Adventure Gamers - Forums
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
Post Marker Legend:
-
New posts -
No new posts
Currently online
Playthrough Tie-breaker rules
I think the system is fine the way it is, and its not a big deal either way.
However, if you want to simplify it do this: have a nomination round, where people nominate and vote for as many games as they want. Then after several days or a week, take the top 5 of those (ties beyond 5 go to the game nominated first) and make a forum poll, tie again goes to game nominated first.
The only rule that from my point of view was a bit unfair, was the rule that was implemented in some previous CPT, on which in case of a tie the only people who could vote and thus break the tie were those who had voted for both games and no one else, which did not have much sense to me, since they were ultimately the ones who would win and participate regardless of whatever the outcome, fortunately this rule was not used on this occasion and hopefully it won’t be used again.
Anyway I have no objections to any of the other methods that are discussed here, although if it were up to me I would make it more simple, as I said rtrooney I would start from scratch.
” I remember. Somebody died. It was me.”
~
Actually the more i think about it i would simplify it further. Do the voting the same way it is now, except only one round and tie goes to the game nominated first (or typed first if both games are in the same post). Because the point is to get a game that has enough people for an active playthrough.. if two games have 8 people then clearly either will suffice, so is it worth extra days and days of complication? Just a thought 
I fully endorse the method that chrissie used in the voting round, and would keep it for future ties.
It’s basically what’s been stated in the very first post, with the added remark that those who voted for only one of the tied games get to recast their vote if they so wish (we just keep their vote because, well, how often are they going to recast it really?).
I’m not that big on a third voting round, though. Especially if only two games were tied in the first place. If only two games were tied after the first round, and they’re still tied after the second, then a third round will just yield the same result as the second. A third round is only useful if we started with 3 or 4 tied games and are now down to 2 tied games.
And I agree that the voting process for the first round should be a lot longer than just 5 days. Usually it lasts almost 2 weeks!
The truth can’t hurt you, it’s just like the dark: it scares you witless but in time you see things clear and stark. - Elvis Costello
Maybe this time I can be strong, but since I know who I am, I’m probably wrong. Maybe this time I can go far, but thinking about where I’ve been ain’t helping me start. - Michael Kiwanuka
Ok, so let’s update the process I had outlined before based on comments. In the end we don’t seem to have too much disagreements so let’s see if this can solve the sempiternal disagreements everything there’s voting.
First round: everyone can vote for multiple games
Second round in case of tie,
- Only tied games are eligible for the vote
- Anyone can vote (even people who did not vote during the first round)
- People who voted for only one game during the first round retain their vote for that game but they can recast their vote another game if they so wish
- People who voted for more than one game must vote again but only chose a single game.
In the unlikely event there’s still a tie, the leader of the thread or score keeper will decide the winner
Duration of rounds:
First round: 10 days?
Second round: 5 days
Objections/Comments:
TimovieMan suggests not having a third round.
- I personally agree and in that case we could make the second round last 5 days instead.
EDIT: I’ve removed the third round.
rtrooney doesn’t agree with retaining the votes from the first round for people who only voted once.
- @rtrooney do you still disagree based on the replies after?
Zane suggests to simplify directly choosing the first nominated game in case of a tie.
Pretty much everybody said that the first round was too short. So I’ve updated it to 10 days which together with the second round (if we only have a second round like TimovieMan suggested) would make the total 15 days.
Second round in case of tie,
- Only tied games are eligible for the vote
- Anyone can vote (even people who did not vote during the first game*)
*A nitpick, but I assume you mean round here.
I agree with everything else in Glom’s post except for having a 3rd round because it drags out the process too long.
By the way, I apologize for voting for Touché, withdrawing my vote, and then putting it back again, but I honestly thought I wouldn’t be able to play it and thought it wouldn’t be fair to count my vote. Next time I’ll do my research before voting.
“Rainy days should be spent at home with a cup of tea and a good book.” -Bill Watterson
Yeah same here. I agree with giom’s suggestions, but I would eliminate the third round for the reasons Timovieman mentioned.
*A nitpick, but I assume you mean round here.
