Author |
Topic: Post 2014WC Survey (Read 2544 times) |
|
Janzert
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #247
Gender: 
Posts: 1016
|
 |
Post 2014WC Survey
« on: Apr 26th, 2014, 1:58pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Here are the post 2014WC survey results, charts for the multiple choice questions and also responses to the free form questions. Go ingest them and form your own conclusions before reading my summary conclusions next. 
I think overall the survey shows the current tournament format, officiating and community is working well. But also shows there are definitely some spots where improvement can and should be made.
Questions 1 through 3 look at overall satisfaction with the tournament and we seem to be doing pretty well here.
Question 4 asks about the importance of the prize pool size, with it having little importance for current players. I do think having a consistently large pool like this last year will help draw in new players though.
Question 5 checks if players got the information they needed, almost half of the non-finalist and 20% of the finalists did not get enough information. This is mostly my fault for not getting enough instructions out to players. One thing I think might help here is a wiki page from the rules explaining detailed procedures and expectations for the player.
Question 6 asks about tournament length and while it offers the most options for answers has the most agreement in responses. Players (especially non-finalists) have almost across the board agreement that the tournament length is good.
Question 7 checks on the level of tournament organization with the responses showing we did pretty good but have some room to improve still.
Question 8 guages the sentiment of some portion of the registration going to support arimaa.com rather than going into the prize pool. Yay the responses prove that the player base is actually human and you don’t like it when someone takes money out of your pocket.  The finalists come in a notch lower on this at “No preference” compared to the non-finalists at “Mildly prefer”.
Question 9 and 10 asked for free form responses on likes, dislikes and anything else the player wanted to share about the tournament. First to the person that mentioned question 9 should have been split in two questions. I wholeheartedly agree, although possibly not as much as I agree with the other half of your comment. Since I was using the free level of surveymonkey I could only have a maximum of 10 questions so I fudged it a little. I also expected that most people would skip over the free form questions anyway. So, yay 60-70% response rates on the two of them are great. Thanks for all the comments of appreciation. I knew the audio commentary was obviously very appreciated by all. I was a little surprised that it may be the most liked aspect of the tournament even for the players. There were a few comments that seeding was too significant. I’m not sure that I agree with that, but I did think the suggestion to lower the weight of the virtual game to seed the TPR was an interesting way to change this. There were also several comments disliking the early mismatched pairing. I tend to agree that it would be nice to eliminate this if we could but I’m not sure how to do it fairly and without compromising other aspects of the tournament. One thing interesting is I’m not sure any of the people actually affected by the mismatches mentioned them. A common refrain unsurprisingly are the technical issues, unfortunately that is probably the hardest area to fix.
Thanks everyone for taking the time fill the survey out. I think it really does help give some insight on what we should think about changing.
Janzert
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
99of9
Forum Guru
Gnobby's creator (player #314)
 
Gender:
Posts: 1413
|
|
Re: Post 2014WC Survey
« Reply #1 on: Apr 27th, 2014, 8:56pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Whoever suggested giving players more freedom on time allocation also simulatneously solves some of the technical issues, because even a disconnect wouldn't stop you if you had 10 minutes in reserve.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Janzert
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #247
Gender:
Posts: 1016
|
|
Re: Post 2014WC Survey
« Reply #2 on: Apr 29th, 2014, 3:57pm » |
Quote Modify
|
There was also some discussion in chat the other day about using time controls with either a very small or no per move increment and large starting reserve (i.e. sudden death or close to it). I thought it'd be interesting to see what has been used so far. Of the 300699 games so far, there have been 55 unique reserve to move time ratios. After looking at these, I think it'd be interesting to see how live games at the most common postal ratio of 60:1 work out. The controls most analogous to the current WC controls would seem to be 30s/30m, 45s/45m, and 60s/60m.
Code: games ratio most common timecontrols
193403 1 . ('2m/2m/100/10m/8h', 118491), ('1m/1m/100/5m', 22353), ('2m/2m/100/5m', 15244), ...
60745 6 . ('30s/3m/100/5m/8h', 26645), ('15s/1m30s/100/2m/4h', 18403), ...
15437 4 . ('15s/1m/100/2m/2h', 11512), ('30s/2m/100/0/2h', 872), ...
6291 10 . ('15s/2m30s/100/0/1h/2m30s', 5926), ('15s/2m30s/100/0/1h/1m45s', 225), ...
5991 3 . ('2m/6m/100/0/8h/6m', 5903), ('7d/21d/100/21d', 34), ...
4576 60 . ('1d/60d/100/0/300d/21d', 4575), ('5s/5m/100/1m/20m', 1)
4175 7.5 . ('8s/1m/100/2m/2h', 4167), ('6s/45s/100/1m30s/1h30m', 6), ...
2447 5 . ('1m/5m/75/0/4h/4m', 1999), ('1m/5m/100/10m', 290), ('1m/5m/100/0/4h/4m', 137), ...
1847 2 . ('1m/2m/100/3m', 1321), ('30s/1m/100/3m', 168), ('1m/2m/75/0/4h/4m', 162), ...
1243 0 . ('20s/0/0/0/1000t', 767), ('2m/0/100/0/6h/6m', 280), ('15s/0/0/0/1000t', 79), ...
792 14 . ('1d/14d/100/14d', 714), ('1d/14d/100/14d/300d', 78)
769 1.333 ('1m30s/2m/100/10m', 565), ('45s/1m/100/5m/8h/3m', 101), ...
494 2.5 . ('2m/5m/100/0/4h/5m', 244), ('4m/10m/100/0/16h/10m', 186), ...
459 0.6667 ('3m/2m/100/10m', 459)
374 4.667 ('45s/3m30s/100/0/3h/3m30s', 355), ('45s/3m30s/100/0/3h/3m', 19)
323 3.333 ('1m30s/5m/100/0/6h/5m', 244), ('1m30s/5m/75/0/6h/5m', 77), ('3m/10m/100', 2)
320 3.75 . ('8s/30s/100/2m/2h', 318), ('8s/30s/100/30s/2h', 1), ('8s/30s/100/1m', 1)
242 infinite ('0/30m', 79), ('0/2h', 67), ('0/15m', 29), ('0/1h', 19), ('0/10m/0/10m', 18), ...
148 15 . ('4s/1m/100/0/32m/1m', 113), ('4s/1m/100/0/30m', 32), ...
123 80 . ('1d/80d/100/0/300d/21d', 95), ('15s/20m/120/20m/8h', 28)
117 2.667 ('3m/8m/100/0/12h/8m', 117)
. 66 12 . ('15s/3m/100/5m/8h', 65), ('4h/2d/100/0/7d/1d6h', 1)
. 50 17 . ('8s/2m16s/100/0/32m/2m16s', 45), ('8s/2m16s/100/0/32m/1m24s', 5)
. 48 8 . ('15s/2m/100/2m/1h', 38), ('15s/2m/75/2m/4h', 4), ('15s/2m/100/0/4h/2m', 3), ...
. 31 20 . ('10m/3h20m/100', 25), ('45s/15m/100/30m/0/4m', 3), ('15s/5m/75/0/4h/4m', 2), ...
. 28 180 . ('20s/1h/100/2m/0/2m', 12), ('15s/45m/100/0/2h', 9), ...
. 22 5.333 ('45s/4m/100/0/3h/3m', 17), ('45s/4m/100/0/3h/4m', 3), ...
. 14 1200 . ('1s/20m/0/20m', 14)
. 13 270 . ('40s/3h/100/6m/0/6m', 13)
. 12 4.32e+04 ('1m/30d', 12)
. 9 2.4 . ('25s/1m/100/2m', 9)
. 9 120 . ('15s/30m/100/1m/0/1m', 9)
. 8 30 . ('2s/1m/100/0/32m/1m', 5), ('2d/60d/100/0/0/21d', 2), ...
. 8 216 . ('25s/1h30m/100/3m/0/3m', 8)
. 7 0.8571 ('1m10s/1m/100/2m', 7)
. 7 240 . ('30s/2h/100/4m/0/4m', 7)
. 5 13.33 ('45s/10m/100/12m', 5)
. 5 0.01389 ('3d/1h/100/1h', 5)
. 4 40 . ('15s/10m/100/0/4h', 3), ('15s/10m/120/10m/8h', 1)
. 4 0.4 . ('5m/2m/100/2m', 4)
. 4 0.2 . ('10m/2m/50/10m/6h', 3), ('10m/2m/100/10m/8h', 1)
. 4 3.667 ('3d/11d/100/11d/364d', 3), ('45s/2m45s/100/0/3h/3m30s', 1)
. 3 257.1 ('35s/2h30m/100/5m/0/5m', 3)
. 3 7200 . ('1m/5d', 3)
. 3 1.5 . ('2m/3m/100/10m/8h', 3)
. 3 0.008333 ('5d/1h/100/1h', 3)
. 3 1.714 ('35s/1m/100/2m', 3)
. 3 0.04167 ('1d/1h/100/1d', 3)
. 1 7 . ('3d/21d/100', 1)
. 1 44 . ('1m/44m/75/0/4h/4m', 1)
. 1 9.9 . ('10m/1h39m/100/2m30s', 1)
. 1 1.44e+04 ('1m/10d', 1)
. 1 2.25 . ('1m20s/3m/100/10m', 1)
. 1 0.02083 ('2d/1h/100/1h', 1)
. 1 16.67 ('3d/50d/100/150d/0/25d', 1)
|
|
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print