akira 18 May 2009 20:39

Ypuo are probably right, it's a matter of number of gamers.

TCD 18 May 2009 20:40

Spot on Graham. I won't change the number of votes or the points for them. With the small number of votes the double voting power was way too much, since it would mean that the game voted by the one with it would almost automatically win. Just to make it clear : If there is a tie between two games, the one with more votes would be played. Which means that if someone (of the 8 people that vored) would had given Gunstar Heroes one (more) point we would play that instead now.

Biscuit 18 May 2009 22:23

I'm not that familiar with some of the systems, so I find it helpful to see others top 5 lists. Gives me some games I've never heard of to check out in my spare time. If only I had more spare time.

Akira 19 May 2009 01:34

delete this communist thread! :D

john4p 19 May 2009 08:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid (Post 549474)
If there is a tie between two games, the one with more votes would be played.

Ah, good to know. That's different to the EAB/Lemon Super League where the most first place votes, then the most second place votes, and so on, are the tie breaker.

TCD 19 May 2009 08:59

First is the overall number of voters on a game, then the 'one point votes' and so on order follows. I'm almost done with the 'skeleton' for the schedule and some rules, so expect them this weekend ;)

john4p 19 May 2009 09:02

I can't wait to know the next system. Is it the C64 or Neo Geo? Or do we play Arcade games <= 1996?

TCD 19 May 2009 09:08

Next round is MAME :agree Have a look here for further facts and chit-chat : http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?p=549663#post549663 ;)


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:19.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Page generated in 0.08402 seconds with 10 queries