Looks like my case can't rest in peace yet.
xcrossfacekillahx wrote:The top contestants at the end of the regular season last year were the ones to win a necklace. The one necklace rule controls the number of times a contestant can win a necklace.
[...] But as for who wins the necklace, it's always the top 7 none the less.
You touch upon a point that I want to clarify: I don't condemn the fact that strong girls win necklaces. Strength, after all, is one of the key components I mentioned in securing a necklace. Luck, as I argued, is also a factor, but not so much that someone such as, say, Konata, Saber, or even Charlotte can steal a necklace right off the bat from the likes of Kanade and Mikoto.
So as I understand it, your argument here is that luck is useless since "top contestants at the end of the regular season last year were the ones to win a necklace" anyways. Two points I'd like to make:
1. What happened last year happened because there was no one-necklace rule. Notice that Shana won three necklaces, and notice that by winning necklaces, none of the top hitters were barred from winning any more necklaces. It was, indeed, very difficult for any non-top-7 to win any necklace. It gave too much of an edge to the strength part of necklaces, which I suppose is the reason why the staff put in place the one necklace-rule this year. Sure, someone from the top 7 will likely win the first few necklaces this year, but can you honestly neglect the increasing likelihood of a non-top-7 winning the latter few necklaces now that those who've already won can longer compete? Personally, I think it's still a tad bit hasty to assume that this year will end up the same as last year.
2. SDO, and thus scheduling, makes things more unpredictable. If you determine necklaces purely through strength, even with the one-necklace rule, what would certainly
happen? Aquamarine: Kanade, Topaz: Mikoto, Amethyst: Yuki, Sapphire: Shana, etc. The SDO factor obviously impacted the first two, and for the third one, it's not entirely certain whether Yuki or Eucliwood would win it. For the fourth, Shana better pray that she gets a good schedule to fulfill that prophecy
(although people who want Shana to get Ruby will pray otherwise)
. As such, it keeps things exciting. Alot of people raged at the Aquamarine result, and that's part of the excitement too (imagine a totally predictable Kanade-Aquamarine win, ugh).
xcrossfacekillahx wrote:The good thing about the necklace round is that the characters who didn't have enough luck but had the strength to compete can win the necklace by having x more votes to the current leader. How about the 7-0 girls who compete but have slim to none chance of winning a necklace? It just backfires them on that round which is bad. Since SDO carries over after 7 matches, it does not bode well for them if their SDO is very low and if they are not strong enough. What happens most of the time is it boils down to 2,3,4 people even if it's a 7 way match unless the SDO diff. is close enough for everyone.
If you have a 7-0 girl who has a low SDO, that means she fought easy opponents. Which one is more honorable: a 7-0 girl who defeated girls with barely 0 to 2 wins, or a 7-0 girl who defeated high caliber opponents with 4 to 6 wins? Who had the toughest route and deserved the necklace the most? Under the old (2008) system, the first girl would win, purely by easy VD. Under the previous (2009-2010) system, the second girl would win, purely by virtue of SDO. Under the current system, both girls would be able to duke it out one last time, and if the SDO difference is small enough ("the first girl put out effort close to that of the second girl") or if the first girl is strong enough, the result can be overturned. Incidentally, this current Yuki-Eucliwood situation for Amethyst 8 is similar to this; you can see it as an upset in both ways. It can be a big upset if Eucliwood overcomes her 6-1 record and conquers the necklace from Yuki, or it can be a small upset if Yuki overcomes her SDO deficit and conquers the necklace from Eucliwood. What allows this? Necklace round.
PS: I don't get what you mean by backfiring; I can't detect any injuries or long-term health issues from entering a necklace round and not winning.
Kordosa wrote: Eater-of-All wrote:
Kordosa wrote:At the very least, though, would it be too much to ask to post the list of contestants by tier after the seeding matches conclude? Because I don't follow all the statistics talk, and I only have a very general idea of which girl is which tier. And as far as maintaining trust with the community, wouldn't releasing a tiered-based list of contestants be a good compromise for not posting the entire schedule? And since strength will rise and fall during the tournament, simply add a disclaimer indicating that the list is how strong each girl is projected to be at the time of the seeding tournaments and doesn't reflect those changes in strength over time. Heck, put it in a spreadsheet so voters can download it and modify it as the tournament goes on to indicate those changes (all for personal use, of course).
Every Amethyst fantasy thread has a link to the list of contestants by tiers. For convenience, here it is
(Hinagiku is the wildcard).
Doh.... That's what I get for not bothering with Fantasy. Thanks.
So is the left column updated at the start of each period to account for strength changes, or is it just the match opponent portion (which I don't necessarily need)? And I assume the match opponent portion is filled in as the period goes along and not at the start. Or else we'd essentially have a period schedule available.
The left column, I assume, has been staying and will stay the same (or else someone must be really horrible for not updating Holo's tier after all these recent matches). The opponent portion is used for fantasy stuff, so you can ignore that if you only want the tiers. And yeah, that portion is only filled out as the period goes along.