Card Contests Improvement Thread

[Nathanael D. Striker]

It should come as no surprise that Card Contests and the 1v1 subforum have become a home for not only me but other members here on YCM. I, along with other YCM members (read Ain) have noticed a lack of quality in Card Contests. The main culprits being the lack of transparency that some contests have with their judging and the overall lack of execution that some have.

This thread is meant for everybody who cares about this part of YCM to come together and discuss improvements for Card Contests. Now, let's get down to business.

Things to do
*Create a standard for Card Contests to promote overall quality (suggested by Ain)

[Trebuchet MS]

sharpretina did try to gather some information on how to have a well-run contest. His findings are documented here.

 

This could also be stickied.

[宇佐見 蓮子@C94]

Create some sort of standard judging rubric, or at least guidelines of it. There are a lot of really bad judging rubrics lately, with some putting emphasis on OCG over card effects, so something needs to be set straight.

Sharpretina's tutorial is a good start, and it needs to be stickied here, though some remastering might be needed.

We can also apply to contest judging rubric guideline to 1v1 so we can increase the quality of good votes, or at the very least reduce the amount of bad ones.

Oddly enough, any long-term success in this section somewhat depends on how successful RC's ideas are. :V

[Nathanael D. Striker]

I agree that judging guidelines should exist. If contests had similar rubrics then contests would be a better determination of one's ability in comparison to their peers in each particular contest. I think these factors should be considered in order of importance: overall design, balance, and playability. If people have other factors that should be considered, let's here them. That's what this thread is for. And as for RC's success, that's mainly why this thread exists. RC and CC need each other in order to be successful.

[宇佐見 蓮子@C94]

Really, all you need is a core rubric of Design-Flavor-Balance. You can add any other criteria if you like, such as OCG, Art or whatever you fancy. Have the standard too strict and you'll see a drop in activity, have it too loose and bad contests will start popping up. Have something that still allows freedom to contest makers while making sure it's not terribad.

[Nathanael D. Striker]

Really, all you need is a core rubric of Design-Flavor-Balance. You can add any other criteria if you like, such as OCG, Art or whatever you fancy. Have the standard too strict and you'll see a drop in activity, have it too loose and bad contests will start popping up. Have something that still allows freedom to contest makers while making sure it's not terribad.

Perfect. That actually sounds great as it fulfills the similar rubric while giving the freedom to add. So, how about this?

Design: ?/35
Flavor: ?/30
Balance: ?/25
Other: ?/10
Total: ?/100

Or something like this? Just picked some arbitrary numbers to prove a point and the Other is for what each host can add. Also, each judge in a contest should use the same rubric and fully disclose their scores and their thoughts on how they scored the card.

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

Or something like this? Just picked some arbitrary numbers to prove a point and the Other is for what each host can add. Also, each judge in a contest should use the same rubric and fully disclose their scores and their thoughts on how they scored the card.

I agree with the first part [usage of the same rubric] to some extent.

 

In a lot of contests that I've seen lately [including those I assist judging in], some of the other members judging (mostly newer members) grade on the picture and usually that part of the grading scale is worth a considerable amount. We grade on the other stuff as well [though how we see things does tend to distort stuff a bit]. It also saves us from having to scale grades when we use different scoring criteria which come out uneven. But as Toyo already mentioned, just keep things to the core stuff and anything else can be added later to a rubric.

 

Second part is somewhat iffy, IMO. Granted, it would be nice to explain why a card was graded how it was, but if there are a ton of entries, writing a review for each will take a while. This is further compounded when judges also have personal commitments outside of YCM to attend to. Some of the members in said contests don't even check back to it or are gone when that happens, so any explanation on their stuff falls on deaf ears. If a member would like to know, they can always ask a judge why they graded their card a certain way.

 

OCG-wise, it shouldn't be factored as priority over card effects and balance/creativity. I'll admit that I do grade OCG on equal terms with balance and originality/design, but it's mostly based on whether or not I can understand your card [with reference to general English usage and PSCT standards covering the other parts]; so unless people have a ton of errors or I can't understand their stuff, people score relatively well. Toyo, I remember you making a status about that member's criteria that put OCG over Balance/other important things.