Good catch. I’ve corrected it
Yeah same here. I agree with giom’s suggestions, but I would eliminate the third round for the reasons Timovieman mentioned.
Yep, I’m personally in favor of not having a third round.
By the way, I apologize for voting for Touché, withdrawing my vote, and then putting it back again, but I honestly thought I wouldn’t be able to play it and thought it wouldn’t be fair to count my vote. Next time I’ll do my research before voting.
No need to apologize for that… Things like this are bound to happen. Glad you’ll be able to join the playthrough!
Zane suggests to simplify directly choosing the first nominated game in case of a tie.
Since this is a world-wide group I don’t think you can do that. Time zones would be a major problem.
Life is what it is.
Ok, so let’s update the process I had outlined before based on comments. In the end we don’t seem to have too much disagreements so let’s see if this can solve the sempiternal disagreements everything there’s voting.
- People who voted for only one game during the first round retain their vote for that game but they can recast their vote another game if they so wish
rtrooney doesn’t agree with retaining the votes from the first round for people who only voted once.
- @rtrooney do you still disagree based on the replies after?
If I read that correctly changing a vote is a two-step process. 1) Telling the moderator to remove your your vote from the automatically-applied entry. 2) Voting for a different game. The more steps, the greater the chance for error.
I still think a start-from-scratch for everyone is the way to go. So, yes, I still disagree on this point. Everything else is fine by me.
For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.
Well, it’s just that the user would say in a comment:
“I’d like to change my vote to Blade Runner instead of Touché.”
And the score keeper would change the vote. We already allow people to change their mind on a vote so it’s not a very big difference. Plus, I think that’s an edge case since, as Tim said, the user is unlikely to want to change his vote.
That said, how strong of a disagreement is it? Do you disagree with it but can live with it?
Since, I think we do need to compromise if we want to reach an agreement between everyone on the rules…
Zane suggests to simplify directly choosing the first nominated game in case of a tie.
Since this is a world-wide group I don’t think you can do that. Time zones would be a major problem.
I dont think so. The time every voting begins wont be the same. And the first game nominated doesnt mean it will be the one involved in a tie for first place. It does perhaps give some incentive to nominate sooner than later, and i dont think thats a bad thing. What it boils down to is, were not crowning a champion of game rankings, were picking which of the titles to go with that already have enough people for a playthrough.
On the other hand, having multiple rounds of voting might be more fun for people, i can understand that.
That said, how strong of a disagreement is it? Do you disagree with it but can live with it?
Since, I think we do need to compromise if we want to reach an agreement between everyone on the rules…
You already asked me, and I said yes. Now you’re asking again, but asking that I define my level of disagreement.
Trying to define the level on a 1-to-10 scale won’t change the basic fact.
You can make the process as absolutely simple as it can be. Or you can add layers of complexity that, no matter how subtle, are eventually like to cause a problem.
Having a set of rules is better than having no set of rules. So you are ahead of the game.
For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.
I’m asking if you can live with it because we’ve got to reach a consensus (which we’ve failed to do repeatedly up until now). I think it’s better if we can have the same rules for the both playthrough voting threads and since you run the Casual Playthrough Voting Thread, your voice is important 
On one hand, there’s you who think retaining votes from people who only voted for one of the tied games makes things more complicated, on the other hand based on comments, me, Tim, SoccerDude28 think that retaining votes make things easier since we don’t have to ask them again to cast their vote when we already know it.
I’m just trying to compile what seems to be the general agreement so that we reach a consensus…
If that’s the case, then I guess I can live with it, but not like it. I’m not terribly fond of changing the way the CCPT has dealt with ties since day one. That’s not as long as the AGCPT has been running. But it has operated its tiebreaks consistently for a longer period of time. 
I can also say that the CCPT has been quite lucky. It has needed far fewer tiebreaks since it started. (There was some discussion when the first one came up. Which resulted in some discussion that resulted the current, non-written, rules.) And while Touche has won the vote, unless the download link appears, you still may be looking at a tiebreak.
I think we’ve also been lucky in that we’ve pretty much had one moderator since day one. Whereas the AGCPT has had, I think, five, if not more, in recent history. Each with his or her own preference as to how things should work.
For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
