• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Possible change for how votes work

RadicalMrR

RadicalMrR

VS Battles
Retired
3,179
503
So ever since I've been here the voteing system bothrered me, heres why.

So the rule is first one to 7 votes win,now thats not necesarily how it goes all the time since when both characters surpass 7 it becomes the wild west when it comes to how many votes a character needs.

Another thing that I dislike about it is if a character has 7 votes and the other has say 6 or 4 and no one else seems to want to participate then they will automacticly call that a win despite a big portian of people do belive the other combatent can win.Even if the majority of people are saying combatent A wins I really dislike how the result was made from a pool of 11-13 people.

So here is what I propose a character needs to have atleast 7 votes more than the other to win but this rule only applys if the number of total votes are below 14.

Examples:(10-3,7-0)

As for when it surpasses the 13 mark I suggest that a character needs only 3 (or 5 if thats to low) votes to get the win.

Another big change is there should be a grace period of when can it be considered a win.I suggest that the winning character must be winning for atleast a day before adding the win but the OP can ask to extend this.

Now I want to get into which votes count and which don't.

So only votes with an explaination as to why should count and the explanation has to make sense.What I mean by this is sometimes I see something like "Character A wins because of soul hax" even if Character B has a big resistence to soul hax.

I would also like to make it a rule that there must be a tally of the votes for the win to be considered and it must be on the thread or in the OP.Plus that way the admins don't have to waste time trying to count that.However if the admin don't belive the tally they can count the votes (just in case some makes a Puar Vs Beerus thread then proced to claim that Puar has 8 votes more,this is just a example)

I would also like to create a page for this because alot of newcomers don't understand this and it would be nice to give them a heads up on.

Now these are only suggestions and I don't mind if you disagree as long as we don't keep using the system thats being used now.And the admin don't have to delete all previous wins/losses or redo them all but I just ask that we use a new system from now on.
 
I agree with tallying of the votes.

I don't agree with three votes deciding any match no matter the unpopularity of the characters involved. It's far too little to make it notable in any manner as it's impossible to expect three persons to note a considerable amount of relevant information of the participating characters though I wouldn't mind if it was reduced from seven. Maybe five?

Sensible explanations are already described as mandatory.

A waiting period after the appropriate number of votes have been reached sound reasonable.
 
I agree with this

I also believe matches with speed equalized shouldn't be added to profiles as speed could very well be a deciding factor which isn't fair in those cases.
 
The reason it's 3 is because after awhile not many people will give input and I have seen so many matches that go on for weeks without any input but if three is to little then 5 might be more appropriate
 
Shouldn't we talk this out with Kavpeny as well? I mean he (along with Faisal in some parts) were the ones that made the page with the current rules?
 
ˆAgreed with Mighty, in fact, I don't support the idea of using votes cuz two reasons: there is no much people who knowns about the characters, so the first ones that get the votes could be fanboys/wankers of one characters with certains knowledge about the character that they wanted to win, the people that doesn't known much about any character would listen the the argue of the previous guy a give the vote.

the other reason is that people can change their votes depending of the argues presented, so counting votes would be a mess. the better is reaches an agreed conclusion, but that is almost impossible.

The better to do is that in any vsthread there a rasonable expert from any side, an a moderator to unsure that the thread doesn't get out of control
 
Well i messaged Kavpeny to try to look at this and see what his thoughts on this manner would be.

Aside from that, i get Mighty has said. Tallying up the votes by putting it on the OP (of course not by that voting poll function thing).

Not sure about the 5 votes thing considering that's what we use to had and whatnot....
 
But the 5 vote rule comes after the inicial 13 votes because after awhile a thread usually losses steam and no is giving input anymore even with bumps.

This is what the grace period is for so that other people can give input and every time input is given the Grace period will reset.
 
While harder requirements for such votings aren't bad one has to on the other hand judge against the fact that the requirements have to be reachable. If I don't do a fight against or between popular verses (HST, Fairy tail and dragonball mostly) it can be quite difficult to get a sufficient amount of people to participate, give well founded opinions (for them to even be well founded is for those not many know difficult) and in the end majorly agree on something (a 7/10 majority is more than the german parlament needs to change the "constitution").

A certain unbalance in the likelyhood of a battle getting listed for not as popular verses is unavoidable and as such I am not against such an increase in general, I just want to mention that one has to consider what the appropiate balance is in that point.


Further in my opinion a debate shouldn't end or be listed at the point a necessary majority is reached (even with grace period), but only once either an agreement is reached or the debate went on for a considerable time and a clear majority was established (precise definition of considerable time is debateable). Otherwise the side that has the majority is encouraged to just ignore arguments from voters with different opinion that already have voted and wait for their victory.

I might also point out that opinions on wether an argument makes sense or not may differ in certain less simple cases. Generally to not count such votes an objective criteria for when an argument is considered debateable or solid enough to count for a vote (even if the one counting believes it absolutely doesn't make sense) is necessary for such cases. Arguments which generally are given and in further discussion not defended would likely fall in the class of those that can generally be disregarded, but that is just a sufficient criteria not a necessary one.


About the speed equalized thing: It should not be listed on profiles at all except it is specifically written down together with the result of course. Even though I agree that fights under such conditions are rarely notable.
 
DontTalk said:
About the speed equalized thing: It should not be listed on profiles at all except it is specifically written down together with the result of course. Even though I agree that fights under such conditions are rarely notable.
Click to expand...
Problem is, it's rare to find characters in the same tier with the same speed. Also, characters that usually operate on a galactic or stellar scale are often FTL, but there are some franchises, like Marvel, that are vastly below. Plus, there could be an immesurable vs MFTL+ or immesurable vs 4D omnipresent that would be more fair.
 
