Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Welcome to The Cave of Dragonflies forums, where the smallest bugs live alongside the strongest dragons.
Guests are not able to post messages or even read certain areas of the forums. Now, that's boring, don't you think? Registration, on the other hand, is simple, completely free of charge, and does not require you to give out any personal information at all. As soon as you register, you can take part in some of the happy fun things at the forums such as posting messages, voting in polls, sending private messages to people and being told that this is where we drink tea and eat cod.
Of course I'm not forcing you to do anything if you don't want to, but seriously, what have you got to lose? Five seconds of your life?
Each year, the esteemed ASB Awards take place, giving the TCoD ASB community a chance to celebrate all of the best that's been given to it for that year. Everyone can vote, and everyone even has a say in what are the awards should be -- each ASB Awards ceremony has started with a roughly week-long discussion phase where ASBers can drop off their suggestions and their thoughts on each potential addition.
Starting this year, we'll be using a single thread, separate from each ASB Awards ceremony, in order to host the pre-voting discussions. This should, ideally, keep the whole pre-vote discussion in one place, where any of it can easily be found and checked, while also making the ceremony threads significantly less cluttered.
Aaaaand I'll be keeping the first post mostly clear for now, just in case there are useful things I can put on here later.
Alright, so! Let's get this year's festivities started, shall we? For the record, the very first change we're introducing this time around: the winners will ultimately be elected and announced on January 30th 2016, which will be the first anniversary of our relaunch, rather than the usual date of October 4th -- this, mostly, because it's a more convenient date. (From now until there, we'll have roughly 15 days each of meta, nominations, and voting.)
But, for those who weren't around for the times when ASB Awards rolled, a brief explanation. The ASB Awards are an annual event in which the community comes together to honor trainers and referees who would be worthy of awards like Best Battler of the year or Best Referee of the year or even (author of the) Best Nickname of the year. This is usually split in three stages: initially, the award categories themselves are decided in a public discussion; next, the nominations roll in -- people just PM as many candidates as they like for each category; and finally, the actual voting period begins, with people PMing in the one winner they'd choose for each category (although, it should be noted, nobody has to nominate or vote for all categories -- you can do just the ones you have an interest in). Award winners are generally given some rewards (always at least some cash, and the more significant awards may even entail rare prizes), but the chance to just win an award is in itself the real thrill and the greatest worth of the event.
But there's no better way to know what it's like than by living the spectacle -- and we'll cross that bridge when we get to it, because, for now until someday around the 1st of January 2016, it's time to talk award categories.
To smoothen the procedure somewhat, here's a list of all the award categories that have showed up in or been discussed for ASB Awards of the forum's current iteration (barring four that aren't presently applicable and one that's been rendered redundant), neatly divided in three supercategories:
ASBer of the Year (2009~2011): The "best ASB player right now, for whatever reason".
Best Battler (2009~2011): Self-explanatory. Doesn't necessarily have anything to do with whether the player goes on to win their battles or not (to paraphrase Negrek, a good battler who sometimes loses to other good battlers is still better than a mediocre battler who wins against a lot of weak battlers).
Best Referee (2009~2011): Self-explanatory.
Best New ASBer (2009~2011): Similar to ASBer of Year, but only new players are nominated. (there's a bit of a sticking point in the definition of "new" in the current ceremony; see below about that)
Best Battle (2009~2011): Self-explanatory. Generally considered to award exemplary or thrilling battles as opposed to Most Entertaining Battle's (cfr Additional categories) fun or hilarious battles.
Most Improved Battler (2009~2011): For players who grew a lot as battlers in the current award period.
Best New Referee (2011): Similar to Best Referee, but only new referees are nominated. (has the same issue about the definition of "new" as mentioned in Best New ASBer, cfr Core categories)
Most Entertaining Battle (2010~2011): Self-explanatory. Generally considered to award fun or hilarious battles as opposed to Best Battle's (cfr Core categories) exemplary or thrilling battles.
Most Helpful ASBer (2010~2011): Self-explanatory (and, yes, a little vague).
Best Strategy (2009, 2011): For the most interesting plays during a given battle.
Best Battle Performance (2009): For a particularly spectacular performance in a given battle.
Biggest Upset (2011): Nominations are any battles where a player wins despite seeming very likely lose, for various possible reasons (generally either "the battle was going very poorly for them" or "they were up against someone much more experienced/better known").
Most Valiant Defeat (2011): "Someone who doesn't win, but makes the best show out of losing".
Best Arena (2009~2011): Self-explanatory.
Best Signature Move (2010~2011): Self-explanatory.
Best Signature Attribute (2010~2011): Self-explanatory.
Best Nickname (2009~2011): Self-explanatory.
Best Single Reffing (discussed, never applied): Self-explanatory.
And now for a few particular points I'd like to raise:
ASBer of the Year may be the event's biggest mainstay, but I worry that it suffers from some dispersion of critteria that tends to make it so you generally don't have any players you'd specifically name for ASBer of the Year that you wouldn't name for something else -- just Best Battler, Best Referee and Most Helpful ASBer already cover the three primary reasons why you'd generally name someone ASBer of the Year (and it's telling that all three players to win ASBer of the Year so far have also won either Best Battler or Best Referee in the same year, and one of them even scored Best New Referee and Most Helpful ASBer along with that) -- so the category doesn't seem to stand on its own enough to be worth the while. Maybe that's just me and everyone else is going to think not so, but, that's the good thing about putting things through meta.
There's a little problem with all of the "new something" categories, and possibly a general one. For all the ceremonies so far, the award period spans from each 4th of October, which was always the day when awards were announced; this means, for example, that the Best New Referee has to be someone who was approved for reffing during the current award period, or that the Best Nickname has to be one that was given during the award period (this kind of thing was much easier to track down when we still had to do everything by post, but ah well). The thing is, we never ended up doing an award ceremony in 2012, which begs the question of whether the current award ceremony should have an award period strictly in the year 2015 (which effectively snubs everything from October 4th, 2011 to the ASBplosion) or whether it should continue the tradition and start counting off the last award period (which means, for example, that someone with almost two years of experience could get nommed for Best New Referee). It's a pretty tricky question, and probably not one we'll have to give the same answer to in all circumstances.
Anyhow, the discussion is on. In general, core categories and creative categories will be kept, except if changing one or taking one down gets agreed upon. As for the additional categories, though, none of them are in by default, so if you're interested in any of them being kept, be sure to point it out -- general interest is the key here. Lastly, of course, the ASB Awards are always open for suggestions of new categories; if you have an idea that hasn't been covered in the ceremonies so far, please feel free to float it. (keep in mind, however, that negative categories -- things like "worst battler" -- aren't going to fly.)
Personally, I'm a bigger fan of awards that reward players for their year-long resume (at least in terms of battling), rather than those that recognize their achievements in one instance, so I've never been a fan of the categories from "Best Strategy" to "Most Valiant Defeat", and "Most Entertaining Battle". I think "Best Battle" is an exception, especially considering it rewards the efforts of two ASBers rather than one, but I consider the others a bit superfluous. I feel like they were added as a way to reward as many people as possible. I would suggest removing or combining a few of those categories (Biggest Upset sounds too subjective to me, while Best Strategy and Best Battle Performance could easily be amalgamated) at least, while "Best Battle" should not only be reserved for shows of effective strategy, but also those battles that were notable for their originality. It should be up to the voters to decide what they consider the "best" in that respect.
I agree that "Most Helpful ASBer" is a bit vague and I would be in favour of removing it. I think those that would be nominated in that category make large contributions in battling and refereeing as well, and therefore they deserve nominations for "ASBer of the Year" instead, considering that we have no cap on the number of nominations in each category. Regarding the issue surrounding "ASBer of the Year" and the crossover with other categories, I would say that the award usually goes to someone who participates in ASB in many areas, being a good battler, referee, and contributor, but that they often excel in one subset. If that means that they win "Best Battler" or "Best Referee", so be it, that doesn't mean that they aren't deserving of the greater award.
I think that "New" categories should be reserved for the time period following the reopening. I feel like few people clearly remember the happenings in ASB from 2012, and a good number of the battlers who were active in those days are no longer around, meaning they would doubtfully be aware of their nominations or victories. In general, I feel like our current ASB league is so different from the one pre-explosion that including nominees from both time periods would be a bit strange.
I'm a bit confused by the "Best Single Reffing" category. Is it rewarding someone for their work on one battle, or for one round? I feel like the latter would resemble the Additional categories that I disparaged earlier, but the former sounds good. I might rename it "Best Reffed Battle" or something like that instead.
Sadly, I'm not creative enough to come up with any new categories to add, but I think it would be cool to have some section on the db for immortalizing award winners as well as medals or something similar on individual profiles as is going to be done with Halloween Extravaganza ribbons.
My last point is a question (either for MF or for everybody): should nominees be allowed to vote for themselves?
I think that the creative categories (bar the single reffing) can be from before or after the implosion of the League (given, of course, that the person is still around and active in the League)
I have some doubts for best nickname, though. How would Pokémon that are constantly having their nicknames changed be judged? Would only the nickname at the time of nomination be considered, or can previous nicknames also be nominated?
About the latter -- the two only showed up separately in one ceremony and neither got much attention then, so I pretty much only put them in separately in the spirit of thoroughness. Unless anybody really, really wants both in, they probably won't be both in.
I'd also single out Biggest Upset in that... well, subjective, all the categories are supposed to be, but this particular one personally always rubbed me the wrong way, if only because it tends to carry some charged implications. There's a benign "victory that seemed like a loss" form but it seems like the essence of the category is painting someone as a likely loser and someone else as a likely winner based on ad hominem assumptions, which is unfair towards everyone involved, specially when it's not a tournament battle or anything where everyone is really trying that hard.
while "Best Battle" should not only be reserved for shows of effective strategy, but also those battles that were notable for their originality. It should be up to the voters to decide what they consider the "best" in that respect.
It's more or less already that way; "Most Entertaining Battle" is only distinct in that, well, for example: This Most Entertaining Battle 2011 nominee is sure as hell not something you'd want winning Best Battle (don't worry, it's a short read -- comically short, as it were).
I agree that "Most Helpful ASBer" is a bit vague and I would be in favour of removing it. I think those that would be nominated in that category make large contributions in battling and refereeing as well, and therefore they deserve nominations for "ASBer of the Year" instead, considering that we have no cap on the number of nominations in each category.
This is basically more of a spitball than actual data, but as far as I remember almost everyone who gets nommed for Most Helpful ASBer either: a) reffed a lot (which should just get you a Best Referee nom); b) had a lot of cash and spent plenty of it on other people (which... is probably not a thing that needs to be awarded); or c) was very prestative towards new players (possibly worth it, but we didn't exactly see a torrent of new players this year, so in this particular ceremony at least it's also not very significant).
I think that "New" categories should be reserved for the time period following the reopening. I feel like few people clearly remember the happenings in ASB from 2012, and a good number of the battlers who were active in those days are no longer around, meaning they would doubtfully be aware of their nominations or victories. In general, I feel like our current ASB league is so different from the one pre-explosion that including nominees from both time periods would be a bit strange.
I highly doubt people who didn't stick around since 2012 will garner enough attention to be nommed in anything, so nomming people from 2012 is basically more a matter of people still being fairly new if they only got, like, two months of ASB action before it exploded. Whether that in particular would be worth the while is more the point of discussion.
I'm a bit confused by the "Best Single Reffing" category. Is it rewarding someone for their work on one battle, or for one round? I feel like the latter would resemble the Additional categories that I disparaged earlier, but the former sounds good. I might rename it "Best Reffed Battle" or something like that instead.
afaik the idea is awarding a specific ref post. Apparently this was a category pre-2009 but garnered too little attention for Negrek to reinclude it, but, again, thoroughness. If anything else sounds good enough for a category, though, it could just be made into a category.
Sadly, I'm not creative enough to come up with any new categories to add, but I think it would be cool to have some section on the db for immortalizing award winners as well as medals or something similar on individual profiles as is going to be done with Halloween Extravaganza ribbons.
The guideline that the awards have gone by since 2009, and also the ones that I'm likely going to be adopting unless anybody has a good counterpoint to them, is: you can't nominate yourself, but if you were nominated for a category, you can vote for yourself in that category.
I have some doubts for best nickname, though. How would Pokémon that are constantly having their nicknames changed be judged? Would only the nickname at the time of nomination be considered, or can previous nicknames also be nominated?
You can nominate a nickname that no longer exists (if, like, you can prove it's ever existed), but I'd be surprised if anybody were to actually want to.
This is kind of weird, and I don't know if anyone else would be interested, but could we consider having a category for like, Most Entertaining Battler? Like, there are some people whose battles I look forward to watching because it's fun to see what kind of weird command strings they'll order, or because it's just fun to read their commands. It's very different from Best Battler in general, because as I would know very well, fucking around kind of makes it more difficult to win... but it's so much more fun to watch than several actually viable strategies.
It's kind of niche, I guess, but I think it'd be kind of fun.
This is kind of weird, and I don't know if anyone else would be interested, but could we consider having a category for like, Most Entertaining Battler? Like, there are some people whose battles I look forward to watching because it's fun to see what kind of weird command strings they'll order, or because it's just fun to read their commands. It's very different from Best Battler in general, because as I would know very well, fucking around kind of makes it more difficult to win... but it's so much more fun to watch than several actually viable strategies.
It's kind of niche, I guess, but I think it'd be kind of fun.
This is kind of weird, and I don't know if anyone else would be interested, but could we consider having a category for like, Most Entertaining Battler? Like, there are some people whose battles I look forward to watching because it's fun to see what kind of weird command strings they'll order, or because it's just fun to read their commands. It's very different from Best Battler in general, because as I would know very well, fucking around kind of makes it more difficult to win... but it's so much more fun to watch than several actually viable strategies.
It's kind of niche, I guess, but I think it'd be kind of fun.
That's a workable idea, but I'm not sure how much interest there'd be in it. (Although I'm guessing ILS's post for one would be a good sign in that regard, hmmm...)
By the way, now that I've actually read the entire second post, I would be absolutely devastated if Most Entertaining Battle wasn't there for me to nominate the Baby Bug Ball Brawl. I'm sure those still active of the sixteen other participants and two referees would agree! :D
Also, I actually really like Best Strategy, despite what seems to have been a general lack of nominations in that category... I can't imagine why. (seriously)
I guess this may just be a subset of "Best Battle," but the best thing I can think of to suggest is "Best Nail-Biter," if that makes sense? Like, a battle that comes down to the wire, where you really don't know who's going to win, or where someone makes an exciting come-from-behind win that only barely makes it? (I guess all these things I'm listing are kind of criteria that would also apply to Best Battle, but idk I feel like "down to the wire" is not necessarily the same as "exemplary; high-quality" even if it often is. Like, someone can be in the lead for most of the battle and I would still nominate it for Best Battle if it was legit a contender for best in terms of strategy, ref's writing, etc., but I wouldn't nominate it for Best Nail-Biter, and there are also vice-versa situations.)
I like the idea of turning Best Reffing into something like Best Reffed Battle, but on the other hand I like the idea of being able to single out specific reffings. But most of the reason I like the idea of singling out specific reffings are because those ones are entertaining/funny, so maybe having both Best Reffed Battle (i.e. high quality all the way through) and Most Entertaining Single Reffing might be a way to go? Or maybe even the latter should just be rolled into Most Entertaining Battle or something? I'm not really sure what I'm saying here, I'm just kind of spitballing and hoping something I say is good enough for somebody else to expand on.
As for the "additional categories" that are in flux, I really like the idea of Most Entertaining Battle, Best Strategy or Best Performance but not both, and Most Valiant Defeat, and I'm pretty neutral on all the others, except Biggest Upset (as has been said, could easily turn into an unintentional insult) and maybe Most Improved (same reason... idk, I know IRL clubs and teams and stuff tend to have an award like this, but I've always seen it as kind of a "wooow, you used to really suuuuuck" more than "you're a lot better now!", but maybe that's just me).
I guess this may just be a subset of "Best Battle," but the best thing I can think of to suggest is "Best Nail-Biter," if that makes sense? Like, a battle that comes down to the wire, where you really don't know who's going to win, or where someone makes an exciting come-from-behind win that only barely makes it? (I guess all these things I'm listing are kind of criteria that would also apply to Best Battle, but idk I feel like "down to the wire" is not necessarily the same as "exemplary; high-quality" even if it often is. Like, someone can be in the lead for most of the battle and I would still nominate it for Best Battle if it was legit a contender for best in terms of strategy, ref's writing, etc., but I wouldn't nominate it for Best Nail-Biter, and there are also vice-versa situations.)
I could see this replacing Biggest Upset as a strictly benign form (although, as a nitpick, I'd probably name it Nail-Biter of the Year or Biggest Nail-Biter instead of Best Nail-Biter). Anyone else?
