Fight Club Tips, Suggestions & General!

[Thrawn]

Have you given any thought to creating a Fight Club Trading Card archive George? I'll be honest one of my favorite parts of Fight Club is appreciating the work you put into the trading cards. Sometimes when picking my combatant I think to myself "Who would I like to see George make a trading card for"? The Crawlspace has an image gallery right? Any chance Brad would let you make a section for the Fight Cards that we could link to?

[George Berryman]

Have you given any thought to creating a Fight Club Trading Card archive George? I'll be honest one of my favorite parts of Fight Club is appreciating the work you put into the trading cards. Sometimes when picking my combatant I think to myself "Who would I like to see George make a trading card for"? The Crawlspace has an image gallery right? Any chance Brad would let you make a section for the Fight Cards that we could link to?

I haven't looked into that since all the cards are still posted in their original fights, and that Master List has links to 'em.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7222

So... many... cards...

Plus, some of 'em I am not happy with and will redo when that character heads into another fight.

[Thrawn]

I haven't looked into that since all the cards are still posted in their original fights, and that Master List has links to 'em.

Some of those links are incorrectly linked. I personally think it would be nice to collect them all in an image gallery, but that's me.

Plus, some of 'em I am not happy with and will redo when that character heads into another fight.

A few I feel could be improved. But not many. Either way you do a damn fine job boss. I personally saved a few of them to my computer. I think they're that cool.

[George Berryman]

Some of those links are incorrectly linked. I personally think it would be nice to collect them all in an image gallery, but that's me.

I've got the next two weeks off. I'll work up an image gallery via the Fight Club forums here. They might take forever to load but I'll get 'em all put in one thread.

[George Berryman]

Here ya go Thrawn!

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7900

[Thrawn]

That is awesome George. Thank you. It's a monument to your awesomeness.

[Thrawn]

Hey George, you accidentally listed Captain Cold twice.

[George Berryman]

Hey George, you accidentally listed Captain Cold twice.

Fixed!

[Venomaniac]

Hey George,
In my current fight with FSU, it may seem that all is well. The score is 6-8 in his favor, and a number that high would imply lots of fun debate all around. But if the situation is analyzed, one finds that is not the case, and a current…shall we say minor issue... with Fight Club has become apparent. If that thread is analyzed, at the time of me posting this, there have been three people making argumnents: you and me arguing in favor of my champion, and FSU arguing in favor of his. By the idea of Fight Club being about debate and not being based on bias, the score should be 2-1, as no one as added to the discussion (or even backed up any points made by either me or FSU). The numbers do not much the discussion. In fact, since the last post in the thread was a question I asked FSU about his champion’s abilities that has still gone unanswered, the numbers do not much the debate, as in theory, one of the 8 who voted for Link should be backing up FSU and trying to address my points. In fact, much of Fight Club is like that now- the votes often do not match the amount of intelligent debate being discussed. Not only does this diminish the fun of Fight Club, it also highly increases the risk of bias in fights. I am currently looking at fights with little debate and numbers that often do not match the arguments- sometimes even those that make the most eloquent arguments are losing to bias, and there is very little backing of either side…eliminating the debate that makes Fight Club fun

So what to do about the situation? I propose a minor amendment to the Fight Club rule: While the poll votes would still normaly decide the winner, the votes would only count if there were an equal amount of people vouching for that candidate publicly on the thread via intelligent debate/backing up arguments. For example- the number in my match is currently 6-8 and those numbers would only count if 6 different people in the thread posted their reasoning for Grubb and 8 different people in the thread posted their reasoning for Link . If the poll numbers do NOT match the postings, then the posting numbers win- as intelligent fun debate should be the primary focus of Fight Club, not bias or voting without reason. This way would eliminate the issue of lack of debate while continuing to make Fight Club a more fun and enjoyable experience for all.

[George Berryman]

Fight Club's always been like this and it's always worked. At the end of the day the vote count is and will forever be the final arbiter of win, lose or draw. I barely have enough time to do Fight Club as it is. I darn sure don't have the time to go through threads that can sometimes go three or more pages to take a second count on who is saying what.

This seems to me like fixing what isn't broken.

[Venomaniac]

Fight Club's always been like this and it's always worked. At the end of the day the vote count is and will forever be the final arbiter of win, lose or draw. I barely have enough time to do Fight Club as it is. I darn sure don't have the time to go through threads that can sometimes go three or more pages to take a second count on who is saying what.

This seems to me like fixing what isn't broken.

I disagree, but to each their own
Just trying to add more fun debate

[CrazyChris]

I have a proposed rule for season 2 that I'd just like to throw out there: no discussing the fights outside the fight club thread on the message board. This would of course be an honor system rule. Some of these fight debates have spilled out onto large skype discussions and some of the closer matches are actually won or lost on such chats. The reason I don't like this is because I think it defeats the spirit of fight club, which I see to be fair debate on the merits of the characters. If someone has a point to make, it should be made in public where anyone can freely rebut it. It isn't a fair fight when one contestant has gathered a group of his or her friends in a private chat room where he or she can make his case without the other person or other spectators who favor the other person's champion there to defend the other point of view. Off-board discussion also biases the fights in favor of the better-connected posters with large personal networks who can link their friends to fights. Those friends might not take the fights seriously and simply vote for the poster's champion because they like that poster more.

This is all in good fun, but part of the fun is the competitive nature of it. The purity of that competition is tarnished when it stops becoming a debate and starts becoming a full-on political campaign. In a real campaign a lot of the outcome depends on who can afford the most man-hours to knock on the most doors and call the most phones, and also who has the biggest network of supporters in the established power structure. Here, some of the outcome is decided by who has the most time to campaign on skype and the biggest network of friends they can influence. That isn't what I want this game to be about because those things have nothing to do with the merits of the characters. I want it to be about who has the best arguments and who picks the best characters.

So what I would want is basically this: off the board it is okay to talk about how great Fight Club is in general, and try to get as many people involved as possible, but when it comes to talking about a particular fight then all discussion should be strictly relegated to the thread for that fight if the poll for that fight is still active or the fight is pending (nothing's wrong with talking about the great fights of the past!). I don't even think it should be okay for a combatant to share a link to a fight he or she is involved in because whenever your friend tells you that he's in one of these fights there is always an unspoken request that you vote for that person's champion. Links to the fight club should only be to the forum, not a particular thread, with no mention of any fight the linker might be involved in. I know my way is a little extreme, so if it is too much than you can consider intermediate remedies, like off-board discussions are allowed only if both parties to the fight are present in the chat. Just something to keep the real battle in the correct threads is sorely needed, in my opinion.

[BertoneBeatle]

I have more to say about that later, and while I think you have some good points I don't fully agree with you.

As someone who has done the linking and talking about it to my network, I can tell you that it doesn't always work. I've lost votes by bringing it to my friends attention because they've seen the combatants and have favored the character my opponents have picked. I've had friends and other posters straight up tell me they are voting for the other guy. I can try to convince them otherwise, but ultimately I have to be cool with it. No emotional blackmail is being done...not saying you are accusing me (or anyone else) of that...unless you are lol.

The talk has generated interest in Fight Club which can't be a bad thing.

People will have their bias no matter what. People will vote for their friends or favorite characters whether they see it on SKYPE or on the board. It can't be stopped. And if the other person isn't on SKYPE to defend their character...well nobody is stopping people from reading what's within the actual thread.

Like I say I agree with some of what you're saying, but I'm not sure your solution will solve the problem. Recording though and can't write a more detailed reply now. Thoughts?

[CrazyChris]

I'd like to illustrate my point with two real life examples.

First example: In a recent fight Berserk suggested that perhaps he lost because Bertone was able to call in more favors than him. If Berserk's statement is right, then my proposed rule would solve improve fight clubs by making it so that "calling in favors" doesn't undermine the purity of the fights. If Bertone is right that his victory had more to do with the strength of his arguments, then my proposed rule would improve fight club by taking away "the other guy called in favors" as an excuse for losing. Under my proposed rule, there would simply be less reason for anyone to doubt that the winner won for the right reasons, which would increase our fun by improving our confidence in the validity of the results.

Second example: in an earlier fight someone flat out told me (over skype) that he voted for the other person's champion because he was "tight" with the other person. He admitted that he thought my champion would be the real winner, though. After some pleading, he said he would change his vote but he'd only do it if it would change the outcome of the poll. At the end of the day, the poll really was decided by one vote. Now, I'm not saying my bargaining in this case was any better than the other guy taking advantage of "favors" he could call in, so if I'm pointing fingers then the finger is equally pointed at myself. However, it is a problem that these kinds of backroom interactions are actually deciding fights. If that way of playing is allowed, then everyone who wants to build great stats has to play that way. I don't want to be in that position any more.

I really want people to seriously consider this amendment to the rules. I've made the best case I can for it so I will leave it at that.

[BertoneBeatle]

I'd like to illustrate my point with two real life examples.

First example: In a recent fight Berserk suggested that perhaps he lost because Bertone was able to call in more favors than him. If Berserk's statement is right, then my proposed rule would solve improve fight clubs by making it so that "calling in favors" doesn't undermine the purity of the fights. If Bertone is right that his victory had more to do with the strength of his arguments, then my proposed rule would improve fight club by taking away "the other guy called in favors" as an excuse for losing. Under my proposed rule, there would simply be less reason for anyone to doubt that the winner won for the right reasons, which would increase our fun by improving our confidence in the validity of the results.

I can tell you right now that the favors thing was exaggerated. I lost votes by linking the fight. I had friends (like Jesse) tell me they were voting for Beserk. I didn't hold it against them. Besides, I don't have 28 favors (or whatever it was) to call in.