Talk:Discosaurs/Rage in the Age

Archived conversations made before the start of RITA are located at the archive. A write-up of the event can be found here.

THE GAMES HAVE BEGUN --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 01:00, 3 October 2010 (BST)

Kills

Kills go below here.

1. First blood to RDD. 01:08, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   Seconds before Natasha and the rest of the allstars declared war on the Discosaurs.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 01:12, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   Judging by time stamps I'm not so sure. First reported kill maybe but not necessarily the first actual kill.--ZIPO/Talk/◆◆◆/CAPD 01:36, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   Have you met these guys? 01:41, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   Those guys are crazy. Good solid strikes. as for first kill, it really doesnt matter. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 01:46, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   I suppose you could say that I met them. Saw a few of them on the way here to.--ZIPO/Talk/◆◆◆/CAPD 01:57, 3 October 2010 (BST)

2. Axe gets Timmy --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 01:14, 3 October 2010 (BST)
3. Kempy gets Bravo --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 01:14, 3 October 2010 (BST)
4. Tash gets Funkiraptor --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 01:14, 3 October 2010 (BST)
5. Zipo gets Noir Although first blood goes to RDD, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th, and 6th blood goes to the allstars. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 01:18, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   I'm still proud of my daring escape from one of the most horrific massacres in Manhunt history.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 01:20, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   I stand corrected.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 01:21, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   Oh SNAP! ~ Kempy “YaketyYak” | ◆◆◆ | CAPD |

    

   01:24, 3 October 2010 (BST)

6. Tash kills Rexy --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 01:23, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   Nothing Like Getting Killed, revived and claiming two victims in the same ten minutes. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 01:25, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   Right, I need to go to sleep. Can people update the front page on their own? I'll do the talk page table, seeing as that's really for my reference.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 01:29, 3 October 2010 (BST)

7. WU TANG AINT NOTHIN 2 FUK WIT -- LEMON #1 01:55, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   The event should just end like right now. I mean, let's face it. The All-Stars are pwning everyone, and very early in the game too. ;D --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 01:59, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   Well, crud! We were sure this thing started tomorrow night. Over here, it's still October 2. But hang on.... everyone will be awake shortly and then we'll see who does the major pwnage regardless of who drew first blood.  ;) Petite Fille 04:03, 3 October 2010 (BST)

8. Baron gets Bravo --schweinhund 03:06, 3 October 2010 (GMT)

   Quick question, is everyone supposed to have their group in their profile because some don't or have an incorrect one listed. --schweinhund 04:00, 3 October 2010 (GMT)

   Well, everyone was originally suppose to list their group so to not cause confusion with the folks at RG, but I've submited the below list to them already, so I think it's safe to say, we don't necessarily need to list it now. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 05:07, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   Seeing how certain groups (MHAS and DS in particular) are made up of mis-match members of other groups, we shouldn't force them to change group tags.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 12:01, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   It makes no difference to me whether the others are wearing the same tag or not since the other teams are contact-listed now but I'd like to point out that we're also made up of mismatched members too. Out of a seven member team, we were wearing five different group tags before this manhunt began. However, if I'd known this deal about group tags wouldn't be a rule-breaker sooner, I never would have dropped my Feral Undead tag. This is the first time I've not worn my FU tag since I put it on in May, 2007, and I feel a little naked without it. But hey, it's only for two weeks, right? Petite Fille 12:57, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   Pop the tag in your profile somewhere, the rules don't state it has to be in the Group section. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 12:58, 3 October 2010 (BST)

   I didn't mention you guys because you're all wearing the right tags. :p But seriously, we have a list, so wear whatever.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 12:59, 3 October 2010 (BST)

9. Darma gives disco a +1 Kill--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 17:06, 3 October 2010 (BST)
10. Massive Bereavement, today was your day [1] --Jess Noir 19:45, 3 October 2010 (BST)
11. Teralynn gets ZIPO3956 Kill Symbiote spiderman14 21:43, 3 October 2010 (BST)
12. Hell's Belles started their day with Ensin Panther -- Spiderzed▋ 21:52, 3 October 2010 (BST)
13. I was going for that Haircuts fellow but I had to settle for a sleeping Vinetown Scout *sigh* Next time, Haircuts, next time! *shakes fist!* Petite Fille 21:59, 3 October 2010 (BST)

    Finally. I was wondering why you didnt post this 4 hours ago, when you killed me. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:06, 3 October 2010 (BST)

    Because everytime I tried to post, someone posted ahead of me and it would kick me out or the post ended up in the wrong place - below the Start header. If it hadn't worked the last time, I was going to give up and take a nap. Petite Fille 22:26, 3 October 2010 (BST)

14. T1MMY TH3 TR3NCH13 G3TZ ASS H@ 3R AX3 HACK LMFAO!!!! - J3ZUS ST1LL LUVZ U LOL BUT UR D3D!!!!! Timmy the Trenchie 00:37, 4 October 2010 (BST)

    OK, so between me and you, it's 1-1. Vengeance shall be mine, Timmy. Vengeance. Shall. Be. Mine. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 00:40, 4 October 2010 (BST)

15. Zipo finishes Julian--ZIPO/Talk/◆◆◆/CAPD 00:39, 4 October 2010 (BST)
16. Soph gets Hell's Belles --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 01:33, 4 October 2010 (BST)

    I'm not sure who's supposed to be managing the scoreboard but I updated it up to this point for reference. --schweinhund 02:16, 4 October 2010 (GMT)

    I already had. I think you miss read it was Soph getting Bell not the other way around.--ZIPO/Talk/◆◆◆/CAPD 02:30, 4 October 2010 (BST)

    Never mind I see someone didn't update a different kill.--ZIPO/Talk/◆◆◆/CAPD 02:33, 4 October 2010 (BST)

17. Baron gets Bravo a second time! --schweinhund 04:07, 4 October 2010 (GMT)
18. Darma gets Sophie Ames --Darma 11:49, 4 October 2010 (BST)
19. Hell's Belles wins the shoot-out versus Massive Bereavement -- Spiderzed▋ 21:28, 4 October 2010 (BST)
20. Massive Bereavement noms Hell's Belles -- Spiderzed▋ 21:28, 4 October 2010 (BST)
21. Tash kills Teralyn --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 23:33, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Manhunt Participants (for reference)

Contestant	Group	Number of Kills	Number of Deaths	Overall Score
A Tyrranosaurus	Discosaurs	0	2	-2
Bravo Seven	Discosaurs	0	3	-3
Funkiraptor	Discosaurs	0	1	-1
Kegosaurus	Discosaurs	0	0	0
Mad Hlaine Larkin	Discosaurs	1	0	1
Philosiraptor	Discosaurs	0	0	0
Pravus	Discosaurs	0	0	0
Tricerohops	Discosaurs	0	0	0
Axe Hack	Manhunt All-Stars	1	1	0
DanceDanceRevolution	Manhunt All-Stars	1	0	1
KempyClassic	Manhunt All-Stars	1	0	1
Massive Bereavement	Manhunt All-Stars	1	2	-1
Natasha Fatale	Manhunt All-Stars	3	1	2
Sophie Ames	Manhunt All-Stars	1	1	0
vinetown scout	Manhunt All-Stars	0	1	-1
ZIPO3956	Manhunt All-Stars	2	1	1
Ensin Panther	RDD	0	1	-1
Haircuts That Kill	RDD	1	0	1
Julian Linair	RDD	0	1	-1
Skull Grin	RDD	0	0	0
Teralynn	RDD	1	1	0
Karloth vois	The Team Formerally Known as Karloth Vois	0	0	0
Baron Underbheit	Timmy the Trenchie's Twist and Shout Band	2	0	2
Darma	Timmy the Trenchie's Twist and Shout Band	1	1	0
Hell's Belles	Timmy the Trenchie's Twist and Shout Band	2	2	0
Jess Noir	Timmy the Trenchie's Twist and Shout Band	1	1	0
petite fille	Timmy the Trenchie's Twist and Shout Band	1	0	1
suvaloo	Timmy the Trenchie's Twist and Shout Band	0	0	0
Timmy the Trenchie	Timmy the Trenchie's Twist and Shout Band	1	1	0

Query

Just recieved a message abotu somebody trying to join DS. Shall we use the AHMH policy of people joining late acting as -1 kill for every 3 days late you are? Or shall we ban new members? Everybody register opinions now!--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:29, 3 October 2010 (BST)

Late = -1, which will of course damage your overall group score. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:33, 3 October 2010 (BST)

If it was one of your already named members who's just turning up late, then it's ok far as I'm concerned. If not, and it's someone new wishing to join, then yeah, -1. ~ Kempy “YaketyYak” | ◆◆◆ | CAPD |

 

16:57, 3 October 2010 (BST)

Yeah, it's somebody new. The above team members may well disappear from the list.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:16, 3 October 2010 (BST)

I'm not really in favour... When we let Natasha into the third Malton Manhunt, it was like... an hour late. Fair enough, we said, and no-more. But this contest has properly started nearly 18 hours ago and it's bending the rules somewhat out of shape to let them in now. Also, the prescribed penalty is barely a scratch in this 'team' game. Personally, I think we should say no, sorry to whoever it is that wants in, but people have had weeks to prepare... --BOSCH 18:23, 3 October 2010 (BST)

If I recall, the penalty was -1 for every 5 hours in AHMH3. Or something like that. I don't fully recall what I came up with. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 18:49, 3 October 2010 (BST)

It was 1 per 3 days, I checked. Frankly, I'm not bothered either way, and now that we have a point, I'm reluctant to lose it.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:09, 3 October 2010 (BST)

Am I meant to update it myself?--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 19:15, 3 October 2010 (BST)

The front page one, not the talk page one. The talk one is more meant to be for which group everyone is in.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:33, 3 October 2010 (BST)

Quick unrelated notion. Make the scoreboard an actual scoreboard: rank the groups on actual points rather than alphabetically. --Thadeous Oakley 18:38, 3 October 2010 (BST)

Click the button under rank and the table reorders itself. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:41, 3 October 2010 (BST)

lolirdumb --Thadeous Oakley 18:55, 3 October 2010 (BST)

Back on the subject of the latecomer, I'm sorry but I can't agree with this either. I'm really not making a big deal about the name tag thing but this would be the second time the rules were bent and the event isn't even 24 hours old. But like Bosch said, everyone has had weeks to decide if they wanted to participate in this. This person can always join the next event and that'll be fair on everyone playing in this manhunt. Petite Fille 19:25, 3 October 2010 (BST)

Yeah, it's cool, I've already told them they can't participate. But the group name thing was never really part of the rules. It was more to help the RG not think we were PKers (which most of us are).--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:33, 3 October 2010 (BST)

Aye. Now to stab RG in the back and still claim it's part of the event. xD --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 21:17, 3 October 2010 (BST)

Karl's ranking

Unless you want to add in some clause about not having made any kills or whatever, 0 is still a higher score than any negative number. Plus I find it hilarious that Karl could easily come not-last without even doing anything. 15:31, 4 October 2010 (BST)

But it's done by kills, as it always has been?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:32, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Then why have an 'overall score' if it's just done on kills? 15:33, 4 October 2010 (BST)

I believe it's left from Poodle's table, and he had some stupid scoring system.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:46, 4 October 2010 (BST)

It could be changed to "Kill Differential" to avoid any confusion. -MHSstaff 16:03, 4 October 2010 (BST)

So kills suffered don't subtract from your score? Remove the overal score heading if that's the case, as it would suggest that kills are minus points. 16:05, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Wait a minute, here. Your rules state, "Each person's death shall negate one point for their team.". Now either they do or don't result in a point taken from your team, but I certainly was under the impression that they do count against you. Which is it? --Darma ^talk 16:40, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Darma's right. The rules on the page state that kills suffered subtract points, there's no reason to change it now that the event has started. 16:46, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Not to mention that if it is based on kills only that changes everything. Had we known that, our team would have tried to get the maximum number of team members to start instead of settling for just 7. It is inherently unfair to smaller teams to base the score on kills only. --Darma ^talk 16:50, 4 October 2010 (BST)

It has ALWAYS been based on kills. Nobody is changing any rules halfway through.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:10, 4 October 2010 (BST)

And if you're both honestly unable to read the next line which says that the most kills wins, then that isn't anything to do with me.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:11, 4 October 2010 (BST)

"Each person's death shall negate one point for their team. The most kills shall determine the score", to anyone reading, implies explicitly that the most kills, after deaths are subtracted, is the winner. Removing this after the event has started not only impacts smaller teams, but seems suspect given whose team has suffered the most kills... 17:17, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Personally, I've always understood it as "most kills win", with deaths acting as tie-breaker. But yes, we are in the middle of a bona fide case study of "why you should lay out everything clearly right off the bat when you organize a MH". -- Spiderzed▋ 17:22, 4 October 2010 (BST)

So, the fact that your own rules for this event contradict each other has nothing to do with you? Who then, exactly, do we blame for that? Gnomes? Elves? Now, come on! Ok, fine! If you are going to base it on kills alone then I want a weighted average to be used so that all the groups have a fair chance to win this thing! --Darma ^talk 17:20, 4 October 2010 (BST)

The person who wrote that section who has no authority in this manhunt whatsoever?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:46, 4 October 2010 (BST)

That's a fair point, as it is, the larger groups have an advantage. However, I don't really like substracting deaths like this. It encourages window-diving, which is sort of lame. It detracts from the spectactle, too. Maybe any death should count against the team, be it kill or suicide. --Sophie ^{◆◆◆ CAPD} 18:28, 4 October 2010 (BST)

I would have had no issue with this except that, just like Yon's assertion, it would be yet another rule change after this contest has already begun. I'm sorry, but you can't make game-changing rules in the middle of the game and still expect folks to think it is fair! --Darma ^talk 18:36, 4 October 2010 (BST)

"Yet another rule change". Fuck off. There hasn't been a single rule change since the contest started.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:46, 4 October 2010 (BST)

I beg to differ. This most certainly IS a rule change. It is not a spelling nor grammar correction. It is the removal of a sentence that changes the rules. It is, in fact, a rule change that occurred after the start of the contest. --Darma ^talk 20:01, 4 October 2010 (BST)

But it wasn't listed in the rules section. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 20:16, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Neither is 'no RP kills' but it's still enforced. 20:19, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Not my fault somebody didn't add it to the page after being told to. :P That quite blatantly wasn't a rule change, it was me fixing a sentence which shouldn't have been there, as pointed out above. Now, both of you can piss off and grow up.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:00, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Make two awards. An overall team-kill award and a team-efficiency award. -MHSstaff 20:50, 4 October 2010 (BST)

This. --Sophie ^{◆◆◆ CAPD} 20:52, 4 October 2010 (BST)

+1 -- Spiderzed▋ 21:09, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Yes. This would solve the problem in my mind since different people had different understandings of the rules. --Darma ^talk 21:19, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Which brings us back to the question of which one is actually winner award. --Thadeous Oakley 21:21, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Both! :) Why not? --Darma ^talk 21:27, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Most team kills is the winner. Other than that make whatever awards you want.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:27, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Kinda funny how the faggot who's leading the team with the most minus kills is the one who omitted rules to change shit in his favor. Then denies he did it just to stack shit in his favor. Yon, you're as big of a fuckwit as DDR. - Goribus 23:10, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Kinda funny how Misanthropy's meatpuppets come out in force when he's losing an argument. Read the page history and the talk archive. This is how it's always been, and no amount of bitching or meatpuppetry by Misanthropy will change that.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:13, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Oh fuck off you twat. As you can clearly see Goribus is taking part in this fucking event anyway, it's hardly surprising he'd read the shitting page about it. And no, it clearly isn't how it's always been, since there is fucking pagelog evidence of you removing the rule, and no amount of accusing me of bullshit will change that. 23:17, 4 October 2010 (BST)

No no Mis. Don't correct Yon. He's right about everything. Well that and he'll just omit parts of our posts to make himself look better anyway. Next thing you'll know I'm omitted from the event and I'm just in Chudleyton sightseeing. I's sorree masah Yon. I's nevar talk bad about yer cheatin' again masah! - Goribus 23:20, 4 October 2010 (BST)

From the rules section where it wa? No wait! It wasn't in the rules section! It was in the middle of Poodle's rhetoric, uneditted from when he put it in there! Damn, sounded like a credible argument then.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:21, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Also, Goribus hasn't editted in a month, so that's a poor argument. Of course, he was bound to be on the wiki with a vote you want cheated through.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:22, 4 October 2010 (BST)

It was on the article page, which you finalised. It has as much weighting as any other piece of information on that page. You knowingly changed the rules of an event after it started to directly benefit yourself and now you're simply flinging mud unnesessarily at other users to hide the fact that you are the worst sportsman I've encountered in a long time. It doesn't fucking matter how often someone edits, if they're taking part in a contest it's prudent to read the rules, especially when they seem to be as liquid as you're treating them. 23:28, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Mis, these have been the rules in every manhunt ever. Frankly, I'm too tired and busy to deal with people who can't get their own way and so bundle up a mass of internet buds to defend their every word. It's petulant and childish, and I have no intention of humouring you any more.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:32, 4 October 2010 (BST)

What's petulant and childish is changing a game's rules to benefit yourself and lying about it. 23:36, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Wait a sec, when was the last time we used a different scoring system during a manhunt, other then "most kills wins"? Besides wasn't everybody under the impression beforehand, "most kills wins" was the one in use here. (edit conflict) --Thadeous Oakley 23:33, 4 October 2010 (BST)

The last time? This one, since it was clearly there on the rules page for all to see. 23:36, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Yeah, the manhunts that came before this one. Also, that doesn't answer my question whether or not most people assumed from the start this was "most kills win". Yonnua sounded surprised to me when you brought that up, and I don't see any reason not to question him, and it was indeed a mistake perhaps from Poodles version. You automatically assume he's cheating, which seems rash. Also I don't really see the big problem, it's not like people are now screwed over.--Thadeous Oakley 23:42, 4 October 2010 (BST)

After it was pointed out by Darma, with no consultation or discussion on how people had read into it (and at that time, only people who had read "kills suffered remove points" had contributed), the rule was removed discretely. That's poor sportsmanship. It would have been wise to actually ask who had assumed what, but that didn't happen. Instead, a rule was removed and its removal denied despite pagelogs and a screencap of the diff itself to state otherwise. And people are screwed over - a team of 7 or 5 just have plain old less AP to make kills with, and under the original rules, this was compensated by the fact that they could protect their points easier by being harder to kill as often. Now this isn't the case, it becomes very difficult for smaller teams to catch up, and almost impossible for Karloth. 23:47, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Maybe Yonnua didn't think it over as well. Maybe he saw it as unintended error, better remove it swiftly to prevent confusion! I, again, don't see why we immediately need to assume cheating. Perhaps he should have waited, but that doesn't mean he's bad loser. Also, my advice: Wait the manhunt out. Let everyone do what he wants, and then at the end when the hunt is over we'll have a discussion which rules to implement, maybe a democratic vote. Discussion in the middle of the game creates a mess like this, so just lets wait until it's over. Also Karloth was doomed from teh start. --Thadeous Oakley 23:54, 4 October 2010 (BST)

I at least was pretty sure from the start only kills count, except deaths are the tie-breaker, that's just how manhunts are played. I was surprised to learn Mis and Darma thought otherwise. I had to re-read this whole thread. So yeah, then I noticed the main article contradicted itself, and Yon fixed it, but I honestly see his edit as correcting a cut & paste mistake. There's no way I could think he did it in bad faith. To me, the alternate interpretation of that contradiction wasn't plausible enough for Yon to even have a chance to choose.

And yeah, this made me realise "most kills" means the larger teams have an advantage. I liked the two awards proposed above, or maybe we could make it fair by adjusting the rules to something else, say avg kills by team member (kills / # of members) or whatever... but that'd only work if we all were reasonable. After what this has build up to, I think the prudent thing will be to just not touch the rules 'til it's over. --Sophie ^{◆◆◆ CAPD} 02:07, 5 October 2010 (BST)

When you look at it, though, the 'overall score' and the pre-existing tallying of kills as minus points in team and individual listings all lean towards the alternate being quite plausible. Obviously it wasn't clear cut either way or everyone would be in one boat, but it's definately not implausible to have thought that the removed rule was the correct one given that the scoreboards seemed designed to accomodate it. 02:15, 5 October 2010 (BST)

Yup, I see your point now, I just never noticed those before.

