[Idea] Expanding the Create a Card

Reggie McGigas

Reggie McGigas

-
Member
Create a Card has become very popular recently. We have tons of new members joining just to compete (fun fact: I joined Pokebeach to enter in the create a card competition!). With all the popularity, it's time to take things above and beyond. Water Pokémon Master has shown an interest in putting fake blanks on the front page, and I think he should also post about the CaC on the front page as well. CaC's should be expanded to around 25 entries per category, and have 2 judges for each one (Possible, one would cover entries from users whose names start with #s-M, and the other N-Z). This would really establish Pokebeach as a Pokémon Card Faking resource (which is what I'm assuming WPM wants to do), and would help gain visitors, old and new.

In summary, here is what I want to do-
-Promote the CaC on the front page
-Expand the CaC


This is somewhat a rough idea, any thoughts?
 
I agree. As we've seen from this month 15 slots filled EXTREMELY quick, and when it was expanded to 20 those were taken quickly too. I say make it 30 entries, that way the judges each have the normal amount of 15 entries to judge.
 
I agree with you all the way. It would be really helpful to have blank resources open to all.
 
This is an awesome initiative from WPM, but Reggie's two judges idea might not be as good. Having 2 judges really leaves space for discrepancies between both perspectives. Text-Based judging can be easily be taking care of up to 30 per judge if the judge actually does judge the cards periodically, and if I continue to do so as planned, I'm willing to let IA bump Text slots to 30. Image-Based, however, is a different story, since you take at least double the time to judge an Image than a Text format.
 
GadgetJax said:
I agree with you all the way. It would be really helpful to have blank resources open to all.
Click to expand...

They have been for 3 years, its just not everyone goes to deviantart :) (and PB's rules regarding external links/advertising)
 
Luispipe8 said:
This is an awesome initiative from WPM, but Reggie's two judges idea might not be as good. Having 2 judges really leaves space for discrepancies between both perspectives. Text-Based judging can be easily be taking care of up to 30 per judge if the judge actually does judge the cards periodically, and if I continue to do so as planned, I'm willing to let IA bump Text slots to 30. Image-Based, however, is a different story, since you take at least double the time to judge an Image than a Text format.
Click to expand...
We could launch two separate CaCs commencing at the same time, with different judges. I signed up for CaCs too... but then discovered games and YAY!
 
I agree with Luis, multiple judges for the same competition would become problematic. I've only judged a few cards and already find myself doing things quite differently from how CMP did them (not to say he did anything wrong, of course). It's very hard to make sure the scores are unaffected by who does the judging, as there is always a substantial subjective part. Having 2 concurrent identical competitions would be a problem as well, because winning one would not necessarily make you "the best", and the temptation to compare scores would be huge.

What I think would be a good idea, however, is having 2 different themes each month, each with a limit of 15 or 20 participants. That way 2 judges can be used without having to ensure corresponding scores. Another idea would be to have the same theme but to split the competition based on era, with one judge judging cards meant for older formats and the other judging cards made for the most recent format (or whatever split would generate roughly the same number of contestants). I wouldn't mind not having to deal with the rather boring XY-era when judging.
 
Now that's a viable idea. I have some trouble looking up reference for cards prior to BW myself and can take ages doing so. Having an "old timey" mode inside the real theme could be good. Either that, or having a Judge for each rubric.
 
Luispipe8 said:
Now that's a viable idea. I have some trouble looking up reference for cards prior to BW myself and can take ages doing so.
Click to expand...
And I haven't played since HGSS, and am therefore rather unfamiliar with the wording of anything post-BW (I'm also thoroughly uninterested, but that shouldn't be too much of a problem for CaC). With the new wording and conventions introduced in BW, it seems like the perfect place to split the competition. A Neo/e-series split would also be possible as a third division if need be, since the wording changed quite a bit back then as well, and the classic cards are quite popular.

The only problem would probably be that BW-on will fill up far more quickly, but at least this would give latecomers a chance to participate anyway without having to arbitrarily split the competition.

I guess all we really need for this to work is more judges?
 
I'll be back judging next month, but if Spoon wants to continue, I think finding some way to get more judges involved is a great idea.
 
Great feedback/ideas!

I've been thinking of having multiple judges for CaC for a few months now, and seeing how this round blasted off, we'll have to plan/take action much quickly to appeal to the growing community.

Personally, I would rather prefer seeing one theme for the month and increasing the number of judges. Obviously, we'll run into the issue of not keeping the same consistency for judging, but as HS said, we can just divide the different eras up + assign.
 
Having multiple judges might be messy right out of the gate, but it's definitely possible to train around it - exercises like presenting each potential judge with the same card from a previous competition, presented without the date, user, and with strict orders not to find out what it scored, could give you a baseline of how each judge is approaching the rubric. Then you could give feedback to the judges that would help increase consistency, and, once specifically trained to all give similar results, that could help lighten the load without biasing the competition.
 
I think, to maintain consistency with multiple judges, it could be broken up by category (i.e. in Image-based, one judges Creativity/Originality and Believability/Playability and the other judges Wording and Fonts/Placement). That way each category will be judged similarly across the board. Spoon's knowledge of the TCG is far beyond mine, so he'd have a better understanding of Believability/Playability and, to an extent, Creativity/Originality.
 
CMP said:
I think, to maintain consistency with multiple judges, it could be broken up by category (i.e. in Image-based, one judges Creativity/Originality and Believability/Playability and the other judges Wording and Fonts/Placement). That way each category will be judged similarly across the board. Spoon's knowledge of the TCG is far beyond mine, so he'd have a better understanding of Believability/Playability and, to an extent, Creativity/Originality.
Click to expand...

That's what I planned to implement in my unoficcial pokemon contest, and it would seem the best if you want to reduce the load for each judge. In addition, each judge can help with individual weaknesses for the other judge.
 
I think the best would be 2 themes with 15-20 people each. If you are grading with the same rubric it can be done pretty quickly.
 
aschefield101 said:
tbh, its still mostly text thats had the boost of late. So you need only plan around that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, as much as I'd like image-based to be the one with the huge popularity, it currently seems more than manageable by just one judge (I may regret saying this sometime in the near future). If it does eventually get the popularity it deserves, I'd of course love to take over some part of the judging process from CMP so the number of entries can be increased.

It's hard to divide the workload between text-based judges. I guess one could focus on the wording, but that would imply that the other is somehow more of an expert on creativity, or more capable of judging it. Both judges would have to read every card as well, and wording would probably still be the hardest part, so it's not like it would be that much easier. Splitting the competition based on era (or theme) still seems like the way to go for text-based.

And seriously guys, try and learn image faking, it's a lot of fun and feels a lot more rewarding. It's not even that hard once you find the proper resources.
 
Maybe that's what WPM wants; if so many people want to get in text, it's possible that the more artistically inclined from among them would want to dabble on image-based later, and if they have ample resources centralized in only one spot, instead of having to go all over the site/internet for them, it seems more likely they would want to take up image based faking.
 
Really liking your ideas, guys! The two judges thing is hard to sort out. Dual themes does seem interesting, someone could sign up for the theme that they wanted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top