 

As for something that hasn't already been brought up today (and this is something Icy had around in the past), but setting the minimum requirements for even hosting/judging a contest should be done. I admit that the idea is somewhat discriminating against newer members (the old requirement was 150 posts), especially when we get some newer members who make decent cards. Instead, let's do something similar to how that RC Mentor program Aix made earlier today/yesterday (in most of your cases) and just require a certain amount of experience in the CC section.

 

But as Toyo mentioned, RC's success with its changes will reflect what happens in here. We do have some contests revolving around Pop Culture stuff, so that should be kept in mind as well.

[J-Max]

People honestly rate high based on the Card Image? lol That should be part of the Flavour Rating (up to 10% of say 40%) as if the effect goes well with the image ten it should be noted. There needs to be a minimum requirement and that is not Post Count..... A member should at least have a grasp of the fundamentals of the game rather then "Hey look at me! I love Dragons! Join my Contest!!!" I believe a minimum of FIVE decently created cards (as in people rated them pretty good in RC or PC) should be the benchmark before a Member can create a Contest.

 

Also having to design more then 3 Cards for a contest should not be allowed too. I have noticed one member once asking for people to create a Full 40 Card Set for a contest! Man I am getting the urge to host a contest now.....

 

This is my 2 Rupees on the matter.

[-Noel-]

People honestly rate high based on the Card Image? lol That should be part of the Flavour Rating (up to 10% of say 40%) as if the effect goes well with the image ten it should be noted. There needs to be a minimum requirement and that is not Post Count..... A member should at least have a grasp of the fundamentals of the game rather then "Hey look at me! I love Dragons! Join my Contest!!!" I believe a minimum of FIVE decently created cards (as in people rated them pretty good in RC or PC) should be the benchmark before a Member can create a Contest.

 

Also having to design more then 3 Cards for a contest should not be allowed too. I have noticed one member once asking for people to create a Full 40 Card Set for a contest! Man I am getting the urge to host a contest now.....

 

This is my 2 Rupees on the matter.

I support this idea, if one couldn't even make just 5 decent cards, then how can we expect the decent judging from that person?

[宇佐見 蓮子@C94]

Hmm, I suppose that plan could work, but there's going to be an inevitable backlash from new members, and maybe even a drop in activity.

Just make a CC equivalent of the RC mentorship thingie is what I would say, but that means double workload and the risk of making us seem like an overbearing community.

[J-Max]

Hmm, I suppose that plan could work, but there's going to be an inevitable backlash from new members, and maybe even a drop in activity.

Just make a CC equivalent of the RC mentorship thingie is what I would say, but that means double workload and the risk of making us seem like an overbearing community.

Quality > Quantity. I would rather join Contests (Such as Sakura's) that have been thought out well and have a Member that can judge fairly as well. Rather then 100 Contests run by Dragon loving Fanboys who drool over the best image.

[宇佐見 蓮子@C94]

Quality > Quantity for sure. I guess at this point anything is worth a try.

Oh! What if mods donate points to contests to increase the pots? It would certainly help increase activity.

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

That works.

 

As for the amount of cards that a contestant should make, I'm up for 3 being the maximum because too many cards will make it hard to judge. (This is one of the reasons I don't grade stuff in Multiples most of the time; too many cards to look at and CnC.)

 

@J-Max: In most, if not all of the contests I've helped judge since Sep 2013 (not counting my own), the other judges usually grade on picture (ranges from a minor issue up to a sizable portion of the grade). I don't grade on picture, because there is something called Written Cards (I know suitable pics are hard to come by at times). Yes, cards with pictures look prettier but if you really want to make a card and lack a nice pic, just go Written if you have to. There's no shame in doing so.

 

Likewise, I rather join a contest that has a good theme and is well organized. I've been in two since returning; the last one was a disaster (but free), but this can be attributed to a Fake Type card winning over several cards that could be considered as RC-level quality, and then threw a severe fit when asked to explain why said Fake Type card won over the "RC-level" things. (It's the thread marked "Video Game Contest" or something a few pages back by deck1125 or whatever his name is.)

[-Dom-]

My personal suggestion, though probably too impractical, would be to have more senior members (examples being anyone who has commented on this post) help in contests started by less experienced members. I don't just mean as additional judges, but to settle any disputes over card scores. This is just because recently I've seen a lot of these conflicts not resulting in much due to the contestant can't overrule the contest creator in his voting, which can affect the overall position.

