TOPIC: Proposed GT Class Lottery Approach

Picc wrote:

Rob F wrote: Random does = Fair. With the exception of the Gen Con housing lottery. ☺

I really miss the days when it was first come first serve to get those downtown rooms!!

Signed,

Hypocrite Rob

Fair is often a matter of perspective. Lets say I make a pie, should I share since its fair everyone gets a slice or is it fair to keep it to myself since I put in the work to make it.

Even if we switch to a class lotto is it fair that whoever anounces first has preference on run selection (combat generally fills up first). Is it fair if I preorder before Christmas someone who orders after the tokens go into print should have the same chance at classes ( if so why does getting the class card first matter on all other runs). Is it fair that someone who says they are third level gets to take that card from me, Is it fair that token power scales with rarity or that some players have 40 token builds while others have 4. IMO its all perspective.

Speaking as a relatively newer player that just placed his first 8k order. I may have the chance for my first GT this year and the reality is I only have what I consider a good build for 1 class. Possibly not as good as any of the experienced players. If I got a chance and it was randomised - could I play other classes? Sure but not as good and possibly impact the team negatively. At the end of the day if the group will help me have a good build for something else I would be open to that. Though I may have to learn the class in that moment I won't be a great asset but I can still have fun. I've never been involved in GT, but if what I'm reading here holds, it's better to just be an adult and have the conversation. I had the chance to play True Grind last year and 2 of us were there for the first time. The group was really experienced, we did Hardcore or Nightmare and they asked which class we felt most comfortable with as they were more class flexible. We were able to have a class we felt good about and they also helped upgrade some of our slots and we had an AMAZING time. I'm sure the same can happen at GT runs.

Rob F wrote: ....All Matt's trying to do here is offer an improvement...

The problem as I see it is, he skipped a few steps.

I've done process improvement in several organizations. I was taught a way to do it:

First, build consensus that there is a problem to solve.

Second, define what a successful solution looks like. You can do that bycollect concerns that the various stakeholders have.

Third, examine existing process and highlight gaps. Which concerns are or aren't being addressed?

Finallly, work with the group to modify or replace the current system with something that works better for everyone.

What happened in this thread was, skip to the last step with a very detailed solution that works better for people who live in California without considering any effects on anyone else.

And, as anyone who has worked in the corporate world can tell you, "imposing" a top-down solution on a group of independent peers seldom results in smooth sailing, let alone success. Especially when the current process has been in place for over a decade and the majority of people are comfortable if not happy with it.

Let's start over:

I've noticed that a large percentage of GT slots are claimed within a few days of the first preorders going out. The problem as I see it is that people who live close to Carbondale have as much as a week advantage over those who live farther away. This is exacerbated by there are only being 40 available. Is there a way we can give all potential GT winners a more equal chance of getting to play the run and class they want, regardless of where they live?

If THAT was how this thread had started out, with a problem statement and request for help instead of a multi page detailed solution without context, I think reactions would have been very different.

Instead, it wasn't until post #33 that I finally understood what this was all about.

Because maybe one solution is as simple as this: ask Jeff to ship preorders based on distance. Send the farthest ones on day one to get a head start, and end with the closest, so that they all arrive at their destinations within a day of each other.

"But shipping times are approximate." Yes. Let the Post Office be the randomizing element, rather than dice or the stock market.

Just saying there are lots of ways to "improve" the situation if we all agree on what the problem is.

There is a way of handling it. When everybody arrives at the coaching area decide who plays what classes. The group should be able to resolve any issues.

FirstGladiator wrote: There is a way of handling it. When everybody arrives at the coaching area decide who plays what classes. The group should be able to resolve any issues.

These are typically Nightmare players, with tokens in every slot.

This would be a problem for players who won't be able to print out their party card ahead of time (which makes the coaches' job harder) and who must bring a big collection of tokens with them to cover every possibility instead of just their one (large) build. There's no bag check on Wednesday. GT usually happens right after training, and many of the players are volunteers, so waiting until the last minute would add lots of stress and spoil the experience to a large extent.

Those are reasons why preassigning classes is a must-have constraint.

