Total Posts:30|Showing Posts:1-30
Jump to topic:

International Hero Tournament

BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/10/2010 12:37:25 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I have an idea....i hop it goes well.

I call it "International Hero Tourney".

In this tournament, one competitor will represent one hero (non-deity) in history who existed and fought valiantly. This tournament is modeled after the show "Deadliest Warrior" aired on Spike TV USA.

There will be four categories which anyone may sign up for one or even all three if they want.
The categories will be:
Pre-Historic Combat Heros (? - 1800) [Note: Must be real non fictional heroes]
Group Combat Heroes (I.e. Navy SEALS, Spetsnaz)
Combat-Fiction only (Fictional Characters are allowed)
National Combat Heroes of the World (Self Explanatory; National Heroes only)

For each category you will be asked to pick weapons (which they have used) for whom you represent.
For instance:

1) Short Range Combat Weapon
2) Long Range
3) Hand to Hand (Knives, Maces)
4) Gunnery (For Group Heroes)
5) Special Weapons

The Judging system will be changed to accommodate each one. The GOAL in this is to prove why your weapon would be better for each category than your opponents.

If you wish to sign up, PLEASE PRIVATE MESSAGE ME WITH YOUR CHOICE OF HERO OR ANY QUESTIONS!!!

DO NOT POST YOUR CHOICE HERE!

Pre-Historic Heroes (?-1800)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Group Heroes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Combat-Fiction:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

National Heroes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

The system will go olympic style:
3 Prelim rounds for each.
Top 6 break to Quarter-Finals
2nd and third seed play for final break.
Loser of Final break faces 4th seed for bronze, and First and 2nd seed play for gold.

AGAIN. DO NOT POST YOUR CHOICES!!!! SEND THEM TO ME
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/10/2010 1:43:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/10/2010 12:37:25 PM, BellumQuodPacis wrote:
I have an idea....i hop it goes well.

I call it "International Hero Tourney".

In this tournament, one competitor will represent one hero (non-deity) in history who existed and fought valiantly. This tournament is modeled after the show "Deadliest Warrior" aired on Spike TV USA.

Ugh, what a despicably inaccurate show >.>
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/10/2010 1:50:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/10/2010 1:43:06 PM, TheSkeptic wrote:
At 3/10/2010 12:37:25 PM, BellumQuodPacis wrote:
I have an idea....i hop it goes well.

I call it "International Hero Tourney".

In this tournament, one competitor will represent one hero (non-deity) in history who existed and fought valiantly. This tournament is modeled after the show "Deadliest Warrior" aired on Spike TV USA.

Ugh, what a despicably inaccurate show >.>

I know which is why im hosting it here, to meet the PEOPLEs choice.
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/10/2010 3:46:36 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/10/2010 3:43:25 PM, sherlockmethod wrote:
Can we up the real heroes to 1900? So we can consider Civil War soldiers?

1900 Would allow extreme firepower. Also I will allow Civil War.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/10/2010 5:30:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Perhaps you should create a set of time periods, contestants choose one 'team' in each category, hopefully at least two in each time period choices will occur.

Alternatively run the tourney with stricter time periods e.g. 1970 onwards all categories, B.C. all categories and so on.

Odd numbers can be round robin, even numbers straight elimination maybe.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/10/2010 7:53:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Combat-Fiction only (Fictional Characters are allowed)
Mith Raw Nerudo ("Thrawn") of Star Wars

Weapons
Imperial Fleet
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 4:17:55 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/10/2010 7:53:56 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
Combat-Fiction only (Fictional Characters are allowed)
Mith Raw Nerudo ("Thrawn") of Star Wars

Weapons
Imperial Fleet

What part of...DO NOT PUT YOUR TEAMS ON THE THREAD!!!! Wasnt clear?
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:23:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/11/2010 4:17:55 AM, BellumQuodPacis wrote:
At 3/10/2010 7:53:56 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
Combat-Fiction only (Fictional Characters are allowed)
Mith Raw Nerudo ("Thrawn") of Star Wars

Weapons
Imperial Fleet

What part of...DO NOT PUT YOUR TEAMS ON THE THREAD!!!! Wasnt clear?

I figured that would be cheating.

Thrawn would Pawn :)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:30:31 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/11/2010 5:23:23 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 3/11/2010 4:17:55 AM, BellumQuodPacis wrote:
At 3/10/2010 7:53:56 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
Combat-Fiction only (Fictional Characters are allowed)
Mith Raw Nerudo ("Thrawn") of Star Wars

Weapons
Imperial Fleet

What part of...DO NOT PUT YOUR TEAMS ON THE THREAD!!!! Wasnt clear?

I figured that would be cheating.

Thrawn would Pawn :)

Thrawn trilogy was probably best SW books I've read. Still, the Imperial Fleet isn't the end all of sci fi fleet majesty. :P
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:34:47 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/11/2010 5:30:31 AM, Puck wrote:

Thrawn trilogy was probably best SW books I've read. Still, the Imperial Fleet isn't the end all of sci fi fleet majesty. :P

And if you had cooler ships Thrawn would take'em :)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:48:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Do'Urden vs. a Jedi would be pretty cool :)

His icy scimitar would plausibly extinguish the lightsaber...