[Maeriberii Haan]

Design: ?/35
Flavor: ?/30
Balance: ?/25
Other: ?/10
Total: ?/100

Or something like this? Just picked some arbitrary numbers to prove a point and the Other is for what each host can add. Also, each judge in a contest should use the same rubric and fully disclose their scores and their thoughts on how they scored the card.

That's pretty similar to what I have in mind, spread wise, though my rubric are somewhat different.

 

As for limiting contests hosts to only be from users with 5 or so "good cards" in RC, I don't really think that's actually a good idea to be honest. 5 "Decently created cards" is a very subjective threshold, since, really, card reviews are subjective. And this just made background checking everyone that wanted to make a contest to be a necessity.

(also, one that made 5 decent cards from a total of 30 cards, or something similar does not make a good cardmaker, so that's another concern)

 

Really, I believe the idea of restricting Contest Hosts is unnecessary, and won't do much but hurt the section.

We, the senior members, are here to help newbies to be better.

[Overfrost!]

For judging rubric, I do admit that I put my ocg above the others, here's my current rubric (probs will change soon):

• 22 - OCG
• 21 - Balance
• 4 - Personal Liking/Flavor/Overall Design
• 3 - Aesthetics

Okay, so, based on my 1 experience judging with it, it goes well. It was more of free points to my point of view, as some minor stuffs are counted, BUT won't greatly affect the score. Some really serious ambiguity that matters, like if you forgot to write 'from ?' in the card. As that really matters, and in actuality, renders it unplayable. But yeah, the ocg part needs to be reduced (though I still prefer it that way if possible).

My suggestion is allowing the judges to make their own rubric, following some certain rules. As judges' have their own unique point of view, someone can't just make the same rubric for everyone. Also, to test their rubric/judging abilities, they can submit their "test" judging to someone in authority, in order to proof that they are able to judge on contests.

I'm not trying to keep my rubric like that though, I'm fine changing it in some way if necessary.

Link to my judging: Cannot be Normal Summoned/Set Contest Judging

[宇佐見 蓮子@C94]

Oh, no. OCG should never be placed any more important than balance. Striker's rubric example is pretty good and covers all bases, I think something like that would be good for the section and the card makers.
though to be honest if i can eradicate ocg from all judging rubrics i so would

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

As I mentioned earlier, while I do factor in OCG on the same level as balance and creativity (15 points each with an additional 5 if you actually followed directions/abided by TCG standards; final score of 50), I am pretty lax about it for the most part. Since there are still things that Konami has yet to clear up in terms of wording certain actions, if there is no clarification on it, I'll not deduct points. Pretty much, if you spelled everything properly and make sure I can read the darn thing and can figure out what you're trying to do, you shouldn't bomb the section.

 

I will probably adjust it so OCG isn't worth as much (Put it back to 10 like I had it prior; only raised it because of the scaling factor; and boost the balance grade to 20 and compensate for the lowered points). I have it like that now because if I can't understand your card, then how do you expect the judges to believe your card is balanced without fueling win-moar/broken combos. That also ties into the balance and creativity sections.

 

So far, there haven't been too many problems with my grading scale since I adopted it at the start of SCS 1.

 

In a lot of contests I've seen/judged in, judges tend to use different score systems, which makes scaling to a common factor a necessity. In some cases, scores can end up as irrational numbers and need to be rounded up properly. But yes, the quality/integrity of a member's grading is important (to ensure that all entrants have their stuff dealt with fairly)

 

A lot of the stuff Icy wrote in the past could be reapplied now, but we'd have to adapt them accordingly for this generation of YCM (because this is not like the old days)

[Overfrost!]

Oh, no. OCG should never be placed any more important than balance. Striker's rubric example is pretty good and covers all bases, I think something like that would be good for the section and the card makers.
though to be honest if i can eradicate ocg from all judging rubrics i so would

Well, do forgive me for that. That's my first, see.
I'll lower it to this:

• 32 - Balance/Usability/Abusability
• 11 - OCG
• 4 - Overall/Creativity/Flavor/Personal Liking
• 3 - Aesthetics

How about this?

[Zauls]

How about we give a guide as to how much percentage of the total score each category can be, that all contests must follow? Something like:

 

30-40% Card Design

25-35% Balance

15-35% Flavour (rather large margin here since it depends a lot on the individual contest)

5-15% OCG

0-10% Other 

 

The specific percentages can be adjusted to what mods/members think is best, but you get the picture.

