|
Post by Odin Reeves on Nov 19, 2007 6:26:48 GMT 1
Tournament Fighters:
1. Taiku 2. Odin 3. Shamino 4. Dain 5. Auroth 6. Tyler/Pain Killer 7. Maverik 8. Ein 9. Alkaiser
And that’s it. I’m going from recent tournaments only.
Street Fighters:
1. Shamino 2. Taiku/Zeniro 3. Odin 4. Dain 5. Pain Killer 6. Tyler 7. Auroth 8. Ein 9. Maverik 10. Random NPC # 47
|
|
Felix
Dreamer
MISSING IN ACTION
You think you have demons? My past is riddled with more than just your average demons.
Posts: 188
|
Post by Felix on Nov 19, 2007 6:28:04 GMT 1
A new set of Xin awards would be nice to see. Its always a fun thread to read.
|
|
|
Post by Pain Killer on Nov 19, 2007 7:16:30 GMT 1
Tournaments are horrible to judge someone's fighting on, considering winners are based off of judges, rather than how the fight actually turns out.
|
|
|
Post by Odin Reeves on Nov 19, 2007 7:18:53 GMT 1
If someone's getting decimated through non-god modding ways, then they're going to win.
It's a pretty fair way of deciding winners, and that's why all types of sports fighting have judges.
|
|
|
Post by Kyukaku on Nov 19, 2007 7:25:46 GMT 1
If that was true, then why am I still ranked below certain people that I've beaten in a tournament consecutive times, or beaten someone who beat them?
Not whining, just backing a point.
|
|
|
Post by Odin Reeves on Nov 19, 2007 7:27:17 GMT 1
Cause it's a personal consideration of the posters thoughts. That's why.
|
|
|
Post by Pain Killer on Nov 19, 2007 14:26:50 GMT 1
If someone's getting decimated through non-god modding ways, then they're going to win. It's a pretty fair way of deciding winners, and that's why all types of sports fighting have judges. That's right, but not every fight is so one-sided. Fights that are even remotely close are left up to the discretion of the judge, at which point it just becomes a personal preference as to who they believe is winning. There's been plenty of times I've turned a fight around that I was "losing", simply because Pain Killer's strategy often revolves around taking damage to create openings. If the fight is even remotely close, it can still usually go either way. Not to mention all the other things that influence judging that wouldn't particularly matter in a fight outside of the tournaments, like the 24 hour rule and having only a week to finish the battle. These two things together can mean that a match may have as little as 3-4 posts from each participant. There's also the fact that things other than your fighting ability are taken into account during the judging process, and rightfully so. I'm not saying that tournament setups are wrong, I'm just saying they don't lend themselves well to judging someone's fighting ability.
|
|
|
Post by Alkaiser on Nov 19, 2007 17:49:28 GMT 1
It's not about ability, though. Ability is measured through consistency, whereas victory is decided based on performance in a particular thread. Nobody cares about who has the potential to win, it's who does win that matters. That sort of thing lends itself to a here-and-now sort of perspective, and I believe that the judging system is effective at capturing that.
|
|
|
Post by Pain Killer on Nov 19, 2007 19:28:57 GMT 1
What isn't about ability? I'm pretty sure the idea behind best fighter would be how good you are on a consistent basis, not whether you had one good fight.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan Branigan on Nov 19, 2007 19:34:55 GMT 1
I think the difference between tournament fighters and street fighters is that while street fighters have to win it in the long run. Tournament fighters only have to make it appear that they are winning at the time. That'll make the judges believe they would win, regardless if they actually would have.
So people like you, Pain Killer, can be somewhat disadvantaged in a tournament due to your style of endurance fighting. It might have been the reason the judges picked Taiku over you.
|
|
|
Post by Alkaiser on Nov 19, 2007 19:36:44 GMT 1
Yes, that's true. I was arguing that the best tournament fighter brings his A game to each tournament, however. This means that even if they get beaten to the ground constantly in street fights, if they're beasts in the tourneys then they would still be eligible for the top ten tourney fighters. Thus, the final verdict is limited to data collected from those given tournament fights, and nothing more.
|
|
|
Post by Odin Reeves on Nov 19, 2007 19:37:11 GMT 1
Four fights, at least, to win a tournament... seems pretty consistent to me.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan Branigan on Nov 19, 2007 19:44:57 GMT 1
Yes, that's true. I was arguing that the best tournament fighter brings his A game to each tournament, however. This means that even if they get beaten to the ground constantly in street fights, if they're beasts in the tourneys then they would still be eligible for the top ten tourney fighters. Thus, the final verdict is limited to data collected from those given tournament fights, and nothing more. I have to agree with Odin Alkaiser, I don't think it's a consistancy issue more than it is a window of view issue. We will never really know how most of those fights would have ended, with the exception of fights like Auroth vs. Odin, but even that is up for spectulation due the the last posts being motivated by judges decision.
|
|
|
Post by Odin Reeves on Nov 19, 2007 19:51:16 GMT 1
Wait, when did you become a school pillar? Your the most unheard of pillar I've ever seen...
On topic, Tournament fights, like my last match with Auroth, can be drawn out. If it continued for another week I wouldn't have minded, but I'm sure a victor would've been decided before that, and if that was the case, rather then a deadline, neither of us would've set ourselves up to be hit, like we did.
|
|
|
Post by Alkaiser on Nov 19, 2007 19:51:22 GMT 1
Hmmm...somewhere in all of my talking, I lost track of the point I was trying to make. Oh well. EDIT: For Odin, See here.
|
|
|
Post by Pain Killer on Nov 19, 2007 19:54:57 GMT 1
Heh, I'm not complaining about any losses I have in tournaments, most of them I deserve.
Right. I don't have a problem with the tournaments, believe me, I usually sign up for every one of them. What I'm saying is that from a pure fighting aspect, they aren't as reliable of a source to tell how good someone is at fighting if you're going by victories. The winners of matches are supposed to be chosen based on both their fighting and their rping ability, so from a purely fighting aspect, you could lose every tournament you're in and still be the best fighter. I mean, look at Shamino, I can't remember the last time he won a tournament, but he's still most likely the best fighter here.
Awesome. Way to take what's being said out of context.
|
|
|
Post by Odin Reeves on Nov 19, 2007 20:01:08 GMT 1
It's easy to do when left open.
Regardless, these reasons that have been mentioned is why I gave two seperate lists. Wasn't expecting conflict to arise from my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Pain Killer on Nov 19, 2007 20:06:37 GMT 1
It's easy to do when left open. Regardless, these reasons that have been mentioned is why I gave two seperate lists. Wasn't expecting conflict to arise from my opinion. I live to give opportunities. Anyways, I didn't mean for this to come across as conflict, more like another perspective. If it helps, I personally think that Best Tourney Fighter is closer to being Best Rp'er, rather than Best Fighter.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan Branigan on Nov 19, 2007 20:07:54 GMT 1
I've got no problem with those lists. The two areas you made lists for are different enough to be made. But, I guess this was started because Pain Killer doesn't consider Tournament matches as reliable as normal matches for skill.
|
|
|
Post by Odin Reeves on Nov 19, 2007 20:10:36 GMT 1
If tournaments were decided on best Rper, I wouldn't have won.
Auroth's a better Rp'er then I am, I'm a better fighter. That's were the lines were drawn.
Going back to my first tournament, Aryck, AKA Dain, is a better Rp'er than me. I think I won it on fighting ability.
Tyler... Well, probably about even in terms of Rp'ing, but I still kicked his ass... So eh.
|
|