|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:20 pm
{Ugh..
even the judges hate me..
Well...Guess I'm not welcome at that point.
^_^
Edit: Done, and done sir.
-waves-
-then poof-}
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:55 pm
Shut up Turnip, no one 'hates' you, you were just judged the defeated. Be da man.
At any-rate, solid notes. I feel the "damage" point would've likely been swayed had my opponent the time to get that last post in, and that the temperature points are a bit misleading (the enhanced flames in question are a rare sort to be obtained in these settings, and he, unintentionally of course, placed himself in the metaphorical eye of the storm of them) - but no glaring flaws, /gg notes as always.
Always did enjoy fight reviews.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Female of the Species
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:06 pm
*Exists*
Like Hael said, I don't hate you by any means.
Anyway, I'm here if anyone needs to discuss something about their review.
*Shrug*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:11 pm
My review is final! Don't make me go Judge Mathis on you guys! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:13 pm
Just something I think should be considered in the future. The abilities part of judging should probably be adjusted in some way or just eliminated. If a character has only passive traits that they can't simply use to turn the tide of a fight or if they lack any abilities at all, they're at a disadvantage. Where as characters who have a lot of active abilities can seemingly spam and get away with a free point.
Weapon based characters with out any special attacks with their weapons really seem to just get the shaft with this because passive abilities don't really seem to count for much. Or at least that's how I feel. It should probably just be fused with the creativity category since well, it seems the ability's category and creativity category are judging the same thing, "tactics".
But now I can do something I've been waiting to do since January but didn't want to miss any PM,
Name change!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:16 pm
You must be talking about the second category. That section mainly deals with "who uses their abilities to the best of their character." Be it magic or non magic, as long as you are performing effectively with them, then you get more advantage in this category. It may seem like that when a supernatural person is using powers, but if their powers aren't doing much of anything anyway, then they are failing. A couple of people with powers actually lost this category because they really weren't doing anything with their spamming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:26 pm
So how does that work with characters who's abilities are for the most part always active and passive. They can't actively be controlled nor do they do much since they are just passive traits?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:33 pm
To tell you the truth, I don't like passive abilities, at least passive abilities that are used as if they are as important as active abilities, and that is usually people deciding to build charges as if it's a passive thing when it's not suppose to be.
Mainly, I pay attention mostly to active abilities. The swing of a sword, the casting of a spell, those sort of things. A swordsman has as much of a chance in scoring as a mage who is versatile in a variety of ways (*cough Saphen cough*).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:35 pm
Here's an example.
Let's say you have a passive ability. But you work with that passive ability in mind; you'd get credit for that.
Meanwhile, if someone with an active ability decides to fire ten-trillion of (x) at you from a stupid angle, they'd get marked off because while yes, they were able to "utilize" their ability, they did so not only poorly but achieved little if any strategic results.
Effectiveness + tact.
I may have a passive ability that lets me sprint longer than the average individual for example (enhanced stamina), so if I'm fighting someone who's purely reliant on close-range melee, I might lead them around the ring for a bit and tire them out while my character's still in relatively good shape - that'd be a very basic example of using a passive ability well.
Just because you can't "fire" something, doesn't mean it can't be utilized. It just depends on the ability, aspect, etc. in question.
Meanwhile, if someone has no special POW0RZ, but they're extremely skilled with (x) weapon and utilize (x) weapon in a unique way that turns the fight around, I'd say that would qualify.
That's how I view it. I am justice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:41 pm
So what's the difference between ability category and creativity category if they're judging the same thing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:42 pm
The ability category is "are you using it well". The creativity category is: "are you doing something different from norm."
Throwing a fireball is all nice and all, but if you use it to say, light yourself on fire to get out of a fire-vulnerable grip or something like that, then that's creativity right there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:46 pm
It seems the judges dont like the use of defense as an offense. Ryu is a trap setter. Sets the traps, i.e. walls of earth or anything of the sort, then attacks once his opponent, without knowing, puts himself into a bad situation. Maybe I need to make a new character
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:47 pm
I don't know, I guess I just don't see much of a difference between the two since so far all I've seen was creativity being based on ability usage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:48 pm
They're related, but one is broad and the other is specific. One is based on execution and the other is based on the "wow" factor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:50 pm
Vintrict They're related, but one is broad and the other is specific. One is based on execution and the other is based on the "wow" factor. Is there a specific hate against the using of defense in a major setting to lure opponents in for a devastating attack?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
