Hearthpwn

The poll will remain open for now, but the next Discussion thread is ready.

Damn, these finalists r preeeeetty good, i like almost all of them. GL!

---

About the first page problem: we have tried different things in the past, but the current setup feels the best and overall most fair towards everyone. Yes, there r some weeks when no one makes it from certain page (doesnt have to be page 1) and it definitely feels unfair, but from past experiences, that doesnt happen as often that it would warrant a "VIP slot" for a submission or two just from such a page. Tho i suppose there could be a manual advancement of at least the top submission.

Quote from LevaVanCleef >>

I really can't understand how my card with 43 upvotes is not on the final poll. I really don't see the logic on that.

I mean, I get that first pages submissions have more upvotes because its the first cards people see and maybe a lot of people doesn't even go to the page 2...but I think a +40 card (an the other ones on the first page) should be here...I was really happy that my submission could made it to the finals again...

 

 That's how our system works. You can read all about it on any of the submissions topics.

Problem is, that if we just looked at vote counts, all the finalists would be from the first 1-2 pages, which isen't fun if you didn't happend to end up on one of those.

Let's say we looked at finalists purely by total votes. The 7 cards that have the most of on all of the pages combined are all on the first page. With this amount of voters, we have 12 finalists. So ATLEAST 7 out of 12 people from be from purely the first page, alongside not a single card from the third, fourth, fifth nor sixth page would make it to the finales. That doesn't seem fair, right?

Quote from Chocfudges >>

Quote from ThisOtherGuyTox >>

Quote from LevaVanCleef >>

I really can't understand how my card with 43 upvotes is not on the final poll. I really don't see the logic on that.

I mean, I get that first pages submissions have more upvotes because its the first cards people see and maybe a lot of people doesn't even go to the page 2...but I think a +40 card (an the other ones on the first page) should be here...I was really happy that my submission could made it to the finals again...

 

 That's how our system works. You can read all about it on any of the submissions topics.

Problem is, that if we just looked at vote counts, all the finalists would be from the first 1-2 pages, which isen't fun if you didn't happend to end up on one of those.

Let's say we looked at finalists purely by total votes. The 7 cards that have the most of on all of the pages combined are all on the first page. With this amount of voters, we have 12 finalists. So ATLEAST 7 out of 12 people from be from purely the first page, alongside not a single card from the third, fourth, fifth nor sixth page would make it to the finales. That doesn't seem fair, right?

The current system can cause some problems, but we definitely should not just use the "who got the most upvotes wins" system. That system is obviously flawed by giving the early submitters more advantage.

The current system measures how "outstanding" the card is compared to others in the same page (perentage of the card's upvotes from the page's total upvotes), which means a card's score can be effected by the performance of the others. However, IMO, the ideal way to judge a card is to look at it purely individually by the percentage of people who upvote the card from the total people who saw the card. The system should randomize a sample from the submitted cards of maybe like 5 cards to each voter and ask them whether they like it or not ("Yeah!" or "Meh") sequentially for each sampled card. The randomization should also make each submission get viewed by at least like 20 people for a good sample size. The cards will then be calculated the rate of people who like it from all of the people who saw it. A card that has a 89% " 'Yeah!' rate" is considered to have a higher score than another with 86%. Cards then will be judge on how much they can impress the viewers regardless of how many voters saw their card or how well the other cards performed.

It's still sad that even the Bwonsambi card didn't even make it to the finals, not that because it got the most upvotes, but because most of the people like it.

 So those suggestions are interesting, and when the season is over (which is after the 8.20 competition) there will be a feedback thread, where you all can come with suggestions on what you think could change with the competitions.

I can't rule anything out at current moment, but a "Yeah/Meh" button, alongside randomized showings of the cards are extremely unlikely to happend. It would require an immense amount of work from our developers, since it doesn't fit within how our current system works.

A potential solution, that have been talked about tho, is a competition side by side based system. By this i mean that we calculate scores, not based on the amount of votes that the card has recieved, compared to the other cards on the page, but rather that we compare them to how many votes a card in that specific position have had through the years.

Say we have 5 cards on page 1 with 50 votes, and a card in those positions have on average had 75 votes. But on page 6 the card that does the best have 4 votes, but a card in that position have on average 8 votes.

This would negate the effect of "weak pages", and allow for several cards to advance from a single page, not affected by the quality of cards on their page or on another page.

This would still require a ton of work internally. But based on how HearthPwn works, this is a way more manageable solution than a complete revamp of the entire site.

Poll results should be visible now, cg to little doggie :)