Hey, wow... lot of heavy stuff to read here.
I'll admit, I had a knee-jerk reaction to your first post, Matt, and crafted a *fantastic* reply at 2am... and then decided to sleep on it. When I re-read it this morning, I was glad I waited. The reply was vindictive and snarky, and you don't deserve that. I suspect you and I (and most people here on the forums) want the same thing: a healthy, fun TD experience. I really appreciate what you contribute to the forums with your various token analyses and trend tracking, and I hope I can contribute constructively to this conversation.
So, let me try again to say what I wanted to last night.
Matthew Hayward wrote: Regardless of what the top players may actually want, proposals such as this have the effect of keeping the leader-board static, and so it is a reasonable inference that those who promote these approaches do so for the purpose of keeping the leaderboard static.
That really hurts. Especially the presumption between "what the top players actually want" and "proposals such as this." It's a huge presumption. The presumption is that
the Top Players are the ones making such proposals. Then it follows into your "reasonable inference" that those same Top Players are promoting those approaches, in order to keep the Leaderboard static, and maintain their place at the top.
What I'm trying to say here is that, while some of those proposals are being made, it's NOT the Top Players who are making them. Nor has it been my experience that they were made with the intent of keeping the Leaderboard static.
Rather than get into any further explanation about styles of argument, let me directly address your list of proposals, and why I don't make the same inferences.
This includes proposals such as:
1. Annual XP capped to what can be obtained at Gen Con alone.
2. XP for redux / best of / retro dungeons limited to people under some XP cap (5th level, 7th level)
3. XP simply not awarded for dungeons not at Gen Con
4. Extra XP awarded to those at the top of the leaderboard (this one may have been tongue in cheek, but it was mentioned in the recent thread).
My responses:
1. Annual XP capped to what can be obtained at Gen Con alone.
I recall a huge debate about this, around the time True Realm premiered.
It was the first time XP could be obtained outside of GenCon, and there was (ahem) significant "polite" concern (cough) that this was going to turn XP into a money-grab. Ie, Pay-to-Win, with the wealthy TD players jetting off to events outside of the normal convention season and earning XP which no one else had access to. This was seen as a potential way for the top XP players to permanently secure their place at the top, and for the plebian masses to remain permanently on the bottom half of the XP list. in other words, it was actually proposed as a way to keep the XP list more fluid, instead of static.
2. XP for redux / best of / retro dungeons limited to people under some XP cap (5th level, 7th level)
Again, those promoting this weren't doing so to maintain their position at the top of the XP pile... The support came from people who were new(er) to TD and wanting to catch up to the curve. True Dungeon was getting extremely popular, and every year the new players joining were looking for ways to bridge the XP gap. But if past dungeons could be re-run for "new" XP, then the gap would keep widening. So rules were put in place that would keep the higher XP crowd from "double-dipping" while still allowing newer players to catch up.
It was literally a push from New Players, to give them the chance to climb the XP list.
3. XP simply not awarded for dungeons not at Gen Con
Can't say I know where this come from.
Might have been that XP was too much of a hassle, especially in the days when the XP desk could be backed up an hour deep, as all the new players made accounts (because XP was recorded on-site back then.)
It doesn't make sense to me, though, that this would be put forward as "clearly trying to keep the leader board rankings static" since those who benefit most from XP at other Cons are the total newbies who do their first runs there - and they wouldn't be shaking up the XP rankings any more than Newbies joining at Gen Con.
If the concern is that Vets would be shaking up the XP list by jetting off to those "extra" Cons, and climbing up the rankings, then keep in mind that the top XP crowd would also be trying to make it to those Cons to get that extra XP, which would just result in the rankings staying more-or-less the same, but with a wider gap between the lowest and highest XP available.
4. Extra XP awarded to those at the top of the leaderboard (this one may have been tongue in cheek, but it was mentioned in the recent thread).
I am pretty sure that was tongue-in-cheek, aimed at mocking the XP-grubbing crowd... So how exactly does it support the theory that people are trying to keep the leaderboard static? If it's satire, then the aim is, in fact, the opposite.
To sum up: I can see how someone might make the inferences you did, but that doesn't mean they are accurate. In fact, it stings that someone would look at those efforts which have been made to keep the XP list fluid, as use it as evidence that there are forces trying to keep themselves firmly ensconced at the top.
You know what I think is the most significant factor keeping the XP list static?
The fact that TD is an awesome game.
The same people are playing TD over and over... and getting XP for it.
Unless you want to bar certain players from continuing to play, or withhold their XP, or introduce some other way to gain XP which isn't connected to playing (ie, buying it) then the Leaderboard is likely to remain relatively static... at least among the higher ranked players, who have proven that they're committed to supporting this awesome game.