TOPIC: Missed GenCon, Game Hole Con exp for 2016?

Matthew Hayward wrote:

jedibcg wrote: Also not surprised considering it was only 47 people that were voting which represents what percent of the TD community? So it is interesting but I don't know that it tells us much about what the community wants, just what the 47 of us that voted chose.

It's better than you might think. In a population of 10,000 people 96 respondents will give you answers within a 10% margin of error.

So, while you can perhaps quibble with sampling bias (e.g. who was invited to take the survey), the following claims hold up even considering the sample size (e.g. even accounting for the small size these are still likely to be true):

* A strong majority agrees retro/redux dungeons should grant some XP.

* A roughly even split (be it 35/65 or 50/50) exists between the propositions that XP should be capped at one con's worth, versus there should be more XP available.

* Participation is being reduced by there only being XP at Gen Con (whether it's impacting 20% of people or 40%).

I'm not a statistical expert, probably shouldn't even be voicing an opinion, but yes, 96 people randomly selected from 10,000 might give you pretty good results. However, this group is not random. However, I agree that if a result shows 80-90% voted in one direction we can feel pretty certain that the you wouldn't see things swing the other way, even with a larger group.

Dave wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

jedibcg wrote: Also not surprised considering it was only 47 people that were voting which represents what percent of the TD community? So it is interesting but I don't know that it tells us much about what the community wants, just what the 47 of us that voted chose.

It's better than you might think. In a population of 10,000 people 96 respondents will give you answers within a 10% margin of error.

So, while you can perhaps quibble with sampling bias (e.g. who was invited to take the survey), the following claims hold up even considering the sample size (e.g. even accounting for the small size these are still likely to be true):

* A strong majority agrees retro/redux dungeons should grant some XP.

* A roughly even split (be it 35/65 or 50/50) exists between the propositions that XP should be capped at one con's worth, versus there should be more XP available.

* Participation is being reduced by there only being XP at Gen Con (whether it's impacting 20% of people or 40%).

I'm not a statistical expert, probably shouldn't even be voicing an opinion, but yes, 96 people randomly selected from 10,000 might give you pretty good results. However, this group is not random. However, I agree that if a result shows 80-90% voted in one direction we can feel pretty certain that the you wouldn't see things swing the other way, even with a larger group.

I updated my original post with more data. Basically:

1. With regard to sample size, if the TD community is 10,000 people 47 respondents suggests a 90% chance that the answers to our questions are withing +/- 12% of the accurate value.

2. With regard to sample selection - who knows - the selection is basically active forumites and their friends. That group could pausibly have different ideas than the community at large in a way that skews the results.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

jedibcg wrote: Also not surprised considering it was only 47 people that were voting which represents what percent of the TD community? So it is interesting but I don't know that it tells us much about what the community wants, just what the 47 of us that voted chose.

It's better than you might think. In a population of 10,000 people 96 respondents will give you answers within a 10% margin of error.

With a 12% margin of error, a population of 10,000, and a 90% confidence interval 47 respondents are needed:

www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html

So - there is a 90% chance that the breakdowns we observe are within 12% of the accurate values of the community assuming random sampling.

So, while you can perhaps quibble with sampling bias (e.g. who was invited to take the survey was not random), the following claims hold up even considering the sample size:

* A strong majority agrees retro/redux dungeons should grant some XP.

* A roughly even split (be it 35/65 or 50/50) exists between the propositions that XP should be capped at one con's worth, versus there should be more XP available.

* Participation is being reduced by there only being XP at Gen Con (whether it's impacting 20% of people or 40%).

The guy with a BA in Sociology has more than just a quibble about sampling bias. This tells us a lot about active forumites opinion and not much else. It's still valuable information, just limited.

If TD wanted a wider opinion, they could send out a newsletter with a link to a survey, or some other way of reaching a much broader swathe of their playerbase.

I'm not a statistician, but my takeaway was indeed basically "huh, that's interesting" followed by "I'll bet TD could get much more than <1% of their overall users/interested parties.

It also has larger ties to their business model, of course. How many new players would such a thing attract? (locals to those cons that can't or aren't interested in Gencon) How many people would spend considerably more (on runs, on tokens, on other swag) based on that option being available? Nitty gritty stuff like that, things we can't know (or at least probably shouldn't be talked about openly), the raw mechanics/logistics of such a change, the risk/reward ratio (not said in a negative sense, they are a business after all), and aspects like that.

I'm glad the survey was run though, it was interesting to ponder.

If the question is in effect "do you want free stuff?" I suspect the answer will almost always be yes (even if that stuff is immediately discarded.

Picc wrote: If the question is in effect "do you want free stuff?" I suspect the answer will almost always be yes (even if that stuff is immediately discarded.

It would depend if it is heavy and bulky and how far I would have to carrier it. Yeah if I just suspect it is complete junk I likely to walk on by.

jedibcg wrote:

Picc wrote: If the question is in effect "do you want free stuff?" I suspect the answer will almost always be yes (even if that stuff is immediately discarded.

It would depend if it is heavy and bulky and how far I would have to carrier it. Yeah if I just suspect it is complete junk I likely to walk on by.

I learned that the hard way 1 year when working exhibitor hall and endedup taking a half pallet plus of micro games home. Didn't really appreciate the dent in my gas mileage or how bad the ride got on way home that year.

Otherwise, yes in a vacuum/in general people aren't going to say no to free stuff unless they've really learned better or have reason not to.

It seems to me that's part of the disconnect here, though.

The player based exp system only really applies to people who are going to play regularly. I doubt many 'walk ins' are getting 4k per year at Gencon, let alone going to actively seek out more conventions simply because of exp being available now.

So we have two disparate groups; the 'casuals' who presumably won't care, won't know (unless they occasionally do swing by the forums, or TD makes a BIG thing about it), or won't be playing enough to really have much of a difference in their plans.

And the 'hardcore' (in terms of dedication to playing the game frequently, understanding the mechanics, etc), whom might be more inclined, and with token purchases in the 3-5 figure range, seem to have the resources to do it.

What works for one group (yay, casuals get get to level 2 and Grind potential!) is problematic for others (Top 100 chart noooooo!).

While I respect needing to address the interests and desires of disparate groups, some of these seem to be mutually exclusive. From that standpoint, I'd suggest addressing what is most valuable for TD themselves, and for growing the community.

I think consistency of player experience is important. Having certain game aspects available at one venue but not others makes the others feel 'lesser', even if those players are only tangentially aware of how they work in the first place. Are the other cons 'lesser' simply because they're not Gencon? Re-using rooms or dungeons from the past is argued to make them easier to handle, but this requires players who are dedicated enough to have access to those old modules, or do considerable forum research to gain a potential advantage in puzzles (combat with tricks perhaps), but is that really all that different from someone re-running a room at a Con with full knowledge of how to Token and play?

Not to besmirch anyone, I'm sure most people here are noble souls who minimize 'out of game information' usage and wouldn't dream of traipsing over the experience of new/er players in that way, but if some of those players died their first time around and made it to the end in the second, they get more exp. The system already allows for doing dungeons multiple times with knowledge in advance and 'improving ones score'.

Like, I've done one dungeon last year. Reading on this forum for a better understanding of what I was getting into was interesting, but I think there's a considerable disparity in what people want and are advocating for each of these group. I think that exp existing at other cons might *in itself* not necessarily drive new players (any moreso than the actual 'adventure' of the game would), but if explained clearly it might help hook some people in to return again.

Note, I intend no disrespect, and am astounded by the incredible dedication some players have. I'm not saying we shouldn't also recognize the desires of people who have played for years, helping fund and building towards what we have today.

I guess what I'm kind of getting at is this; who is True Dungeon for? Is it aimed at the hardcore players, buying thousands of dollars in tokens? Is it aimed at more casual players (yes, like myself) who play maybe once or twice per year or two, armed with a few random packs and some generously donated/traded for rares? Is it aimed at everyone? I'm sure the obvious answer is 'Of course!', but we do seem to have mutually exclusive interests/options at play here, and as we all know 'you can't please all of the people all of the time', so something has to give somewhere.

Sorry if this got a bit rambly, I haven't had coffee yet, but this topic had been rattling around since last night and I wanted to get some ideas down.

Forar wrote: It seems to me that's part of the disconnect here, though.

The player based exp system only really applies to people who are going to play regularly. I doubt many 'walk ins' are getting 4k per year at Gencon, let alone going to actively seek out more conventions simply because of exp being available now.

So we have two disparate groups; the 'casuals' who presumably won't care, won't know (unless they occasionally do swing by the forums, or TD makes a BIG thing about it), or won't be playing enough to really have much of a difference in their plans.

And the 'hardcore' (in terms of dedication to playing the game frequently, understanding the mechanics, etc), whom might be more inclined, and with token purchases in the 3-5 figure range, seem to have the resources to do it.

I'm not confident this is an accurate assessment. You make level 3 with 3000 XP - which is 5 dungeons at Normal (assuming you make it to then end).

For the first 3-5 years I played my friends and I:

1. Played every year, but we could take it or leave it.
2. Entered XP every year (even without really understanding what it was for).
3. Didn't really understand the rules, didn't participate in the secondary token market, didn't spend much on tokens (maybe a few extra 10-packs bought at the con).

As an example of my level of investment, when True Realm was going on, I was like: "What? That's weird? Who would want to do that?" and now I'm like "Darn - really missed out on something special!"

Eventually I, and to a lesser extent my friends. started interacting with the second token market, optimizing our builds, etc.

I definitely would have been confused/disappointed to attend TD at another venue and find there was no XP.

TL;DR: Some non-hardcore players in your taxonomy definitely track/enter/care about experience. Getting to player level 3 is feasible in a few years with minimal effort.

It seems to me that the best way to make the most people happy, or at least satisfied, is the annual 4K cap, achievable regardless of which con you attend, as long as you are not repeating a dungeon.

bpsymington wrote: It seems to me that the best way to make the most people happy, or at least satisfied, is the annual 4K cap, achievable regardless of which con you attend, as long as you are not repeating a dungeon.

Agreed. This is what was done with GENCON Indy and GENCON SoCal, and what was done with GENCON and True Realm. It worked just fine in those instances.

bpsymington wrote: It seems to me that the best way to make the most people happy, or at least satisfied, is the annual 4K cap, achievable regardless of which con you attend, as long as you are not repeating a dungeon.

Well, that doesn't make me happy!

I'd personally rather have either WYC/Gamehole Con have zero XP OR for them to provide a separate amount of XP (raising the cap).

Regardless of the long-term policy, I definitely do not think this Gamehole Con should have XP in order to be consistent with WYC and so that people get notice in advance so they can make plans ahead of time.