|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 10:42 am
I dunno, cap it at 128?
Then have 6 brackets of 16 and the final 8 are in the semifinals?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 10:44 am
Rhoslyn Vernal I dunno, cap it at 128?
Then have 6 brackets of 16 and the final 8 are in the semifinals? But if we don't get 128, we'll have like a full set of byes.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 10:47 am
Do what you gotta do, man. confused
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 10:49 am
I think it'd be worth shuffling byes in to ensure everyone who entered gets the chance to fight. Hell, make the top fighters, point-wise get bye weeks so everyone else gets a chance to come up in points.
*shrugs*
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 10:52 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 10:53 am
That signature didn't last very long, Cog. I didn't even get to see the picture. Wasn't the one before of that weird monkey/wendigo couple?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 10:56 am
Let me mess around with my tournament bracket program. I might have a solution.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 10:56 am
NO, I FORBID YOU FROM DOING YOUR JOB.
D<
xp
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 11:08 am
Wow, with 68 entrants, there's like a whole lot of byes.
This could all easily be fixed if there was no set bracket and everything was random pairings every round, but I already did say 64 and Ecks is already making them as we speak. No use in turning back around and changing it. The only solution is a preliminary round to see which of the waiting list and those who turned in late revisions get the open spots.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 11:10 am
Vintrict The only solution is VIOLENCE. qft
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 11:18 am
Vintrict Wow, with 68 entrants, there's like a whole lot of byes. This could all easily be fixed if there was no set bracket and everything was random pairings every round, but I already did say 64 and Ecks is already making them as we speak. No use in turning back around and changing it. The only solution is a preliminary round to see which of the waiting list and those who turned in late revisions get the open spots.I LIKE THIS. @ Fox - Ahaha, no, that one was fine in terms of size and dimensions. The one I had recently was a Clint Eastwood gif from Gran Torino. Nobody can deny the Godliness of Eastwood, but some infidel reported it and it got taken off. If I find out who it is, Imma have some WORDS with them.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 11:20 am
The round will have to last like 3 to 4 days with a limit on posts. The highest graders get the spots. That way, everyone get a chance to fight.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 11:21 am
[ Cognitive Genome ] If I find out who it is, Imma have some WORDS with them. It was Egar.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 11:24 am
Also, there may be no shows to the first round, so even if the preliminary rounds aren't...
Naaah, I'll just stick to the first come first serve. Most likely most of the waiting list will be able to get in due to a few people not showing up as of yet, though a PM may fix that.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 11:25 am
@Cog and Vin: There's two sides to this coin.
Having preliminaries is going to be unfair for either of the two sides. It's just going to be a choice of who deserves the unfair judgement.
One, the people who gave you their profiles first should be given some credit for starting early and handing them in on time.
However, two, I can't discredit anyone for spending the extra time to make sure their profile is absolutely ready for competition.
If you wanna have prelims for those people, it'll also take time away from the main event, which means that the regular competition will start later, unless you want the prelims to move double-time to catch up to the main bracket.
Personally, I'd say you should stay first-come, first-serve, but that's just my opinion. confused
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|