So what now then? I don't think we can reach consensus, I at least would object rather loudly to deaths counting against one's team. And we can't play under conflicting interpretations of the rules. I'd be very open to changing the rules to something fairer but, as said already, I don't think that'd be advisable after all this. I think the only option here is letting the Discosaurs issue a clear ruling on this, final and unappealable, since they're the hosts after all. --Sophie ^{◆◆◆ CAPD} 02:42, 5 October 2010 (BST)

It's like the Boxing Championship all over again… ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 02:32, 5 October 2010 (BST)

If a third party opinion helps here, I think that everyone should just continue hunting each other and like some suggested, sort out the rules debacle afterward. I don't think Yon was cheating but I think he should he should make amends for the rules change even if it was simply an oversight or odd artifact from Poodle's original event.

I'd also like to point out that this manhunt is also part of the larger Manhunt Marathon and so ultimately, individual kills count. So whlie you may be upset by rules change affecting your team, it's actually quite likely that you're all competing against one another. Moral of the story, just keep killing. --~ 05:19, 5 October 2010 (BST)

My opinion is that with every competition the rules should be set so that all parties are on an equal level to begin with. No team should have an advantage because they have more (or less) people and no individual person should have an advantage. If the rules are fair or at least an attempt is made to make it fair then I am cool with it. --schweinhund 04:35, 5 October 2010 (GMT)

I'd love to fine-tune the rules for extra fairness, but I don't think that'd go down well now--more than one player has stated quite clearly how they feel about rules being changed.

Anyhow, that's a different issue altogether, isn't it? Neither of the conflicting interpretations of the scoring system benefits the smaller teams particularly. Including deaths in the score only rewards those willing to suicide after a kill--something I dislike in a Manhunt because it slows the carnage. Less kills, less fun. If it were up to me, I'd steal rule #10 from that Boxing thing Rev linked above: "Dont fucking window dive". Heh.

I think fixing the larger team advantage would necessarily involve averaging team kills amongst the team members. --Sophie ^{◆◆◆ CAPD} 06:29, 5 October 2010 (BST)

How open would people be to an "average score" as Soph suggested above?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:12, 5 October 2010 (BST)

I think that depends on exactly what you have in mind. Could you clarify so we can make an educated decision? --Darma ^talk 13:23, 5 October 2010 (BST)

Total Kills of team / Number of people on team.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:44, 5 October 2010 (BST)

Why yes. This would be fine with me which is why I suggested it previously... I cannot speak for anyone else, however. --Darma ^talk 15:07, 5 October 2010 (BST)

Right then. I demand people vote on this rule.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:08, 5 October 2010 (BST)

I'd be in favour of something like that. Maybe give that vote its own header, I think many will miss it that far down the section, and that far off-topic from Karl's ranking. -- Spiderzed▋ 20:59, 5 October 2010 (BST)

Manhunt odditys

Almost surivived the night out side--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 18:49, 4 October 2010 (BST)

I hate the phrase "1 minute ago"--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:54, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Indeed, dammed pkers--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 21:37, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Vote

Most Kills Wins

Most Average kills wins

1. Fairer to smaller teams. Use still unaltered kills for the Marathon. -- Spiderzed▋ 21:06, 5 October 2010 (BST)
2. Sophie ^{◆◆◆ CAPD} 21:10, 5 October 2010 (BST)

Abstain Votes Here

1. I'm neutral to this, really. I can go either way. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 21:05, 5 October 2010 (BST)
2. Don't Care At all, as the Runner of the Manhunt Marathon I'm stating for the record that Individual Kills will always be used in that to gauge overall rankings. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 21:08, 5 October 2010 (BST)

   What's the bet I get most deaths in the marathon?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:12, 5 October 2010 (BST)