|
Post by Katelyn Mayhem on Feb 23, 2010 1:27:01 GMT -5
Can there be a set number of rps for now on? I've noticed that sometimes someone will flood the boards with rps (I'm guilty of this) and beat someone who clearly had better quality. Now I'm not complaining or bitching, I'm just saying that in my opinion it's happened before. If we had an rp limit then it would become a non-issue.
For example if someone loses and wants to know why they're encouraged to ask the judges why.
In the past I've heard people have been told the following.
Sometimes people lose b/c they're told they rped too much for the match and that it took away from their overall quality.
Sometimes they lose b/c they're told their opponent rped more.
I'm getting tired of seeing someone writing an amazing rp and losing to someone who wrote 5 or 6 that were almost identical to each other and were of far lower quality.
I'm not the only person who feels this way. There are others who have expressed similar views to me. I've decided to say something because,
A) I think it's a problem.
B) I don't argue about much here.
|
|
|
Post by Karen DiMarcio on Feb 23, 2010 1:52:00 GMT -5
First, as for people losing because "they RPed too much," it has nothing to do with the number. It just means they tried to play the numbers game and didn't have enough ideas to do so, thus spreading themselves too thin. If you post what looks like it should have been one RP as three just to have three, then it's obviously going to be looked at as such.
Likewise, if somebody loses because somebody RPed more, it's probably because the person that RPed more had a quality edge as well.
Writing is subjective. What some people like, others won't. What you might see as "one amazing RP vs. 5 generic RPs" might not be seen that way by others. And with as many judges as we have, it's not like the popular opinion of one or two people is winning out. You're literally getting at the very least at least 3-4 people agreeing per match.
The problem with RP limits is two-fold..And both were witnessed by several of us that were in another fed with such limits:
1. People will hold RPs until the last possible minute. If there's a, say, 2 RP limit..And each person does one early in the week..The urge to hold that second RP for as long as possible so the other person can't reply is going to be big. After a few months we'd be getting no RPs any day of the week but Thursday or Saturday depending on the event.
2. It's possible to take what would be like, 6 RPs..And post them all as one. So then the numbers game vanishes..But the length game begins. It still ends up a matter of who can write more in the time given..It just results in longer RPs instead of more RPs.
These problems weren't noticed as much in SW because, well, the big title matches didn't even have RP limits, anyway, and the matches people WOULD RP for a lot..WERE RPed for a lot.
Besides limiting creativity, limits cause more problems than they solve..Frankly because in the long run, they don't actually solve anything. Mad your opponent RPed 12 times and you only had time for 3? Even with limits, it could end up your 3 RPs against their 12-RP-sized 3 RPs.
It just doesn't solve anything and ends up being a needless restriction.
|
|
|
Post by WTFWILL on Feb 23, 2010 3:12:01 GMT -5
*agrees with Gina*
In most cases, RP limits simply cause more deadline whorig.
|
|
Steve "Chuie" Johnson
CPW Veteran
I love your loss! Your loss is sweet to me like LOVE is sweet!
Posts: 534
|
Post by Steve "Chuie" Johnson on Feb 23, 2010 15:49:37 GMT -5
I don't get it. I really don't. When has someone written an amazing RP and lost a match because their opponent RPed more? The only time I feel numbers have come into play is in terms of effort. If one person clearly doesn't put in the effort to RP too many times against their opponent, it's an issue. And if they don't put in the effort to RP too many times, their quality probably suffers... so it's understandable that they lose.
I'm curious about when exactly people have been told this RPed too little number of times. The RPed too many times isn't even a point though because if they RPed that many times more than their opponent that a question of numbers was even brought up, clearly there was something else wrong with what they were writing.
I know total length has been a factor in matches that were so close quality-wise that some judges probably used that to decide who wins or not. But that's a non-issue anyway because it simply goes back to more effort put in on top of the quality.
I don't think this is really an issue all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2010 16:06:03 GMT -5
I have been a victim of this before and limits make people work harder on the number amount making there rps hella better. I'm with Toms on this on.
|
|
|
Post by Karen DiMarcio on Feb 23, 2010 16:19:58 GMT -5
..Krazy, there's nothing to be a victim of, and Toms didn't say limits were a good idea so you're not with him. >.>
Limits don't make people work any harder than no limits. It just causes them to make their RPs longer.
|
|
Steve "Chuie" Johnson
CPW Veteran
I love your loss! Your loss is sweet to me like LOVE is sweet!
Posts: 534
|
Post by Steve "Chuie" Johnson on Feb 23, 2010 16:20:04 GMT -5
...I'm not arguing in favor of RP limits, Krazy. >.>
Edit: Sneaky Gina Ninja - Seductress of the Night
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2010 16:25:20 GMT -5
..Krazy, there's nothing to be a victim of, and Toms didn't say limits were a good idea so you're not with him. >.> Limits don't make people work any harder than no limits. It just causes them to make their RPs longer. BULL! Gina, when was the last time I said something about being a victim in the past year? Ummm, this is the first time. I have to say Rp limits would make the rps go up not these 15 ones. There is a way to make this better like non-tile matches limit title limit. There I solved the problem.
|
|
|
Post by Karen DiMarcio on Feb 23, 2010 20:29:23 GMT -5
Krazy, just trust me when I say you've never been a "victim" of this. It's not how we judge, and it's never how things have been judged here.
Again, all limits do is make people that would've typed 15 RPs anyway just combine them into 2 or 3, whatever the limit is. It doesn't FIX any problems, and only CAUSES problems by ending up with more and more people deadline whoring.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2010 20:49:05 GMT -5
that is a good point Gina Bean
PS I love you
|
|
|
Post by Nightmare on Feb 23, 2010 21:42:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by thequitterxavier on Feb 23, 2010 23:51:49 GMT -5
I understand both sides.
I understand what Gina is saying.
I also understand that if it was limited then no one could say "You lost because your opponent put in more effort by posting more rps" I am not saying judges have said this but lets be completely honest people feel like they lose because they do not have time to put up as many rps as a person like Cam or Blackman or Redline.
So is it really fair to someone who has a job or med school or a social life to lose when their quality was close just because they could only write 3 rps to their opponents 10. I mean Cam isnt lying when he says that there has been a lot of talk about this ooc. Heck people have even made deals with each other on how many rps they would post because no one wants to get "flooded"
Nonetheless it doesn't concern me, but I did want to offer the bit of knowledge that while Cam may be the only person that posted it on the boards, he isnt the only one feeling like this is an issue.
|
|
|
Post by WTFWILL on Feb 23, 2010 23:58:03 GMT -5
Coincidentally, I don't think the whole "spam a shit ton of RPs" thing works unless it's for some kind of clusterfuck match like Suicidal Tendencies or a Battle Royale. Fact of the matter is, nobody here (no offense to anyone) can post 15-20 RPs in a week and maintain a respectable level of quality. Black Man put up 17 RPs to Chuie's 12, and Chuie still won. ST08, I put up like 16 RPs and had the most that week, while Joe and Gina put up the least amount out of the top six that year and they ended up being the top two.
I have a job. I go to class. I have homework, a social life, responsibilities... and I'll RP what I can each week. If that week, my overall quality is better than my opponent's, great. But I'm just going to tell you, I've never seen someone spam a shit ton in a normal match and wind up winning.
|
|
|
Post by Karen DiMarcio on Feb 24, 2010 0:03:02 GMT -5
I still don't get where the idea of "RP limits means it's okay if I have less time" is coming from. If your opponent wants to post 10 RPs to your 3, with limits they can STILL post those 10 RPs. They'll just combine them to fit into the 2 or 3 limit, whatever it is. So if somebody wants to whore, they can STILL whore, just by posting a ton of RPs as one instead of as several. And then you, the person that could only do 3, is even MORE screwed since that person, instead of posting their 10 RPs all throughout the week, is probably gonna post them as 2 RPs an hour before deadline.
It. Solves. Nothing.
Not that there's even anything to "solve," as Will pointed out.
|
|
Steve "Chuie" Johnson
CPW Veteran
I love your loss! Your loss is sweet to me like LOVE is sweet!
Posts: 534
|
Post by Steve "Chuie" Johnson on Feb 24, 2010 0:47:00 GMT -5
You know, I'd like to hope that people go by the honor code of never exceeding more than one or two RPs more than their opponent out of fairness, but that's not the case sometimes. And if you're caring that much about a win to actually be upset over a loss when you're too busy to RP because you're doing more important stuff, then maybe you should re-think why you are in an e-fed. It's to have fun on the side of all your important life stuff and no amount of limits will make it any more or less fair.
Because if I write 3 RPs with 5,000 characters each and someone writes 5 RPs with 3,000 characters each... it's the same thing, limit or no. This fed has been running for five, six years now without this... and I simply can't understand why this is a problem now.
|
|