From: -LusterSoldier- | #1206
Trainers were more likely to be bandwagoned against Mario/Bowser to keep themselves from being eliminated from the contest. The primary argument against rallying in Trainers/Cloud is that it's a third place match that isn't even part of the contest, so there's no incentive to push the Trainers over Cloud.
No, they weren't more likely to be bandwagoned against Mario/Bowser because the match was not close. Plus, Nintendo hierarchy anyway.
From: -LusterSoldier- | #1206That's possible. The raw x-stats wouldn't be based off of the Trainers/Cloud match, while the adjusted ones would be.
I'll probably make 3 sets of stats, each set just needs an extra column. Once I make the spreadsheet new stats are easy. It's making the spreadsheet that's the hard work :(
From: KamikazePotato | #1203Congrats, you just described any close match.
From 8am to 9am, Cloud/Seph got 53.72% of the vote. From 9am-10am, they got 53%. But the instant they threatened to take the lead, Pokemon starting 50/50ing them. Those aren't normal trends. The 8am-9am and 9am-10am periods should reflect who the winner of the "day vote" is going to be.
[edit: Especially since in relative terms, Pokemon should normally be doing better in the morning vote against FF7 compared to the rest of the match]
Going from 53%-54% during those hours to 50/50 the rest of the way, is not normal. Normal close matches do not have %age differences between the morning vote and the day vote to that staggering degree - especially when the match then proceeds to become almost trendless, a flat line for the rest of the day. This despite the two entities normally having very different trends - instead of the exaggerated trends we should have seen, the trends vanished.
From: Not_Wylvane | #1210
This whole thing was farcical the minute you opened your mouth and started this bats*** insane derail.
Have a wonderful evening to you too.
--
www.gamefaqscontests.com
www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery