Hmm... the "increments" ruling for the percentage pick makes things much more difficult for this final. If I wanted to go with a 10% pick, I couldn't modify it so that the 10% falls between 55-65%. It would have to be either 50-60% or 60-70%. This is very tricky, as I'd imagine the consensus expectation for the final is Link>Mario with right around 60%.
-- Yoblazer: http://oi53.tinypic.com/2hd0dh1.jpg Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world!
Yep, I made that comment prematurely. This was a pretty good idea, although in this case, I think the 10% risk is useless (unless the semis really suggest otherwise, I doubt Link beats Mario with less than 55% or more than 65%). I also have a hard time picturing any of the remaining perfects being crazy enough gamblers to risk a 63-match streak on 1% accuracy. The 5% risks will probably separate the top prizes from everyone else.
-- Yoblazer: http://oi52.tinypic.com/ad21i1.jpg Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world!
True perfection is out of my reach now because I am not touching that 1% pick. I'll just bank all my points on straight link and hope that's enough to at least put me on the leaderboard when all is said and done.
I think I can successfully pull off a 5% pick here, but a 1% pick seems too risky. If the final was actually Link/Cloud, I might risk it all on a 1% pick. At least Link/Cloud is pretty much expected to fall between 52% and 55%.
-- Luster Soldier --- ~Shield Bearer~ | ~Data Analyst~ Popular at school, but not as cool as BlAcK TuRtLe, Guru Champ!
Wow, what the hell!! It sure would have been nice to know about these final battle rules BEFORE I chose to risk my perfect battle streak on a Frog/Magus upset only because my tiebreaker was 125k. Shouldn't these rules have been included with all the info before the contest started?!? Throwing in new rules in the middle of a contest is about as amateur as it gets!
--
Organized people are just too lazy to look for things.
Since it's pretty much a given that, barring any freak upset, (1) only folks who have perfect entries up to this point will be competitive; and (2) the folks with perfect entries will have to bet everything in order to win
why not just make things simple and have the battlers define their own bounds [min, max] ? Assuming the entrant picked the correct winner with the actual percentage within [min, max], the tiebreaker would then be the value of (max - min).
So for example, if Link beats Mario with 61.55%, - someone who set the bounds [60.00, 63.50] would have a tiebreaker score of 3.50. - someone who set the bounds [50.00, 70.00] would have a tiebreaker score of 20.00. - someone who set the bounds [50.00, 100.00] would have a tiebreaker score of 50.00 where lower is better.
on a score basis, you can normalise it so that (max - min) = 50.00 has a multiplier of 100%, (max - min) = 1.00 has a multiplier of 200%, (max - min) = 0.00 has a multiplier of 1000%
with the current setup there are going to be a lot of ties at the 10% level and another load of ties for straight pick. with flexible granularity up to 0.01 on either bound, there will be a lot fewer ties.
-- GameFAQs.com: Where YOU make the content, but CBS makes the money. http://lueshi.info/Mario_Zelda_Tier_List.gif
According to my math, assuming at least one perfect battler takes a straight pick on Link it'll mean on current scores (prior to points from Mario) you'd need to have 113633 at risk.
Which is only 18 extra which aren't perfect who could possibly win it.
Still, that's relatively significant, and if the top non-perfects get a 1% accuracy, it'll win over even a perfect 5% accuracy pick. Probably won't come up, but it's still interesting to think about.
--
MMBN style fighting game made by me in the link below! http://sandbox.yoyogames.com/games/184947-b8bn
This is literally the only way to make an exciting contest in the future:
Best Game Ever III: Best Game By System
16 systems, 16 games per system
-Arcade -PC -NES -SNES -N64 -GCN -Wii -SMS/Genesis -Saturn/Dreamcast -PS1 -PS2 -PS3 -XBox -360 -All handhelds -Other (not released on any of the above)
Winner of each advances to the tourney proper... the final 4 may be predictable but you can't tell me you think the winners of every round would be easy to predict!
-- SephirothG, channeling awesomeness from Mershiness. The Resurrection
This is literally the only way to make an exciting contest in the future:
Best Game Ever III: Best Game By System
16 systems, 16 games per system
-Arcade -PC -NES -SNES -N64 -GCN -Wii -SMS/Genesis -Saturn/Dreamcast -PS1 -PS2 -PS3 -XBox -360 -All handhelds -Other (not released on any of the above)
Winner of each advances to the tourney proper... the final 4 may be predictable but you can't tell me you think the winners of every round would be easy to predict!
Dear SB,
Please ignore that person. Forcing games to start out competing against only their own generation/system yet again would be the worst idea possible- we already tried that in both 2004 and 2009, with really dull results.
All the next 1v1 128 Game Contest needs is to be run just like Game of the Decade, but also include the best games of the 80s and 90s together with the big games of the last two years, NOT divided by generation or system. If you also remove the Champions of the previous 3 games contests, it'll be really exciting and unpredictable right down to the final round.
Thanks SB!
Your pal, ~Ng
-- thengamer.com/guru thengamer.com/xstats board8.wikia.com I'd search B8 for The Show if I were you. *wink wink*
This is literally the only way to make an exciting contest in the future:
Best Game Ever III: Best Game By System
16 systems, 16 games per system
-Arcade -PC -NES -SNES -N64 -GCN -Wii -SMS/Genesis -Saturn/Dreamcast -PS1 -PS2 -PS3 -XBox -360 -All handhelds -Other (not released on any of the above)
Winner of each advances to the tourney proper... the final 4 may be predictable but you can't tell me you think the winners of every round would be easy to predict!
Dear SB,
Please ignore that person. Forcing games to start out competing against only their own generation/system yet again would be the worst idea possible- we already tried that in both 2004 and 2009, with really dull results.
All the next 1v1 128 Game Contest needs is to be run just like Game of the Decade, but also include the best games of the 80s and 90s together with the big games of the last two years, NOT divided by generation or system. If you also remove the Champions of the previous 3 games contests, it'll be really exciting and unpredictable right down to the final round.
Thanks SB!
Your pal, ~Ng
No, because the games will not just be split by era, but by DEVELOPER essentially. That way Nintendo can be pushed into its own little crappy corner and we can see more interesting matches in the others.
-- SephirothG, channeling awesomeness from Mershiness. The Resurrection
And forcing all of Nintendo into one quarter of the bracket makes that quarter hugely boring, predictable, and with low votals. It also lowers interest and vote totals for all the matches after that, since all of the most popular games (except one) will have been eliminated. After a low votal Contest like this current one, that's going to be the last thing SB is looking for.
-- thengamer.com/guru thengamer.com/xstats board8.wikia.com I'd search B8 for The Show if I were you. *wink wink*
Who cares about any of this. They put Cloud and Sephiroth in the contest which means they're going to win. Just like every year they hold these contests. Same old story, no new outcome.
If pokemon trainer or whatever the heck it is (No one over 25 has most likely even ever seen a pokemon game or show) wins. I will have lost my faith in peoples ideas of CLASSIC gaming rivalries. I hope that its getting votes as a joke and people really aren't seriously thinking that it is the biggest gaming rivalry of all time. S...M...MFn...H
--
psn: DonCalzone21 aka The Goonfather --- oh so fre$h
Ryoten22 posted... Who cares about any of this. They put Cloud and Sephiroth in the contest which means they're going to win. Just like every year they hold these contests. Same old story, no new outcome.
FINAL FANTASY ALWAYS WINS, I know!
-- thengamer.com/guru thengamer.com/xstats board8.wikia.com I'd search B8 for The Show if I were you. *wink wink*
Please ignore that person. Forcing games to start out competing against only their own generation/system yet again would be the worst idea possible- we already tried that in both 2004 and 2009, with really dull results.
2004 really dull results
what? spring 2004 is still one of the best contests ever. which I assume you're talking about cause that was the only contest in 2004 that fit that criteria.
maybe you got it confused with summer 2004
--
"Sorry pop music lyrics don't use ancient Hebrew religious imagery as an illusion to the class struggle in French Indochina as you grind on a girl."