paltouras wrote:1) Instead of (possibly) trying to figure out how the ships could be divided into each group, I think it’s more fair and easy to just take the total number of the ships registered and just divide it into four groups with each one containing a quarter of the total number of participants in order of priority. Priority means the registration order.
If for example the number of participants is 103 … then the first 26 and the next 26 and etc up to the last 25, will constitute the 4 quarters of the total 4 groups.
paltouras wrote:2) Also, I really think that the way of adding pictures should be different. I believe the ships should not be visible to everyone before the end of the deadline for applying to the contest.
That means that the chances for copying one another are much less. In this scenario also, every participant would know their place in the registering order by the exact time of their application being filed (by receiving a confirmation email about their place in the order by the administrator).
paltouras wrote:3) The criteria for participation should be much more clear and strict. For instance, Picture of ship, Picture of Bounty Hunter and Picture of Prisoner Compartment and of course NAME for both of them are essential. Think that some people have added a whole story around the name and back round of each ship and others haven’t even named their projects. Apart from that, some haven’t even presented a picture of their prisoner compartment and others added more pictures than the ones requested.
paltouras wrote:4) The next important step in order to advance to a more interesting phase of “32”, I think would be the number of votes. Increasing them, would be extremely helpful, In order to avoid the burst of the “friends voting” paradox and many dilemmas between ships we would like to vote or some that we just don’t have enough votes to do so(except ours).I believe that the votes should be maximum 8 and least 6. It would be ideal if the FBTB voting system would not let us vote unless it could somehow count our votes and keep us following that condition.
paltouras wrote:5) Reaching the final “32”, things could follow a typical Baskeball Playoff system.
Each group has 8 to advance. So at the next round the opponents could be 1vs8, 2vs7, 3vs6, 4vs5.
I think that the program should be set like that, before the beginning of the contest. For instance 1st group winners against 4th group winners and 2nd group vs 3rd group (or anything similar to that). The next couples could be also mixed up (the winners of 1st group vs 4th against the winners of 3rd vs 2nd) and so on …
paltouras wrote:6) At the round of “16” or the round of “8” , the grids that include the possible winners of each group should face each other so that could give the chance to some others advance to a higher level. Doing that in the phase of final “8” I think is better because if u take a close look on how the things are right now, the only think that will actually change, is that one less “favourite” will be qualifying and one more “underdog” will have a chance to go for the “bronze” medal.
GENERALLY after the group stage is easier to lay out a fair plan of brackets based on the basketball playoff system as long as everything is figured out and presented to the public from the beginning of the tournament!!!
Once more, CONGRATULATIONS for the idea and thank you for your patience!!!
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Mofo Jones and 6 guests