I like the idea of turning Best Reffing into something like Best Reffed Battle, but on the other hand I like the idea of being able to single out specific reffings. But most of the reason I like the idea of singling out specific reffings are because those ones are entertaining/funny, so maybe having both Best Reffed Battle (i.e. high quality all the way through) and Most Entertaining Single Reffing might be a way to go? Or maybe even the latter should just be rolled into Most Entertaining Battle or something? I'm not really sure what I'm saying here, I'm just kind of spitballing and hoping something I say is good enough for somebody else to expand on.
I don't know, making those categoies more specific sounds like a surefire way to garner no interest in either one. Nomming or voting something for Most Entertaining Battle over one particularly entertaining moment is valid enough, so we probably don't really need a separate category there.
and maybe Most Improved (same reason... idk, I know IRL clubs and teams and stuff tend to have an award like this, but I've always seen it as kind of a "wooow, you used to really suuuuuck" more than "you're a lot better now!", but maybe that's just me).
Maybe I'm only thinking of this because I watch the NBA, but how about Defensive Player of the Year, to honour the players who have shown their class in terms of purely defensive play?
Maybe I'm only thinking of this because I watch the NBA, but how about Defensive Player of the Year, to honour the players who have shown their class in terms of purely defensive play?
Has anybody shown their class in terms of purely defensive play? I don't think there are so many people standing out with defensive strategies they couldn't just all be nommed for, say, Best Strategy or even plain ol' Best Battler (after all, ASB is generally played one-on-one or in groups of independent "athletes" rather than organized teams, so anyone who's defending particularly well is probably just playing particularly well in general too).
Has anybody shown their class in terms of purely defensive play? I don't think there are so many people standing out with defensive strategies they couldn't just all be nommed for, say, Best Strategy or even plain ol' Best Battler (after all, ASB is generally played one-on-one or in groups of independent "athletes" rather than organized teams, so anyone who's defending particularly well is probably just playing particularly well in general too).
I love like the idea of Nail-Biter of the Year; battles that move me to the edge of my seat just from seeing an unread post in the thread are one of my favourite things in ASB. I think some sort of Lifetime Achievement Award might be in order at this stage, or perhaps something more specific to this year as recognition for everyone who helped get ASB up and running.
It's an interesting idea, but Best Strategy doesn't usually get that many nominations, so a good team strategy can probably simply go in Best Strategy anyway.
But is there enough of a difference that it really warrants a separate category? It just doesn't seem like something that catches enough people's attention to garner a decent amount of nominations without splitting the ones from other categories thin (although, of course, if there really are numerous people who would be interested in this, I'm listening as long as they speak up).
I think some sort of Lifetime Achievement Award might be in order at this stage, or perhaps something more specific to this year as recognition for everyone who helped get ASB up and running.
Hmmm... I guess keeping ASBer of the Year basically covers that, particular in so far as that one's usually been set up so that the same player can't win it more than once.
Alright, the discussion's been rolling for a week now, so, I figure we should get at least a preliminary list of categories ready. Like so:
ASBer of the Year
Best Battler
Best Referee
Best New ASBer
Best New Referee
Best Battle
Best Reffed Battle
Most Entertaining Battle
Most Entertaining Battler
Best Strategy
Nail-Biter of the Year
Best Arena
Best Signature Move
Best Signature Attribute
Best Nickname
That'd be the original list, with six categories nixed and three added. Of the six I've nixed, though, there are three I'd like to see more opinions on whether they should definitely be nixed (those would be Most Improved Battler, Most Helpful ASBer and Most Valiant Defeat).
(Also, I'm going to try to come up with a better name for Most Entertaining Battler because, while I can understand the parallelism, it's just too easily confused with Most Entertaining Battle.)
I have someone that I really want to nominate for Most Improved Battler, but Best New ASBer serves just as well for that purpose, I think. I can't think of any battles off the top of my head that were really memorably down to the wire at the very end as I would vote for Most Valiant Defeat, so I personally don't think there's any benefit to having that category this year.
I can't think of any battles off the top of my head that were really memorably down to the wire at the very end as I would vote for Most Valiant Defeat, so I personally don't think there's any benefit to having that category this year.
Most Valiant Defeat has more to do with the defeated trainer going out with a bang, although ultimately the line between that and the match just being very close is pretty blurry (and indeed, each of 2011's nominations for the category were nail-biters).