@The real cal howard:

That is a bit depended on what you believe is the purpose of listing the results of vs threads on the profiles. In my opinion we list notable victories and losses since they are to a degree notable and can in another way represent the strength and weakness of a character to make them well understood and to possibly showcase some easy to overlook advantages and details of characters (like having a practical fighting style which is actually a bit rare).

As such speed equal should certainly be mentioned (similarly to when not the strongest version is used, in some cases it might even be relevant to mention the characters being bloodlusted instead of in character).

The question if a loss against a character, if the speed was downgraded through speed equalize, is usually even notable is in my opinion questionable. But given the popularity of such matches I can understand still listing them, but a note should in any case be mandatory.
 
I am uncertain about this, but have also informed Lord Kavpeny.
 
Personally i'd have the numhers for votes look like this. 7-3 is a win. 7-4 and up is not clearcut enough

Then i'd make it the next winnable margin 10-6 10-7 and up not clearcut enough.

Then keep going until a lead of 4 votes is acquired, me thinks.

Of course keeping in mind these have to be valid votes and not just "x char wins". Although agteeing with the reasons of another user I think is fine, rewriting the same answer a different way seems pretty redundant
 
I agree with Aizen

But what do you say to the grace period and a tally being requried
 
LordAizenSama said:
Personally i'd have the numhers for votes look like this.
7-3 is a win. 7-4 and up is not clearcut enough

Then i'd make it the next winnable margin 10-6 10-7 and up not clearcut enough.

Then keep going until a lead of 4 votes is acquired, me thinks.

Of course keeping in mind these have to be valid votes and not just "x char wins". Although agteeing with the reasons of another user I think is fine, rewriting the same answer a different way seems pretty redundant
Click to expand...
That's good and all, but what is going to happen to vote that can't get to 7 in one side in the first place, due to low vote count? (like 4 or 9?)
 
@radical I think the grace period is good, I don't know if a tally rule is necessary seeing as a good majority of people do so anyway, but i'm not against it

@andy then it won't be added until they do get it. Just like it has been up until now
 
Well then im OK with this.Also we need a set time for grace period,in my opinion it should atleast be 1 day but the OP should be able to extend that if he wants more input

You think that how the voting system works should be added to the VS Thread rules page
 
I agree with Aize's suggestion.

A gap of 4 votes however, seems slightly excessive, given an initial maximum of 7. A difference of 3 votes difference seems more reasonable.

Simple yes/no votes will be discounted.

Not sure if agreeing with another person's reasoning should be accepted as a legitimate vote, though.
 
I support Lord Kavpeny's decision.
 
So, do other staff members have objections, or should somebody modify the rules accordingly?
 
A 3 vote gap seems good enough, yeah.

Definitely agree on the yes/no votes being discounted on top of the one line/one word rule we have for them.

Hmm. Well the thing about the last part is that someone could have made the exact same vote that the same person have made either way. I'm kind of fine with that IMO but that's just only me. Don't know about the others about that part, though.
 
I'm in agreement that the votation system needs an update, and I agree with Lord Aizen's magnificent plan but with Lord Kav's 3-vote gap.

Methinks speed equalized is ok to add, else, we have too little fights that don't devolve into lolBlitz.

Agreeing to a previous answer should be accepted imo, else we get multiple posts with the same answer. Redundant redundancy is redundant y'know.

Yes/no answers are disregarded.

The problem I see in this is the waiting time. There is obviously no time limit prior to one character reaching 7, but after that, maybe we could have 3-5 days waiting time, just for the possibility that there are other people with good answers that might boost the numbers of the losing side. Else, maybe adding it is ok if the debaters are in agreement or its something like 7-0. But that's something that is likely already suggested so yeah.

Also, yeah. Putting the tally of votes on the OP and on the comment to the official victory/losses page should be good methinks.
 
Bump

I think were almost done we just got to set a minmum for the grace period
 
I think either 3 or 4 votes gap is good. However I believe that (as long as the person's reasoning is legitamate), then someone saying they agree with another should be counted. As it probably saves the redundancy of people typing out the same thing and the person still gave justification to their vote, albiet justification that someone else already stated.
 
I also think that votes agreeing with somebody else should be counted.

Anyway, could somebody write an outline for how we should word the combination of LordAizenSama's and LordKavpeny's above suggestions?
 
"To have a charcter's win considred they most have a minimum of 3 votes more then his/her oppenent in intervals starting from 7-4 after which 10-7 then 13-10 and so on and so forth..."

Does theat seem resonable but i think we should still set a grace period so that way the maximum amount of people can give input.

If you chose to write with a grace period just continue after I stoped with

"after a minimum vote total has been reached there will be a grace period of (insert time here) that allows other people to give input before the reluts can be added.Every time the vote is in favor of the lossing side the grace period will only restart after another interval has been reached"
 
Well the great majority of people do want a grace period

Also I think it should specify in the cases of an extreamly one-sided match that isn't considered a stomp

Like if it were 7-0
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MasqueTLDF
  • Locked
DxD Rule addition: Class Scaling
2
Replies
48
Views
3K
MasqueTLDF
MasqueTLDF
H3110l12345I20
IF JBW is smaller in user activity than VSBW, then why not reduce the necessary vote count for serious VS threads to 3-4 votes like in FCOC?
Replies
14
Views
3K
H3110l12345I20
H3110l12345I20
YmTheSuper
Location dependent abilities
Replies
2
Views
201
Homie890
Pepsimanslover_69
  • Locked
FNAF World Revision: Main Series Cross Scaling
Replies
21
Views
2K
Pepsimanslover_69
Pepsimanslover_69
Saqphire
Raiden Ei vs. Cosmic Garou [2-1-0]
Replies
9
Views
963
Oliver_de_jesus
Oliver_de_jesus
Back
Top