[VOTE WAR] The War of the Crown - Page 13 - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213
Results 121 to 130 of 130
  1. #121
    Benevolent Dictator CaptainSarathai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    inside your head
    Posts
    9,222
    Mentioned
    77 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    1480 (x8)

    Grats Kroxi. A tough break for me - I was on the opposite of your luck, always taking the second turn and, in the one battle that I was poorest at (Blood and Glory) getting stuck in against you. I'd already beaten the Beasts before, too. I COULDA BEEN A CONTENDER! Ah well, gratz on the victory sir, it was a scary, scary army list you had there.

    I do think that Poll-voting would be a good one for this. Give everyone 1 vote, and there's nothing to worry about. Sure, they can vote for themselves, but it's 1 vote, and the opponent was given a fair chance to vote for himself too. Otherwise yeah, this is traditional VW formatting isn't it? I think it works just fine. As far as ideas for the next one? Not sure - I think running them the same way would work just fine, with the only change being the polls instead of bolded votes.

    Pts Values for AoS here!

    Nippon Armybook: Isuu, Scribd, and free at Google Docs

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #122
    RAWR! KROXIGOR!! kroxigor01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Age
    14
    Posts
    1,935
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    288 (x6)

    I think poll voting is a bad idea. People should be spending at least 10 minutes thinking about the lists, map, tactics etc to make a serious vote. Writing a reply is a small fraction of the time it takes to make a vote.

    I also think the discussions are the most interesting part of the votewar and poll voting would be a step away from that.

  4. #123
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Montgomery, Illinois
    Age
    44
    Posts
    764
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputation
    80 (x2)

    I agree with you Kroxigor. The main problem seemed to be getting more votes. Having a poll would get more votes I think. It comes down to quality vs. quantity. If you want good, well-thought out votes there will be fewer of them. That is why I think that having the participants vote in all the other matches would be a good idea. Even just an eight person votewar would have at least six votes per match that way.

  5. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  6. #124
    RAWR! KROXIGOR!! kroxigor01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Age
    14
    Posts
    1,935
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    288 (x6)

    Yes, list submiters should have to vote.

    But I think posting abstain or draw and giving a few sentence reasoning on why you can't pick a winner counts as voting.

  7. #125
    Keeper of Records and Ale King Ulrik Flamebeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Leeds, Yorkshire
    Age
    35
    Posts
    10,982
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    1372 (x8)

    Thanks for the ideas guys. It is great to have the support and suggestions for you all.

    I will admit that I am not a fan of poll voting. The idea of vote wars is that you are meant to support your reasons why, rather than just vote. So yes, we would have more votes with the poll voting, but it would mean a reduction in the actual reasons why. Something which I feel makes a vote war interesting. I would suggest allowing the owners of the armies to post in their thread, but not to vote in their own - obviously. But rather to defend their actions and explain choices, something I know some of you wished to do this time around.

    As to enforcing all who take part to vote, that is kind of fine. But how do you suggest it is done? Especially if someone does poll voting, unless the votes are made public then you'll never know if they have or not. And telling them at the start is all well and good, but we can't force people to vote each time and what if they are stopped by real life situations? Are they penalised until they vote? Just some considerations to think of.


    Kuffy

  8. #126
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Montgomery, Illinois
    Age
    44
    Posts
    764
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputation
    80 (x2)

    I don't really like the poll voting option either. I greatly enjoy reading everyone's reasoning and thought processes behind their votes. As for a way to get participants to vote in other matches, maybe a 1 vote penalty in their own match if they do not vote. If real life issues interfere, a quick PM to the TO explaining the situation could exempt someone from a round without taking much effort.

    As far as people posting in their own threads I think there is a fine line for that. If they need to explain something that someone has incorrectly posted or some information that someone may have missed when voting I agree with that. I think it goes too far when they try to influence the voting by strong-arming voters with things like, "My list has to win because.." or "I would not handle that fight on Turn 3 like you wrote that I would." I think that after the initial tactics and deployment are written, the combatants should be limited to commenting on errors and factual information and not the subjectivity of the battle. I don't know if I am explaining myself very well here.

  9. #127
    Oh No! Not Him Again! Non Marine Player's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Littleton, UK
    Posts
    779
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputation
    94 (x2)

    I think I understand, you, as the submitter of a list, would be able to comment on how you would deal with X had you not explained it in your tactics, which is a good idea, you'd need someone to enforce restrictions on replies though. That and there's a limit on words in tactics to make us concise with our plan, giving us extra opportunities to explain ourselves kind've moots the point of having the word cap there to begin with.

    Otherwise, I agree with what's been said, although I think that you could have Poll voting, as long as you also posted your decision making process.

  10. #128
    Son of LO Polaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,653
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    720 (x8)

    Well, if you look back to how it went this time we had a lot of votes with nothing else except the name of the army in the post so how is that any different from poll vote?
    Revenant Moon Necrons: (W/L/D) 0/1/0 (6th edition: 13/2/2)(5th edition: 14/6/4)(3rd edition Codex: 16/4/7)
    XIX Legion: (W/L/D) 0/0/0 (5th edition: 14/12/2)(5th edition Codex: 4/3/0)
    Black Legion: (W/L/D) 1/0/0 (6th edition: 2/3/0)
    Something Wicked... Reikwald Beastmen: (W/L/D) 10/4/1

  11. #129
    Oh No! Not Him Again! Non Marine Player's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Littleton, UK
    Posts
    779
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputation
    94 (x2)

    The man has a point, a good point...

  12. #130
    RAWR! KROXIGOR!! kroxigor01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Age
    14
    Posts
    1,935
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    288 (x6)

    Well in my opinion that shouldn't be acceptable. I don't believe that someone has really analysed the match if they can't have at least 2 sentences of justification run off their fingers.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts