Re: [Grand RP Tournament] Xmas Edition - Feedback and Discussion
I certainly see where you're coming from, and if necessary I'll elaborate a lot more, but for now I'll just put a bit of my thoughts on what you're missing here as far as judging consistency goes and why exactly those discrepancies are present. Consistency with opinions is pretty hard to achieve. And the judging does indeed need to be a little different than for sensei or bio tests simply because there are customs involved, which pretty much throws a monkey wrench into our judging merely because not all mods have the same opinion on customs, which is the reason why being consistent here is a lot harder than being consistent there. I'll just respond to each of your examples with a bit of insight on the reason why the results can be different from mod to mod. Because frankly, when a battle ends undefined you're then asking a mod to judge who the better RPer for that fight is. Which isn't an easy question in close fights and is completely dependent on what happened in that specific fight.
Originally Posted by Nagato..
Example 1 and 2
See, here you have to define what you mean by high-ranked attacks. There's an extreme difference between high-ranked attacks and OPed customs. I would say that any member in this tournament is capable of defending and countering powerful techniques with the basic five elements, ninjutsu, genjutsu, and taijutsu. We saw Typhon stop most of Lili's techniques relying mainly on cannon or otherwise simple Hyuuga Clan techniques. However Typhon did not hold the upper hand while Lili just barely did, and I'd be pretty hard pressed to call any of the customs that she used, while incredibly useful, Oped. So in the case that one member is using powerful customs and holds the upper hand for all of the battle, then there is in fact a chance that they will be crowned the winner. But then what happens when the dominating member is using OPed techniques? And what makes an OP technique? Another obscure question that we can't just slap a criteria on. If one member is using grossly powerful customs that wouldn't be approved today and made it under the radar back in 2009, then yeah, I'd probably give it to the person who's using less and still getting by. Why? If you're using grossly OPed techniques in every move and don't fail to kill your opponent, then to me it's clear who the better RPer is.
I don't see what you're getting at here because this is probably the easiest call that you can give me, and part of the reason why three judges aren't necessary. You're giving me an attacker who's using low-ranked customs and cannon techniques and is dominating a battle against a defender using high-ranked customs? To me the attacker would clearly win. I think that any mod would make that call; they just showed who the better RPer was by a long shot. I don't know if you saw this example in the battle (if so then please link me), but I think that you must have misunderstood the call because I don't see how the defender could be declared the winner there for "wanting it more."
My point with responding to each of your examples? Everything is relative. Scorps can easily come to this thread right now and disagree with my take on everything neither of us will be wrong. I disagreed with Scorps and Xylon on the fight between McRazor and Typhon. Every mod generally has the same idea in mind of what makes a good RPer and how we should impartially and fairly judge a battle, but when it comes to judging top-tier RPers against each other in a battle? Inconsistencies are just... inevitable really. Each RPer has there own set of customs and to be honest we grade fights like this based on too many factors to really just say: Ok, you as a mod need to do this this and this when you're judging. We can't reprimand people for using things in their arsenal, but we also can't ignore if one member is using OPed techniques and the other is using intricate strategies and is still surviving. So really, there can't fully be any such thing as "judging consistency" when you have mods who each have their own different take. When a battle has no defined winner what's required from us is no more than an opinion. But an opinion that has multiple factors in which is all relative to how that particular battle was played out. So while we will aim to be more consistent with what we're going for (remember that this is really only the second successful tourney like this, happening back to back, so we as mods need to get a bit on the same page with this a well admittedly) it's... difficult lol. Ya know? I mean, I was practically going back and forth with myself throughout this entire post just now. And I did the exact same in every fight that I was asked to judge.
Now back to having three judges. As far as I can tell, three judges in every fight might even bring more variables to the table, don't you think? Wouldn't you have even more questions on judging consistency if Scorps and I judge the exact same fight and what Scorps thinks is an easy call in one RPers favor I say is an easy call in the other's? Like I said, I think that there should be three mods assigned, each of them grading a certain group of battles per round, but then when a battle is extremely close, the judges convene to discuss that fight. That seems like a logical method to me, but I dunno. I'd like to hear other mods opinions on this before I continue discussing this.