 

Also, I remember there once being a minimum post count limit for a person to judge a contest. While I don't think that is a good idea at all since post count =/= knowing what you're doing, some kind of restriction as to who makes a contest should be implemented. 

[Maeriberii Haan]

Restrictions won't do much to the quality of the section, really. The two proposed method (post count and ''decent card'' count) have their flaws, and the flaw would make them not changing much.

Well, unless a proper, surefire way to ensure all the contest hosts are competent enough is proposed, but at that point Card Contest becomes a club for the ''chosen ones'' and newer members cannot learn about hosting contests properly.

Quality>Quantity of course, but rather than cutting off the ones that lacked quality, we should try to make that quantity actually translate to quality. Proper guidelines, mentorship programs, giving example, all is preferred.

I'm probably a bit overreacting to the restriction, since it does have good things going for it.

[Aix]

I disagree with restrictions on who is allowed to host a contest as well. I'd say setting a default rubric is a good start, and then you are only allowed to change it after 3 stars. True, stars do not dictate knowledge, but at the very least, it makes it more likely that they have gotten a feel for this place and gained some experience.

[J-Max]

Restrictions won't do much to the quality of the section, really. Unless a proper, surefire way to ensure all the contest hosts are competent enough is proposed, but at that point Card Contest becomes a club for the ''chosen ones'' and members cannot learn about hosting contests properly. Quality>Quantity of course, but rather than cutting off the ones that lacked quality, we should try to make that quantity actually translate to quality. Proper guidelines, mentorship programs, giving example, all is preferred.

That's just it though.... Some people are not open to reason and will still hold their crappy "Make a Dwagon!" Contests and ruin the section for the rest of us (Burying potential really good contests because as you know everything in Page 2 and onwards is pretty much dead). and Judge). You don't need to know every single thing of course as take me for example, I know the fundamentals of the games and how everything works but I struggle to design based on how it would be used in the Meta, that does not make me a bad potential host or Judge though as I at least have knowledge of the game.

 

Now take a typical new member with no Knowledge (We will name him Sid) Sid knows a little bit about the game (such as what Spells, Traps and monsters are) but Sid does not know how effects work or how Spells and Traps can be countered. Sid decides he wants to host a contest as he loves Dark Magician Girl so much. People join this contest as they also love the Dark Magician Girl (from Newbies to Vets) and they post some xards. Lisa posts a basic Dark Magician Girl card with a slightly altered effect and slightly different ATK and DEF but a really cute Image from somewhere like Deviantart.

 

James posts a Dark Magician Girl card that can actually have impact on the game (Maybe its a Nomi card requiring DMG as a Tribute or uses other Spellcasters to help in its summoning and effect). James works really hard on the card making sure to stick within reasonable boundaries and finds a really nice professional looking image. Sid then decides to Judge and all thais on his mind is the Pretty picture of the card that Lisa made and makes her the winner. How do you think this makes James and Lisa feel? Lisa feels like now she can just use a nice image and win them all thus diminshing what little talent she had. Where as James will be dejected as he clearly had the better design.

 

Do you really want to see that repeated 1000 times? No..... Yes we need to be able to let all kinds of people to host contests but we do not need 2-Bit n00bs with little to no understanding of how the game works to host them.

 

Sorry for waffling on there but I needed to fully get my point accross.

 

tl:dr? More James and less Lisa and Sid. 

[宇佐見 蓮子@C94]

I somewhat disagree with that. Only allowed to change after three stars seems a bit too restrictive imho. Like, maybe you should still allow some modifications to the rubric, regardless of how many stars you have. Maybe giving the freedom to shift around the percentages of each criteria, or adding another criteria of their own.

[Maeriberii Haan]

@J-Max, I understand your concern. But one really important part of being a newbie is learning. Restriction will just kill the chance for newbie to learn more. It's like RC, really. New users will always appear with their terrible cards. Do we need to restrict who can be card makers to avoid the newbies drowning actually good cards? No. We make them learn about how should things actually be done. If their ego is too big or if they just can't learn, then their loss. Their topic will just be locked/moved or they got banned/warned and nothing detrimental will happen to the community. If they learn though? It brings many positive things to this community. Tl;dr, tell Sid how it should actually be done instead on blaming him for ruining the section.