|
Okay, so I really LOVE the layout of this new page, and the potential of it, but there are some issues with accuracy on the summary side bars.
So let's go through it, shall we?
GM Side
In the Sidebars under my GM Sessions, you list Hmm as GM 87 times (but I have 103 tables?!) This is pretty confusing. I think this may be because I love modules so much. Each module = 2 tables PFS credit, and thus it's giving a more accurate account of sessions vs official table credit. Still, it was a surprise. It does undercount the 64 page modules, each of which should have counted as 3 sessions or 6 tables.
You tell me that I have 61 Tables with uncompleted reporting, which sounds really bad until I realized that what it really meant was that I had 61 tables that were either pre-Season 5 or were modules --- all without reporting conditions. They're not incomplete.
The special count in the sidebar gave me a moment of panic because I thought that I had lost two specials worth of GM Credit. It failed to count Cosmic Captive and Sky Key Solution in my tally.
It also undercounted the diversity in my scenarios. Given that I am going for five stars, knowing how many specials and how many different scenarios I've GMed would be useful, but only if the count is accurate.*
Telling me that the Scenario Mission was not accomplished in any of the 87 times I GMed was not helpful. Where is this statistic derived? My players usually get full prestige. This seems an odd and not very affirming statistic.
Player Side
Loved seeing who my most common GMs were... What fun! I liked this.
TL/DR
Love the layout, accuracy and description of summary headings needs works still. Let me know if you need screenshots of what I am seeing.
Yours,
Hmm
____
* Dean, to become a 5 star you need 150 tables, 50 different scenarios, 10 specials. These statistics are what many GMs will search for.
|
Pretty sure that the "uncompleted reporting" is for sessions at a location that has not "completed reporting" yet.
So if you ran at a venue that uses the same code each week, that venue has not completed reporting. Once that venue marks complete and gets a new code, those shod move to your "completed reporting."
But that's just my understanding of it.
|
|
Pretty sure that the "uncompleted reporting" is for sessions at a location that has not "completed reporting" yet.
So if you ran at a venue that uses the same code each week, that venue has not completed reporting. Once that venue marks complete and gets a new code, those shod move to your "completed reporting."
But that's just my understanding of it.
I don't think so. My numbers of Reporting "Completed" vs "Not Completed" adds up to the exact same number as my GM sessions. That just seems too much of a coincidence there.
I think the Mission accomplished refers to the card game side.
Oh! That could be! I never GM ACG games, so I have never accomplished an ACG mission! A more descriptive text field box could be helpful here.
___
By the way, Dean, meet the Minnesota Crowd. We've all been playing with your new pages quite a bit since last night. One thing we're all been having a blast with is seeing who has GMed for each of us the most. That's been a really fun statistic to explore, and held some surprises when we saw the numbers tallied like that.
Looking at the GM page again, why do we need to know how many times we've completed the A-D checkboxes? Since the context of the checkboxes changes from scenario to scenario, this is meaningless data when aggregated like this.
Hmm
|
|
Pretty sure that the "uncompleted reporting" is for sessions at a location that has not "completed reporting" yet.
So if you ran at a venue that uses the same code each week, that venue has not completed reporting. Once that venue marks complete and gets a new code, those shod move to your "completed reporting."
But that's just my understanding of it.
I don't think so. My numbers of Reporting "Completed" vs "Not Completed" adds up to the exact same number as my GM sessions. That just seems too much of a coincidence there.
And if what Neal B and I have said is true, this should always be exactly the case.
|
|
Neal suggested that the Not Completed was tied to event numbers that are still reporting events. I do not have 61 future events set up in my event numbers.
You and I theorized something different... that the 'Not Completed' refers to adventures in which no scenario check boxes were checked, possibly because there were no scenario boxes to check. (Modules and pre-Season 5, I am looking right at you!)
Eventually, Dean or someone else will come in here and explain what all these things stand for... but for now, it's fun to theorize!
Hmm
|
|
My GM credit count has dropped by approximately 16 or so. I don't remember exactly, but before this latest change, I had a count of somewhere near 364. I GM'd 3 times at Paizo Con, so it should be at 367 or nearing 370 somewhere over 360.
My count is currently showing 351.
After 5 years of GM'ing, it will be really, really difficult for me to go back and figure where I'm missing the counts.
|
|
Neal suggested that the Not Completed was tied to event numbers that are still reporting events. I do not have 61 future events set up in my event numbers.
You and I theorized something different... that the 'Not Completed' refers to adventures in which no scenario check boxes were checked, possibly because there were no scenario boxes to check. (Modules and pre-Season 5, I am looking right at you!)
Eventually, Dean or someone else will come in here and explain what all these things stand for... but for now, it's fun to theorize!
Hmm
I'm also thinking the "not reported" is referring to events that did not check the "reporting completed" box once the event was done.
This is what I said above. Which is almost exactly what Neal said.
I'm confused now.
|
|
Huh. I completely misread Andy's post. I thought he was talking about ticking off scenario reporting boxes. Instead he's talking about closing event numbers altogether.
Okay, so it is possible that I have 61 games that have been reported on numbers that are still in use. Let's see... We still have the Season 8 Dreamers event number open... Jeffrey's Season 8 number for the Source is still open... Okay. Maybe it is because I GMed way too much in one year?
So now I'm wondering:
Why would this statistic (for ongoing event numbers) be an important one to track? Do you want those event numbers to close more often?
Hmm
Looking at my reporting, we have three old event numbers still open for the Dreamer's location. At the moment, I can't figure out how to close the one of those for which I am organizer.
Are there any advantages or disadvantages to closing an event number?
|
|
Looking at my reporting, we have three old event numbers still open for the Dreamer's location. At the moment, I can't figure out how to close the one of those for which I am organizer.
Are there any advantages or disadvantages to closing an event number?
Should be available if you go to the event, edit it, then go to the top section of the event, edit that, and somewhere there should be a box to click to close the event.
Its very non-intuitive to find that particular box with the new format. Previously, everything was editable on a single page with this particular check box on that page.
Alright, I closed the reporting on last year's event number and it changed.
That seems to be the answer.
Am I missing something? Are you referring to the sidebar to the left? If so, that "data" looks less like statistics that are being measured for any specific purpose (though, I suppose, one could use it as such) and more like parameters that can be used to refine searches (like finding events for which the reporting needs to be completed).
On the left side, going down the screen we have the following sections: Event, GM, Mission Complete (the reporting boxes), Number of Seats, Organized Play, Reporting Completed, Scenario, Scenario Mission Accomplished, and Type.
We were talking about the Reporting Completed section.
I should mention that the number of seats also isn't correct. I know that I've had tables with less than 6 players. It is evidently working off if you added a player (for a seven player table) or not. They would likely have to dig in order to determine how many players were actually at each table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After spending a few minutes playing with the information (I hesitate to call it statistical data) in that sidebar to filter my organized play history, I've found it to be about as accurate as the similar sidebar provided by Amazon when browsing their products. The sidebar doesn't show everything and what it does show isn't a truly accurate picture of one's organized play history.
I should mention that the number of seats also isn't correct.
I believe (but could be mistaken) that some of the information is being pulled from the information supplied when events are created and some is being pulled from the actual reporting of events. The information is only as good as what was entered and reported and probably shouldn't be considered an accurate representation of one's organized play history.