Exactly what the title says. A compo of host-specified length, from 5 to 120 minutes. Anyone else agree that this would be a good idea, or no?

hell yeah. i'd make the max 180 minutes.

yeah and then we could have a listening party at the end and people could vote while the song is playing!

Perhaps the maximum/minimum length able to be set starts increasing/decreasing from 60 minutes when you get to a certain level...

Also while you're at it, truncate the countdown length each time an OHC is created to foil goluigi's plan so that no fractional timings occur.

noooooooooo curse you meddling kids! (more like i'm the meddling kid :o)

goluigi, how does the length of the battle affect the ability to have a listening party?

What do you call a minibattle that is not one hour in length? I know a lot of people don't like OHB, but it also renders OHC useless as well. This will obviously be rolled into BotB 3.0 . . .

The BotB Arena calls them Quick Battles.

It doesn't really make sense but perhaps the term OHB/OHC should be kept for simplicity's sake.

puke, i dunno i just gave a random, out there suggestion which should probably be on ANOTHER THREAD.

I'm gonna start WC8 so y'all don't have time to worry about this.

How about a 'quickie'? :3

Not til you take me out for dinner, lepage~

anytime bby

Seeing as I never participate in majors, it looks like I can worry about it. Hee hee.

Perhaps variable length compos should be a brand, butt-smacking new type of compo with their own point type. It's not a perfect analogy, but in terms of our formats I think of OHC/OHBs as NSF, and variable-length compos as NSF Plus. There's no technical reason for making this distinction, yet, the competitive advantages of using expansion chips in conjunction with the APU are great enough to warrant a leveling of the playing field. (I actually don't know if this is why we have two NSF formats, but that's my educated guess.)

That's not exactly why those two formats are separate but definitely one of the biggest reasons. I've also considered many times adding an NSF Classic format which excludes any samples. But let's talk about battles.

Minibattles that are not OHBs could be called quick battles or 'quickies' as in when ui says "I will quick your balls!" I don't see the point in having battles much shorter than an hour. I know a few formats seem 'simple and dumb' but I'd rather see a 2HB than a 1/2HB because two hours is more likely to produce something thought out. I know it's fun sometimes to do something quick and dirty but I'm trying to look out for quality across the big picture.

I think half-hour battles have a certain appeal to them, myself. But 2HBs would be nice as well. :)

I struggle with OHCs, so .5HCs would be ghastly for me.

Definitely for 2HC though!!

puke7, to connect back to my baby thesis (forgot to do that) and borrow from/reply to yours, I look at the OHB/Quickie debate as NSF/NSF Plus; I think Quickies should be a whole new ball of wax with a new point class. EDIT: Again, not a perfect analogy since NSF Plus isn't a part of another point class.

Ha ha two hours. What is this, luxury compo for rich jerks?

Half hours are even harder for me to randomly run through. Two hours is the exact opposite: I could compose a song with an hour left on the clock if I randomly ran into one when I visit the site!

OK. So how about the standard time increments: 15MB, 30MB, 1HB, and 2HB.

15MB and 30MB could be good for Mario Paint, Wildcard, or Pixel.

Other battles can be determined by entry count. Meaning the battle ends when the Xth entry has been submitted. This could add some interesting amount of aggression to the competition and not rely so much on time. That way uncomfortable formats could have time to propagate. The minimum integer for an xEB is 2. For example: A 4EB would end its entry period at 4 entries to start its voting period. To end its voting period it would need 4 votes plus 1 to end. So in summary the format would be for xEB votes start at x and battle ends at x + 1 votes. (Perhaps a + Y integer could be supplied by the host for extra votes until end, but +1 makes it simple and fast to not rely on admin or host ending of battles.) A good example of this would be for demo battles, TIA battles, MML battles, etc.

How about it? :) (Btw... Yay for Winter Chip.)

I'm not too keen on an X entry battle. There's no telling when the deadline ends, and more often than not, more than one person will be working on the last entry. It'd be sad if people were blocked from submitting it. :(

Now maybe if it started a countdown timer once the "last" entry is submitted so people who are working on something can still get their entry in! (And finish it properly. ;))

I hæїtd B00daW's post, but only for the entry count battles. I'm really opposed to the idea, because it only means if you're having a 4-way battle, the fifth person will more often than not work on their entry only for nothing. It'll always result in someone being frustrated no matter what. Please don't let this happen, it's a really bad idea.

15MB, 30MB, 60MB (OHB) and 120MB (2HB), however, are fantastic ideas for compo lengths, and I put my support behind that. I'd even add 90MB to the lot. All of them should give OHCist points I think, since the class already exists and there's no sense in creating a new class for each individual battle type.

I actually really like the idea of an X-entry battle as B00daw suggested, but only if implemented as Slimeball mentioned, where there's a time limit that comes into play once the specified number of entries is reached. That way no one feels slighted if they don't make the cutoff. That's like that feeling of bidding on an ebay auction and getting sniped at the last minute by someone with a faster mouse click.
The idea is fun though. I don't think the imposed time limit should be very long...more like a "last call" that gives the stragglers a fighting chance to still submit something, but not so long that it's frustrating for those who made the X-entry cutoff.
That would take the fun out of such a battle, having to wait around doing nothing for half an hour while the timer ticks down (especially if no one else ended up submitting an entry).
I say 15 minutes at the most.

As far as other lengths for battles, this could get really complicated if there are too many options. IMO there should simply be three options: 30 minute battle, OHB, and 2-hour battle.
That's plenty in my opinion. It keeps things straightforward and wouldn't warrant the addition of any more types of points or BotBr classes.

I think some implementation of these ideas (as puke7 sees fit) would really add to the fun of BotB.

15MB could be a good thing to have for stuff like quick pixel battles, or mario paint sequencer battles, or just stuff like "here's a module with a pattern in it, make up something that follows up nicely", which is something we can't do with OHBs but that would be made possible by really short battles like 15MBs.

Well I've considered the above statements and have supplied the following addendum to xEB without changes to its core:

x+1 entries can be entered for fun and commenting sake as long as they follow the format and can continue to be entered until the voting period is done. For each additional entry submitted during VOET TIMEZ one additional vote on the qualified X entries are required to satisfy the SLUTS.

Unfortunately each X+1 entry cannot be voted on but does receive a complimentary tin can and *ist points as a consolation prize!

I don't understand the rationale behind restricting the number of votes that can be cast. Isn't the quality of voting improved by allowing more votes? I think Slimeball's suggestion for the entry-driven timing makes the most sense. X entries sets off the countdown to end, during which everybody who was still making something has to scramble to finish. This makes enough sense to me, and doesn't punish people who started working on their entry. I dunno why you'd want to restrict the number of votes, or give everyone past the first X entries tincans.

Anyhow, another reason for short battle lengths (i.e. 5-20 minutes) is for improv allgear battles, so you are giving only time for a couple of takes before they have to submit.

Perhaps I like the idea of a more brutal competition. A lot of online games these days are very unforgiving and rigid when it comes to what signifies as a "win". I'm not saying they're fun, but at least that aspect is very good. I remember a lot of the old days where we would/could lovingly curse each other out after being "robbed" of a win and it was pretty good for you to realize that it was all for fun and "you win some and you lose some." Some people are so good at either technical or musical talent that it would be good for other aspects to be required as well. Sometimes an amazing late entry in an OHB can take the cake still. Where I don't think OHB's need to change, I'm suggesting a more rigid and competitive format.

We're already a family and a community. Getting mad at each other can be fun and create new bonds via conflict; and having healthy rivalries and factions is something that has been planned for a long time. Hopefully with BotB 3.0 will be carried out. :)

FATALITY~~~!!!

yeah, i don't know, all this stuff about limiting the number of entries and/or votes just seems counter to the botb spirit of freedom. i don't think it would add anything to put this feature in, i think it would just piss people off, confuse them and/or frustrate them. different time limits, however, would be nice :)

>all this stuff about limiting the number of entries and/or votes just seems counter to the botb spirit of freedom.

This.

#TheNeverendingCompo

Au contraire, mon frere. Us moral libertines like to believe that restriction of freedom such as bondage helps to better taste the freedoms without restraint.

I wouldn't dare consider changing the existing formats to make them more restrictive. I would just like to include additional formats for bondage perverts and freaks such as myself and others who have yet to come out.

Some of the best and most inventive music I believe was made in Communist "iron curtain" regions of Europe and Asia. <3

i'm sure botb was always intended to feel a little like a game, and b00daw's imagination helps in that regard more than any amount of so-called freedom :F

i liked boodaw's idea as an idea but i don't know if i'd want it part of botb.

maybe as a "softer" version of boodaw's idea it could be done like an auction (a real auction rather than an ebay auction) - after the last song has been submitted, people get a "going, going, gone..." of however long (maybe ten minutes) to submit their own songs, and then there is another "going, going, gone..." period etc (i am sure you know how auctions work).

there are all sorts of gamey things that could be done but i wonder if people would prefer to just be judged on their music.

5 minute compos are unnecessary i think but it would be nice to have > 1hr compos. i sort of like the idea from above that higher levels could start longer compos. on the one hand it is elitism but on the other hand elitism seems valid here somewhat.

Well, now that WC8 is over [well, wrapping up], I'd like to put this back on the table.

Thinking about it some more, I agree that sub-15 minute compos are silly for anything past some ASCII things we've done.
So, 30MC, OHC and 2HC are ideal time formats. They are quickies collectively, as opposed to major battles.

ant1's post seems to have the best things out of the thread streamlined, so I don't have much else to add.

And I am extremely for having a sub-hour time format. 30 minutes seems ideal, 15 is too short, and 45 would be awfully similar to an OHC.


The other thing that would be a bit of an issue with b00daw's more aggressive format would be asses that would push the entry count up with 0-effort entries just to make the cutoff happen [in an OHC, submitting 0-effort stuff doesn't matter, it just gets 1-voted and doesn't illegitimately force the compo to close]. Maybe making the minimum time 15-30 minutes before the cutoff period can happen? And the selectable minimum for entrants be 4 [and max at 10, because these are of indefinite length].
I know admins would [and can now] deal with those scrubs that would just push to end, but it would also keep entry quality a little higher by guaranteeing some time.
A 3 minute end period after the entrant limit is reached would be good. It'd be a bit of a race still, and those caught in the ending period would still be able to attempt a shot at entering. The /Submit/ page would be disabled after the end period.

Oh, and since you are guaranteed a minimum amount of entries, don't give b00ns back.

tldr: 4EB minimum, 10EB max, 15 or so minutes minimum possible compo length before close, 3 minute close period after the entry minimum is reached.

And I see no reason at all to limit voting for xEB, that's just silly. The more the merrier is always a thing when it comes to voting.