Sorry Ryan, but I don't have questions, and I didn't have questions to start. I just had comments and ideas to try to help make the contest better (in my opinion).
Daniel Beaver, on 12 May 2011 - 03:34 AM, said:
But you're making a write-up on how to make the blaster
. The Abp5k, FAR, and all of the blasters of the like had no impact because they had no write-up
. Nobody taught us exactly how to make them. I don't think that there would be nearly as many plusbows if Captain Slug did not create that awesome guide with parts lists and everything, we would've had to figure out how to build one on our own. I hope you see my argument here.
taerKitty, on 12 May 2011 - 06:57 AM, said:
That's why I think that the incentive should be scored on how you achieved your goal, so those who create uneasy to replicate blasters and others who create easy to replicate blasters will both have a fair chance at this contest.
If someone has created a generally more difficult to make and costly blaster, but has achieved war effectiveness and creativity beyond the charts, they should receive generally the same amount of points as someone who made a blaster that fit all the incentives decently enough, but not exceptional in them (so like a balanced blaster), who should also receive the same amount of points as . . . well the opposite of the first example. I think you get my point, just there should be a balance that will give all the different types of homemade builders a fair chance.
And on a side note, as Nerf is often considered a craft, and craft is considered an art, I think an Aesthetic/Cleanliness incentive should be added. Maybe not for actual points, but as bonus to make for any lost points that was failed to be achieved.
Also another note, In no way did I ever think about being able to change the incentives, I just wanted to share my opinion and for others to see where I am coming from.
This post has been edited by LotusNerf: 12 May 2011 - 08:20 PM