Brawl #2 Suggestions and Feedback

[Absol]

I liked it more last Brawl when all of the tasks' creators were anonymous until the end of the voting. It'd make people concentrate more on the thing itself than on the team.

Unfortunately this is something we can't have both ways, and most people asked for brawl to not be anonymous

Because most people have favorite element and they want it to win. Else the elements won't matter inn team making.

[Chapuz]

I liked it more last Brawl when all of the tasks' creators were anonymous until the end of the voting. It'd make people concentrate more on the thing itself than on the team.

Unfortunately this is something we can't have both ways, and most people asked for brawl to not be anonymous

Because most people have favorite element and they want it to win. Else the elements won't matter inn team making.

Actually, a big discussion in Brawl #1 was that anonimity didn't always work; many times people noticed a task was of team X.

[vrt]

I liked it more last Brawl when all of the tasks' creators were anonymous until the end of the voting. It'd make people concentrate more on the thing itself than on the team.

It also meant that the people most involved with Brawl (the participants) could basically not post in the voting threads, which was silly.

As for a 'favorite element', the teams are nothing like War, and the elements don't actually matter here. I still think it's a mistake to even use elements in the first place..

[ARTHANASIOS]

I liked it more last Brawl when all of the tasks' creators were anonymous until the end of the voting. It'd make people concentrate more on the thing itself than on the team.

 Seriosuly, as an active member of Bralw #1, that was not the case. People still voted for their team's submission, no matter the anonymity, because they always knew who made what. Furthermore, that's the reason Brawl #2 has 2 votes per task instead of just 1 (like the first Brawl); people will always vote for their team, but at least now they have a 2nd vote to select the submission they truly think it's the best.
 Well, at later rounds, the 2nd vote may be used as a form of sabotage agaist rival teams, but I hope the spirit of fairplay is going to keep us away from dirty tricks; after all, we have Challenges and Wagers for a reason here.

[russianspy1234]

its a little disappointing that voting for round 1 ends after deadline for round 2.  would be better if you got feedback so you could know what voters like / dont like before submitting again.

[Naesala]

its a little disappointing that voting for round 1 ends after deadline for round 2.  would be better if you got feedback so you could know what voters like / dont like before submitting again.

We want to give voters plenty of time to vote without dragging out the event. We're open to suggestions though if you have a way to solve this conundrum

[justaburd]

4 man combo is a scheduling nightmare. Why?!?

its a little disappointing that voting for round 1 ends after deadline for round 2.  would be better if you got feedback so you could know what voters like / dont like before submitting again.

We want to give voters plenty of time to vote without dragging out the event. We're open to suggestions though if you have a way to solve this conundrum

Why not make voting 4 days so we have 3 days to analyze and it doesn't drag out the event?

[Naesala]

4 man combo is a scheduling nightmare. Why?!?

its a little disappointing that voting for round 1 ends after deadline for round 2.  would be better if you got feedback so you could know what voters like / dont like before submitting again.

We want to give voters plenty of time to vote without dragging out the event. We're open to suggestions though if you have a way to solve this conundrum

Why not make voting 4 days so we have 3 days to analyze and it doesn't drag out the event?

1) This was -the- most requested event from Brawl 1. Seriously, if you go back and look at least 4-5 people suggested it. As for scheduling, use titanpad/sync. You have 7 days to get everyone together and discuss an idea, then everyone but the deckbuilder is good to go immediately and can, if need, work on their own. I do not believe this task is in the least bit unreasonable.
2) The concern there is getting everyone time to vote, but I think that might work. I'll discuss it with Chapuz and others for Brawl 3

[Anarook]

I respect the opinions of those who stand highly in their respective areas. But I definitely feel like bonus points each round should not be a thing.
Or at the very least lessen the impact - maybe 1 point per category per round.
For instance - take a look at time: I've got tons of respect for them and congratulate them on doing so well - but look at how a majority of the bonuses points went to them - that made a HUGE difference.

I guess I feel this should be more community driven rather than "expert" driven.

/end rant

[Naesala]

I respect the opinions of those who stand highly in their respective areas. But I definitely feel like bonus points each round should not be a thing.
Or at the very least lessen the impact - maybe 1 point per category per round.
For instance - take a look at time: I've got tons of respect for them and congratulate them on doing so well - but look at how a majority of the bonuses points went to them - that made a HUGE difference.

I guess I feel this should be more community driven rather than "expert" driven.

/end rant

This is how in went in Brawl #1 and there were no complaints. Also, look at the rules thread, points scale up each round so the experts will have less and less impact in the points. Also, it's just a bit of a fluke Time got so many of our votes. Had we been more spread out, the impact would have been significantly smaller.

I will discuss with Chapuz, but I think I will wait until much later, after the worth of higher point rounds along with the high value challenges and wagers, before I seriously consider this amount being too much.

[russianspy1234]

its a little disappointing that voting for round 1 ends after deadline for round 2.  would be better if you got feedback so you could know what voters like / dont like before submitting again.

We want to give voters plenty of time to vote without dragging out the event. We're open to suggestions though if you have a way to solve this conundrum

well its only a day off, so it would really only take either shortening voting by 1 day or extending submissions by 1 day. shouldnt make too much difference to either.

[OldTrees]

I respect the opinions of those who stand highly in their respective areas. But I definitely feel like bonus points each round should not be a thing.
Or at the very least lessen the impact - maybe 1 point per category per round.
For instance - take a look at time: I've got tons of respect for them and congratulate them on doing so well - but look at how a majority of the bonuses points went to them - that made a HUGE difference.

I guess I feel this should be more community driven rather than "expert" driven.

/end rant

I feel this is a result of Community points increasing over time but Expert Points being a flat 2 per expert. Maybe have 1 point per expert in the first half and 2 points per expert in the second half. Or some similar scaling such that the significance of the round stays balanced between the sources.