View Single Post
  #12  
Unread 02-20-2017, 09:41 PM
NOBLE
Staff Hall Of Famer
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,103
Mentioned: 3628 Post(s)
Tagged: 76 Thread(s)
Estimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 stars
Ranked Audio Record
4 Won / 0 Lost
Estimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.71/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.71/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.71/10 stars
Ranked Text Record
30 Won / 8 Lost
Exclusive Text Record
1 Won / 1 Lost
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas View Post
That's actually a dope idea. @Pugz @Noble your thoughts on this?
Ethan's idea of adding an accept/decline option, along with the roll-over to 65th, etc, is definitely a good idea. My only objection is that I don't think the site is active enough for that right now and that it's an an idea better suited for when things pick up. For example, there are currently only 45 people ranked in the text arena, which is an improvement from last month which only saw 29 people ranked. I don't even know how X plans to fill a 64-man GC since it seems unlikely that there will be 64 ranked by the end of this month. For the time being, it probably makes more sense to do a top 64 (as much as you can), give a heads up and check-in opportunity to the top rankers in advance, and fill in the rest manually through forum sign-ups if you insist on having 64 combatants. I think we had reduced the GC to 32 at one point when I was still on staff because the activity was so low.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Unread 02-20-2017, 09:41 PM   #12
 
NOBLE
Staff Hall Of Famer
Estimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Audio: 7.05/10 stars
Ranked Audio Record
4 Won / 0 Lost
Estimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.05/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.71/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.71/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.71/10 stars
Ranked Text Record
30 Won / 8 Lost
Exclusive Text Record
1 Won / 1 Lost
 
Join Date: May 2011
Voted: 408 audio / 1061 text
Posts: 6,103
Mentioned: 3628 Post(s)
Tagged: 76 Thread(s)


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas View Post
That's actually a dope idea. @Pugz @Noble your thoughts on this?
Ethan's idea of adding an accept/decline option, along with the roll-over to 65th, etc, is definitely a good idea. My only objection is that I don't think the site is active enough for that right now and that it's an an idea better suited for when things pick up. For example, there are currently only 45 people ranked in the text arena, which is an improvement from last month which only saw 29 people ranked. I don't even know how X plans to fill a 64-man GC since it seems unlikely that there will be 64 ranked by the end of this month. For the time being, it probably makes more sense to do a top 64 (as much as you can), give a heads up and check-in opportunity to the top rankers in advance, and fill in the rest manually through forum sign-ups if you insist on having 64 combatants. I think we had reduced the GC to 32 at one point when I was still on staff because the activity was so low.
__________________
Offline   Reply With Quote