Can we just change the GT subscription thread (where you post when you have received a GT) to say:

"Please indicate your desired run along with either puzzle/combat and choose 3 classes in order of your preference (e.g. Wizard -> Cleric -> Barbarian). Remember the goal of TD is to have fun and if someone has your 1st class preference start a discussion if you would really like to play that class."

Ed

MasterED wrote: Can we just change the GT subscription thread (where you post when you have received a GT) to say:

"Please your desired run and either puzzle/combat and choose 3 classes in order of your preference (e.g. Wizard -> Cleric -> Barbarian). Remember the goal of TD is to have fun and if someone has your 1st class preference start a discussion if you would really like to play that class."

Ed

+1

MasterED wrote: Can we just change the GT subscription thread (where you post when you have received a GT) to say:

"Please your desired run and either puzzle/combat and choose 3 classes in order of your preference (e.g. Wizard -> Cleric -> Barbarian). Remember the goal of TD is to have fun and if someone has your 1st class preference start a discussion if you would really like to play that class."

Ed

That should help.

I look at the GT as a "free run," and a chance to play a class I might not otherwise, so I don't get bent if I don't get to be Cleric. But then, I find mine and haven't bought a GT before. Someone who dropped $1k on theirs probably feels differently.

Here's another thought:

When I bought my first big orders, I estimated there were about 1.3 GTs per onyx set. Wild guess.
This year, I think there were something like 80(?) patron badges sold, based on Horde presales. If every GT was in the presold Onyx packs, which they weren't, that drops it down to .5 GT per $8k. So, less than that. Probably 20% of people who buy $16k will get zero GTs.

If the GT crew could do a second set of runs in the time slot after the first, there would be double the GTs, double the slots so fewer conflicts, twice the data points for last-minute tweaks to the module, and double the opportunities to let DMs get a little extra training.

On the downside, the crew would have to stay 12 minutes later, and there would be twice the swag bags so maybe the loot would be less generous. Adding more GTs might increase demand and result in a spiral that creates the same situation a year or two from now. Plus, other reasons I didn't think of.

Of course, Jeff doesn't owe us any GTs at all.

I think (could be remembering incorrectly) Jeff has said previously that doing the GT run on Wednesday is a struggle with Gen Con. And adding a second set would be more of a nightmare. Again I could be wrong but I thought this came up before and that was his response. I will do some searching to see if I can find that.

jedibcg wrote: I think (could be remembering incorrectly) Jeff has said previously that doing the GT run on Wednesday is a struggle with Gen Con. And adding a second set would be more of a nightmare. Again I could be wrong but I thought this came up before and that was his response. I will do some searching to see if I can find that.

It was just a thought. No need for anyone to respond to it.

My point was, and remains, that there are many ways to try to solve a problem, and pushing a solution without having all the inputs and considering the possibilities can be counterproductive.

Brad Mortensen wrote:

jedibcg wrote: I think (could be remembering incorrectly) Jeff has said previously that doing the GT run on Wednesday is a struggle with Gen Con. And adding a second set would be more of a nightmare. Again I could be wrong but I thought this came up before and that was his response. I will do some searching to see if I can find that.

It was just a thought. No need for anyone to respond to it.

My point was, and remains, that there are many ways to try to solve a problem, and pushing a solution without having all the inputs and considering the possibilities can be counterproductive.

I don't have a dog in this fight so I have no input as to if there is an issue or not or the best way to solve it if there is one. Just saw something that I thought Jeff had commented on before. I failed in my search though so maybe I am remembering incorrectly.

All Golden Ticket runs are now Greedy Sealed runs, with random character card distribution done 24 minutes prior to the start of the run. Feel free to trade cards among yourselves.


Caveat: I have zero power here, just indulging a delusion of grandeur

Brad Mortensen wrote:

jedibcg wrote: I think (could be remembering incorrectly) Jeff has said previously that doing the GT run on Wednesday is a struggle with Gen Con. And adding a second set would be more of a nightmare. Again I could be wrong but I thought this came up before and that was his response. I will do some searching to see if I can find that.

It was just a thought. No need for anyone to respond to it.

My point was, and remains, that there are many ways to try to solve a problem, and pushing a solution without having all the inputs and considering the possibilities can be counterproductive.

I understand the issue from Matthews post, and see nothing wrong with him proposing a possible solution for consideration. The door was certainly left open for other thoughts and suggestions.