Results for the March General Madness

[Marshal Murat]

As I'm sure everyone who participated well knows, Alexander the Great beat out Hannibal Barca by 3 votes.

Yes, three more posters could have tipped the scales of victory into a camp that I favor. In any case, those are the results.


Comments, suggestions, additions, subtractions, multiplications?

I hope to start another series, with more generals from a wider spectrum. Manstein, Guderian, Rommel, Jellicoe, Scheer, Frederick the Great.

[AggonyDuck]

One thing though; don't mix naval and land commanders. They really can't be compared together. That's one of the essential things about it, they have to be comparable. Eg. comparing Alexander to Guderian would be very hard due to the very different situations and conditions they faced.

[Csargo]

One thing though; don't mix naval and land commanders. They really can't be compared together. That's one of the essential things about it, they have to be comparable. Eg. comparing Alexander to Guderian would be very hard due to the very different situations and conditions they faced.

Yep. Next time you should really try to get the generals into better catagories.

[CountArach]

Maybe something like 2 people from the same general era face off? For example 2 ancient generals or 2 World War era Generals, or something?

[KARTLOS]

all hail alexander, king of generals!

[Stig]

Maybe something like 2 people from the same general era face off? For example 2 ancient generals or 2 World War era Generals, or something?

Well you can't even compare Hannibal and Alexander, they never fought eachother. All you do is saying: I like A over B

[Innocentius]

I agree with CountArach that generals of a similar period in history should be compared, not antiquity vs. 19th century and so on.

[Marshal Murat]

So why even do something so extensive, if you end up with a hundred different categories of 'best'?

I'll write in some more rules, define it better.
Anyway, keep the comments coming.

[TinCow]

Increase the number of competitors. You can have up to 30 poll options at once and if you enable multiple voting, we could get through a large number of votes with only a single thread per round. For example, if there are 16 competitors, simply make a poll with 16 results and multi-voting enabled. Then make the poll options as follows:

1) A v B - A wins
2) A v B - B wins
3) C v D - C wins
4) C v D - D wins
etc.

Each person can then vote once in each 'pair'. If anyone votes for both competitors in a certain matchup for whatever reason, just don't count their vote.

I like the idea of matching up people from the same time frames, at least in early battles. If you've got a larger pool of competitors, you could give each 'division' a specific era. For instance, in a contest with 16 generals, you could have 4 divisions of 4 generals each, with each group of 4 being from similar time periods and/or military bacgrounds.