Quantcast
Channel: Rob Daviau | BoardGameGeek
Viewing all 191878 articles
Browse latest View live
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Proof this deserves #1 rating

January 8, 2016, 11:43 am
$
0
0

by mfl134

Granite26 wrote:

For the record, I think Michael's right, I just disagree with his estimation of the size of the affect.


oh, I have no idea how big the size is. I think it could be very big or very small. Sorry if I implied (or directly said it was big). I still think it is bigger than all other games up at the top except for maybe caverna. but they might all be relatively small. My hypothesis is that it isn't insignificant, but that is nothing more than hypothesis. :)
↧
Search

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Rules:: Re: (May Spoilers) Rules Question

January 8, 2016, 11:46 am
$
0
0

by rmsgrey

Rabbitmeeple wrote:

Otherwise every city in the COdA color would be faded by the end of the first game in May? Or am I missing something?


It's possible to have a city just never come out of the Infection deck and only be drawn from the Player deck as part of setup (Accelerated Incubation only kicks in for cards drawn during play), so even without Quarantine you could have one city just get very lucky (there are occasional session reports where a COdA-coloured city lasted to November without fading through a combination of dumb luck and aggressive quarantines).

But, yeah, the intention seems to be for all COdA-coloured cities to be Faded by the end of Summer, if not sooner.
↧
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Proof this deserves #1 rating

January 8, 2016, 11:46 am
$
0
0

by mfl134

spaff_ wrote:

mfl134 wrote:

It is the fact that the people who rated pandemic low aren't playing or rating PL.


Is this a fact? Without evidence you can only state this as an assumption- But even as an assumption this is simply false. I did a quick look at the reviews of Pandemic Legacy and with minimal effort found multiple members who rated Pandemic Legacy poorly (4> ) had previously also rated Pandemic poorly (4> ).


sorry, there was a poll that was supporting this. I haven't digged into the numbers.

I'll happily revise to:

It is the "thought" that some (not all) people who rated pandemic lower aren't play or rating PL.

I never meant all, sorry if the words gave that impression.
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Nooooooooooo! [/vader] [September spoilers]

January 8, 2016, 11:51 am
$
0
0

by Antistone

We have to triage! How many more will die because you diverted our scarce resources to a hopeless cause?
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Reviews:: Re: Pandemic Legacy Season 1 (no Spoilers) A Disposable Gem.

January 8, 2016, 11:52 am
↧
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: what numbers say about Pandemic Legacy being number 1:

January 8, 2016, 11:54 am
$
0
0

by Case

Perhaps Paul Simon said it best, "Every generation throws a hero up the pop chart"
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: what numbers say about Pandemic Legacy being number 1:

January 8, 2016, 11:54 am
$
0
0

by clydeiii

juanma99 wrote:

clydeiii wrote:

"Almost" nothing, yes. But surely they do tell us something: if you're new to board gamingBGG, you're more likely to rate PL higher. That's definitely a thing.
FTFY.

What about those pesky 2003 subscribers that represent the group that rated P:L the highest, right? To me, without statistics that data just as well support that the average is flat all across the years.

Bit more important to me is how does TS compare in that same metric?
 Probably every single BGG admin/friend of admin. #noclue
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Fastest top 20 ever? (EDIT) ...I meant top 1

January 8, 2016, 12:13 pm
$
0
0

by mith

Interesting that the geek rating went up by more points than the average rating.


Calculus time!

I am modelling the rating algorithm as follows:

B = (A*V + 5.5*S)/(V + S)

where B = BGG rating, A = Average rating, V = Votes, S = Bayesian/Shill parameter. Given our daily stats, I can track changes in S by rewriting this equation:

S = V*(A - B)/(B - 5.5)

For example, today's value is 777.57 ± 1.91 (where the error is due to uncertainty in A and B of ±0.0005).

Assume V and S are constant. Then for a given change in A, we can calculate the change in B by taking the partial derivative:

δB/δA = V/(V + S)

That means currently, a change in A will result in about 86% of that change in B - in Remy's notation, a 6 point jump in average should result in a 5 point jump in BGG rating, if the votes remained constant.

We can do the same thing to approximate the change in B due to a change in V:

δB/δV = S*(A - 5.5)/(V + S)^2

This is a very small number (approximately 0.00008 right now); each individual vote isn't worth much, but of course the change in number of votes is also much bigger than the change in average. In Remy's notation, we can say each vote is worth about 1/13th of a point - so 67 new votes today would again correspond to about 5 points in the BGG rating, if the average remained constant.

So, if S is constant, we would expect B to increase faster than A - it doesn't take many votes to make up that 14% gap. (Of course, in this case the estimate of S also went up by 5, which cause B to only increase by 8 points instead of 10+.)
↧
Search

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Fastest top 20 ever? (EDIT) ...I meant top 1

January 8, 2016, 12:29 pm
$
0
0

by mith

Granite26 wrote:

Aweberman wrote:

Votes: 4816 (+67)
Interesting that the geek rating went up by more points than the average rating.


Sorry if it's been discussed, but have we ruled out the existence of a mechanism that devalues votes for shill (few other ratings) or unbalanced (average >8 or < 3)?


It is known that there is some algorithm in place to remove shill ratings at least. What isn't known is when it runs (every update, or only first-of-the-month) and whether it removes those ratings entirely (affecting vote count, average rating, and BGG rating) or are just ignored in the BGG calculation. Based on the way my parameter moves, I'd guess it's a first-of-the-month thing and only affects the BGG rating (not the vote count or average), but that's just a guess.
↧
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Proof this deserves #1 rating

January 8, 2016, 12:32 pm
$
0
0

by Steinman

mfl134 wrote:

Steinman wrote:

mfl134 wrote:

I do agree that the ratings would be higher if not for the unneeded hate/spite votes. I'd bet some of the negative ratings are real though.


If we assume ratings 2-10 are legitimate and they are normally distributed P:L should have around 34 1's. Removing those 186 votes on 1 from the calculation would change its average from ~8.67 to ~8.98 - a quite significant change.

Doing the same for TS (harder to extrapolate 1's since the other ratings aren't as straight as for P:L) would give it about 100 1's, which would change its average from ~8.33 to ~8.37.


Aren't you going to make an adjusted for all the people that dislike coops or. Dislike pandemic that never bothered playing pandemic legacy because they found out they probably wouldn't like it before playing?


If any numbers were available that would be fun. Would like to have numbers on what all the players who don't like long wargames who haven't played Twilight Struggle would have voted on it too.
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Sessions:: Re: Our Campaign [SPOILERS]

January 8, 2016, 12:36 pm
$
0
0

by rmsgrey

DaveJames wrote:

My question is, If my brother and I are halfway through a game and our neighbor wants to join, is he SOL?


He'll miss out on some of the early twists, and adding players makes the game a little harder, so you should expect to lose an extra game or two as the dynamic difficulty readjusts, but it shouldn't make a serious difference in the long run, and random noise on a game-by-game basis outweighs the subtle balance effects.

If he doesn't mind jumping in partway through, then I wouldn't worry about it - there are a few things where knowing them in advance may make for different decisions if he ever plays a campaign from the start, but the main one up to about June is the rules for adding relationships.
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Reviews:: Re: Pandemic Legacy Season 1 (no Spoilers) A Disposable Gem.

January 8, 2016, 12:50 pm
$
0
0

by rmsgrey

The one thing I'd say about the plot arc that differs from a TV series is that it peaks nearer 2/3 of the way through the year, where a TV series will generally save the big reveals for the finale. There is definitely one particular event that dominates people's experience of the game - the Endgame to December's Deconstruction of Falling Stars; the Fall of Centauri Prime to December's Sleeping in Light; Z'ha'dum to December's Into The Fire (okay, so my first two examples do follow a similar model to Pandemic Legacy S1, but S4 and S5 of Babylon 5 aren't exactly typical)

The structure of PL is more like a novel or a movie, with a three-act structure and peaks at the end of each act, than a TV series with a cliff-hanger at the mid-season break, and another at the end of the season to bring viewers back...
↧

Thread: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Rules:: December setup question (December SPOILERS)

January 8, 2016, 12:55 pm
$
0
0

by lSweetJusticel

I'm pretty sure the answer is yes, but I don't want to inadvertently cheat this late in the game. When instructed to destroy all previously issued Objectives, that includes the Mandatory Objective to cure diseases, right? Or to put it another way, are the only Objectives for December the two new ones?

Thanks!
↧
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Reviews:: Re: Pandemic Legacy Season 1 (no Spoilers) A Disposable Gem.

January 8, 2016, 12:55 pm
$
0
0

by mibar01

Yeah, Rob I'll give you that. I think obviously the event that does happen at that point sort of sets the story in the direction it needs, and also I think just purely in design terms it needs to shepard you through the first few months before dropping the mic.

And now youve reminded me I need to finish watching my B5 boxset.
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Proof this deserves #1 rating

January 8, 2016, 1:07 pm
$
0
0

by getdafunkout

mfl134 wrote:

spaff_ wrote:

mfl134 wrote:

It is the fact that the people who rated pandemic low aren't playing or rating PL.


Is this a fact? Without evidence you can only state this as an assumption- But even as an assumption this is simply false. I did a quick look at the reviews of Pandemic Legacy and with minimal effort found multiple members who rated Pandemic Legacy poorly (4> ) had previously also rated Pandemic poorly (4> ).


sorry, there was a poll that was supporting this. I haven't digged into the numbers.

I'll happily revise to:

It is the "thought" that some (not all) people who rated pandemic lower aren't play or rating PL.

I never meant all, sorry if the words gave that impression.


I can't speak to how many Pandemic-haters play Pandemic Legacy, but I can confirm some do. In my own play group, one player described himself as 'hating Pandemic' (I think he rates below 5) but he was interested in playing Pandemic Legacy because of the legacy aspect. He has rated Pandemic Legacy very highly. Additional info, he is not huge into coops and plays mostly heavy-medium Euros.

One example, but I think a fair number of others will have a similar backstory. It seems like the draw of the game will be the Pandemic element for some, the Legacy element for others, and the combination of those elements for still more gamers. Clearly those same aspects may turn some people off, but clearly the combination seems to be an appealing for many.
↧
Search

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Rules:: Re: December setup question (December SPOILERS)

January 8, 2016, 1:09 pm
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Rules:: Re: December setup question (December SPOILERS)

January 8, 2016, 1:11 pm
↧
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: what numbers say about Pandemic Legacy being number 1:

January 8, 2016, 1:31 pm
$
0
0

by Granite26

What about the spike downwards in 2008, the year Pandemic itself was released?

If you give Pandemic credit for kicking off the current Co op craze (or at least coming near the start of it), it's no surprise there's a definite upward trend starting from people who joined then.
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Nooooooooooo! [/vader] [September spoilers]

January 8, 2016, 1:31 pm
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Proof this deserves #1 rating

January 8, 2016, 1:35 pm
$
0
0

by Granite26

mfl134 wrote:

Granite26 wrote:

For the record, I think Michael's right, I just disagree with his estimation of the size of the affect.


oh, I have no idea how big the size is. I think it could be very big or very small. Sorry if I implied (or directly said it was big). I still think it is bigger than all other games up at the top except for maybe caverna. but they might all be relatively small. My hypothesis is that it isn't insignificant, but that is nothing more than hypothesis. :)


Define top?
↧
Viewing all 191878 articles
Browse latest View live
Search
<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>