And though a jedi can see a couple steps ahead.. Do'Urden thinks at least 4 or 5.

bye bye jedi :)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 6:46:24 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/11/2010 5:34:47 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 3/11/2010 5:30:31 AM, Puck wrote:

Thrawn trilogy was probably best SW books I've read. Still, the Imperial Fleet isn't the end all of sci fi fleet majesty. :P

And if you had cooler ships Thrawn would take'em :)

Alas, space debris is less than apt to such a task.
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:22:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Has anyone other than me even submitted anything?
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:28:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/10/2010 5:30:05 PM, Puck wrote:
Perhaps you should create a set of time periods, contestants choose one 'team' in each category, hopefully at least two in each time period choices will occur.

Alternatively run the tourney with stricter time periods e.g. 1970 onwards all categories, B.C. all categories and so on.

Odd numbers can be round robin, even numbers straight elimination maybe.

I like the time period idea.

I was thinking:
-Earlier than 1000
-1001 to 1400
-1401 to 1600
-1600 to 1800
-1801 to 1950
-Groups from 1000-Present
-Fictional
-National Heroes only

Also. The round robin for odd is good. As for even numbers, ill do the straight up elimination with a losers bracket.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:30:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/11/2010 5:48:42 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
Do'Urden vs. a Jedi would be pretty cool :)

His icy scimitar would plausibly extinguish the lightsaber...

And though a jedi can see a couple steps ahead.. Do'Urden thinks at least 4 or 5.

bye bye jedi :)

No. A lightsaber isn't magic. Any competent Jedi > Drizzt any day.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:33:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/11/2010 5:28:03 PM, BellumQuodPacis wrote:
At 3/10/2010 5:30:05 PM, Puck wrote:
Perhaps you should create a set of time periods, contestants choose one 'team' in each category, hopefully at least two in each time period choices will occur.

Alternatively run the tourney with stricter time periods e.g. 1970 onwards all categories, B.C. all categories and so on.

Odd numbers can be round robin, even numbers straight elimination maybe.

I like the time period idea.

I was thinking:
-Earlier than 1000
-1001 to 1400
-1401 to 1600
-1600 to 1800
-1801 to 1950
-Groups from 1000-Present
-Fictional
-National Heroes only

Here's where your 'I'm the organiser I have to do stuff' part comes in. Are they valid demarcations? That is, do they adequately reflect historical time periods (e.g. is there much historical difference from say 1300 A.D to 1500 A.D. to warrant separate categorical boundaries?).

Also. The round robin for odd is good. As for even numbers, ill do the straight up elimination with a losers bracket.

Sure, really only works for small numbers though, if you have a lot of contestants round robins will be debating a magnitude far greater than straight elimination. Maybe do L-M's thing and 1st round is only one debate to eliminate the odd number.

Depends really on the volume of debates you want and how fluid you want the tourney to run.
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:35:31 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/11/2010 5:33:16 PM, Puck wrote:
At 3/11/2010 5:28:03 PM, BellumQuodPacis wrote:
At 3/10/2010 5:30:05 PM, Puck wrote:
Perhaps you should create a set of time periods, contestants choose one 'team' in each category, hopefully at least two in each time period choices will occur.

Alternatively run the tourney with stricter time periods e.g. 1970 onwards all categories, B.C. all categories and so on.

Odd numbers can be round robin, even numbers straight elimination maybe.

I like the time period idea.

I was thinking:
-Earlier than 1000
-1001 to 1400
-1401 to 1600
-1600 to 1800
-1801 to 1950
-Groups from 1000-Present
-Fictional
-National Heroes only

Here's where your 'I'm the organiser I have to do stuff' part comes in. Are they valid demarcations? That is, do they adequately reflect historical time periods (e.g. is there much historical difference from say 1300 A.D to 1500 A.D. to warrant separate categorical boundaries?).

Also. The round robin for odd is good. As for even numbers, ill do the straight up elimination with a losers bracket.

Sure, really only works for small numbers though, if you have a lot of contestants round robins will be debating a magnitude far greater than straight elimination. Maybe do L-M's thing and 1st round is only one debate to eliminate the odd number.

Depends really on the volume of debates you want and how fluid you want the tourney to run.

I made sure the periods are vaild with one another. The time periods have been seperated by technology periods. (I.e. The 1801-1950 was the war period where technological advancement in weapons occured. Where as the 1600-1800 focused on swordsmanship and other developments in culture and not necessarily war)
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:36:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
That's way too broad of a grouping in the groups category. Non-industrial groups woukd easily be wiped out my modern ones because of the difference in technology.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:49:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/11/2010 5:36:14 PM, Korashk wrote:
That's way too broad of a grouping in the groups category. Non-industrial groups woukd easily be wiped out my modern ones because of the difference in technology.

Which period(s)
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 5:55:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
///-Groups from 1000-Present///

For instance a group like the Persian Immortals would be wiped out by the Navy Seals.

I guess the only fair way would be to create categories for groups like there are for individuals. Or pick one time-period for groups such as only modern groups.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 6:05:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/11/2010 5:55:50 PM, Korashk wrote:
///-Groups from 1000-Present///

For instance a group like the Persian Immortals would be wiped out by the Navy Seals.

I guess the only fair way would be to create categories for groups like there are for individuals. Or pick one time-period for groups such as only modern groups.

So Modern Groups only?
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2010 6:14:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
You're the organizer. I would prefer that modern groups be included because the group that I submitted is a modern group. Ultimately the decision is up to you.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown