|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the stated goals of transitioning to AcP was to incentivize GMs to report their sessions. OP Leadership can't petition Paizo for greater resources if they can't show that people are consuming their product. And, to that end, I think the rollout of AcP is working:
I hope other people are experiencing similar numbers, and I hope those numbers are sending the message that OP was hoping for. But, beyond that, from the bottom of my statistic-loving heart...
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I never ran the stats on my participation so I can only speak anecdotally about my reporting accuracy. I know that games I was directly responsible for reporting (not just the member of an organizing committee) have been reported 100% for at least the past five years.
From my play experience, I have a few missing from PF2E, so my ratio is not likely to be as good as above, but it is excellent nonetheless. So, I have to concur with Nefreet...
|
|
I don't think I've had any unreported games across all three systems; while it has taken ~ a month for some in-person conventions to show up for PF1 a couple years back.
I think the longest I've waited under pf2 is 2 weeks, and 90% have been done in under a week. I think that's another metric that's showing there has been a change in attitude/priority given to reporting; which is great to see, and hopefully is giving OP strong numbers to bring to Paizo Leadership.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It has been *interesting* to see the reporting from 'traditionally physical settings' (that moved online) contrasted with online reporting -- online reporting in some cases is done within *minutes* of a scenario's completion.
Even the 'traditionally physical settings' have stepped up the game, and chronicles that I'd wait *months* for (if ever) in PFS1 have been appearing within a week or two, with the barest of prodding in that rapid appearance.
So yes,
|
|
Agreed, although copying pasting one cell at a time is still only like a minute, so expediting formfill any faster will probably be a late stage upgrade.
Currently my method of reporting goes:
1) Topline details like date, scenario, GM info (this step takes the longest)
2) Fill in all of the Reputation boxes
3) Ctrl+C PFS ID# while making a quick mental note of PC# and Faction
4) I've reported so many games that I don't need to type the PC#; my drop-down at this point contains them all
5) repeat steps 3-4 in rapid succession
And sometimes
6) make a note to contact any players whose information didn't autopopulate
|
|
If you have the player's PFS number right, you can guess character numbers. They're also in numerical order when displayed on someone's page so if they have a few dozen characters you don't have to go through all of them.
The most common wrong PFS number is the last two digits switched, I always give that a shot. For PbP games, I search their posting history to see if they've publicly posted their number before.
Making a few guesses is quicker than contacting someone so I always try guessing first.
I've never had to report someone's game off a handwritten number off of a sheet before, but if I did, I would also try the usual suspects, 1<->7, 5<->6, etc.
