Is It Time To 'Up' The Minimum Plays ?

[vince hughes]

Now that a few thousand plays have been recorded, I was wondering whether its time to raise the 'Minimum Plays' for the best rated scenarios ?

Most of them are stuck on 5 plays and but for Cassino # 8 "Hang-On" with 8 plays, all the other 'best' scenarios have 7 or less (1 x 7, 6 x 6, 12 x 5).

How about raising minimum plays to 8 and get a real look at what scenarios holds peoples favour over the longer term .... Or indeed, post a list of the top 20 here with 8 or 10 plays or more.

On a similar note. The scenarios 'Most Played'. Any chance their average scenario rating can be shown alongside the 'amounts played' numbers ?

Stat nerd

Vince

[Matt W]

Vince,

I would hold off on changing that. We only have 134 people who have logged a play at all. 5 plays means that 1 out of 25 people (roughly) have played a scenario (4% of the total population). Since not everyone has every product this represents a much higher percentage of those who own the product have actually played it and found it wonderful.

If we require a higher number of plays to be ranked some true diamonds will go missing. Let's take a f'rinstance.

Based on current numbers only one quarter of the members have actually logged a play (134/528). If we apply that total to Go For Broke that means of the 48 owners, only 12 will have logged a play if indeed they have played it at all (half of my collection remains completely unplayed at this point and I have only played 12.4% of the scenarios that I own! Assuming there is a scenario in Go For Broke that warrants ranking, even getting 5 plays would be a trick.

This will work fine for games like Eastern Front which are owned quite broadly but not all games and supplements are owned

God help us if War of the Worlds is the best. With only 9 owners we'd have to get nearly every one of them to assemble it and play it.

[vince hughes]

I hear you Matt.

Then maybe 2 lists with different 'minimum' levels.

That way we see the hot and rare versus the good with staying power

[Matt W]

Ownership tends to follow games first, then supplements. Perhaps separating the lists into best game scenario and best supplement scenario might work.

[Shad]

Matt's on target here.

Here's fresh data from the database:

   

X-axis is number of scenario ratings.

Y-axis is number of scenarios having (x-axis) number of ratings.

As you can see, with minimum pegged at 5, we're already throwing out a huge amount of rated scenarios... 889 in fact. There are currently only 250 scenarios with 5 or more ratings.

If you increase the minimum floor you're going to shrink the candidate pool so much it'll just become meaningless due to homogeneity... like trying to find the most attractive penguin in Antarctica.

[campsawyer]

You asked for it Shad....

[Shad]

Pfffffffffft! At least choose a species from the right continent!

Southern Rockhopper Penguin

I swear the standards around here are really slipping!

[Poor Yorek]

the standards around here are really slipping!

7/10 on the pun-meter. You know, penguins, slipping ... ::ducks and covers::

[vince hughes]

Don't mock the Rock Hopper duuuude !!!

They were very entertaining guys when I was in the Falklands !

[vince hughes]

In that case, going back to the original post. Any chance of ratings appearing on the 'most played' section as well ?

As it stands, ratings on 5 plays are over-populating the highest rated.