It's time for more data collection!

After learning that FFG found the data collection project to be a useful tool, I'm looking forward to working on it again. It was thanks to the work of all of you wonderful forum members that it worked at all last season. So, I am hoping we can get more useful data to look at this year.

Last time I tracked:

• Rebels vs Imperials
• Admirals
• Fleet Archetypes
• Fleet Size
• Squadron Count
• Ships
• and a few specific upgrades

So, what should I track this time? Is there anything that stands out that was missing from the first go round? What upgrades are worth tracking?

It's time for more data collection!

After learning that FFG found the data collection project to be a useful tool, I'm looking forward to working on it again. It was thanks to the work of all of you wonderful forum members that it worked at all last season. So, I am hoping we can get more useful data to look at this year.

Last time I tracked:

• Rebels vs Imperials
• Admirals
• Fleet Archetypes
• Fleet Size
• Squadron Count
• Ships
• and a few specific upgrades

So, what should I track this time? Is there anything that stands out that was missing from the first go round? What upgrades are worth tracking?

Ideally I would capture full fleet data in a parseable format. This way the decision on what statistics are useful to show can be done later.

The utter lack of a nyc/nyc adjacent regional means i probably wont be able to make it to one this time around, and this whole thing leaves me angry and bitter.

Let me know how I can help with the excel sides of things, even if just data entry

Ergh, data collection for data collection sake is meaningless.

We need hypothesis' to test. So I propose one statistic.

Number of B wings in fleet.

Spreadsheet for upgrades to ship?

This seems labor intensive and may be too focused for the purpose here, but I think it might be useful to have a graph for each ship showing what % of the time they show up with what upgrades.

This would let us actually see in black and white how many times a CR90 was ran sans TRC or a gladiator with Demolisher

Ergh, data collection for data collection sake is meaningless.

We need hypothesis' to test. So I propose one statistic.

Number of B wings in fleet.

Absolutely.

My chief question last time around was: "Is there a difference in composition of the fleets at the top tables and the whole field?" It turned out that there was.

The question is really the same this time around. I'm trying to decide where I can look for those differences.

I didn't track specific squadrons much last time, but will do so this time.

Let me know how I can help with the excel sides of things, even if just data entry

Will do. I'll share a copy of the old data with you and we can start poking around on how to improve the setup.

Spreadsheet for upgrades to ship?

This seems labor intensive and may be too focused for the purpose here, but I think it might be useful to have a graph for each ship showing what % of the time they show up with what upgrades.

This would let us actually see in black and white how many times a CR90 was ran sans TRC or a gladiator with Demolisher

This could be done the last time by comparing how often a GSD showed up to how often Demolisher was taken. It shouldn't bee too hard to make it more obvious. Thanks!

We can actually see if Rhymer and Demo are actually a crutch. I think the entire purpose of this study should be to determine that.

I think Objectives should be tracked!

With the Corellian Campaign, we are gettting a bunch of new ones.

a) Will new Objectives make older ones obsolete?

b) Perhaps, FFG Organized Play will mix up the tournament legal objectives to shake up the meta?

We always look at the plastic but perhaps the cardboard will have a greater impact on things?

We can actually see if Rhymer and Demo are actually a crutch. I think the entire purpose of this study should be to determine that.

Well, last season certainly showed that those two show up frequently overall and even more frequently at the top tables. So, I'm sure we will be looking closely at that again.

LINK

Spreadsheet for upgrades to ship?

This seems labor intensive and may be too focused for the purpose here, but I think it might be useful to have a graph for each ship showing what % of the time they show up with what upgrades.

This would let us actually see in black and white how many times a CR90 was ran sans TRC or a gladiator with Demolisher

This could be done the last time by comparing how often a GSD showed up to how often Demolisher was taken. It shouldn't bee too hard to make it more obvious. Thanks!

And this is why I'm proposing to capture raw data, I did some data mining on the regional data during last season and found that its hard (or impossible) to check some hypothesis with some data being not captured. I can help with inputting the data and writing the scripts that will import the data into spreadsheets. In my mind the ideal result would be a database similar to XWing List Juggler.

I think Objectives should be tracked!

With the Corellian Campaign, we are gettting a bunch of new ones.

a) Will new Objectives make older ones obsolete?

b) Perhaps, FFG Organized Play will mix up the tournament legal objectives to shake up the meta?

We always look at the plastic but perhaps the cardboard will have a greater impact on things?

Great point!!

I didn't track objectives, but will do so this time around. It would be interesting to know all kinds of things about objectives. Who took them?, what the 1st players chooses?, who then wins? I'm not sure we can get that level of data collected though.

I will track them as best as we are able this time around.

Win/loss of specific Admirals to start win. Maybe average points per game would be better. Not the 400MOV, but the 6-5 or 9-2 win points.

A more in depth version would be if a specific type of ship increased or decreased the win/loss of an admiral. The opposite would be ship win/loss and does admiral affect that.

Example:

Rieekan average score per game: 6.1.

Rieekan with Yavaris average: 6.6

Rieekan without Yavaris: 5.0

The analysis I would like is easy if full fleet composition is recorded.

Besides that. Just how hard of a crutch are Rhymer and Demo.

Average Imperial score with both:

Average Imperial score with Rhymer:

Average Imperial scorr with Demo

Average Imperial Score with neither:

My money is on distinct differences

I think Objectives should be tracked!

With the Corellian Campaign, we are gettting a bunch of new ones.

a) Will new Objectives make older ones obsolete?

b) Perhaps, FFG Organized Play will mix up the tournament legal objectives to shake up the meta?

We always look at the plastic but perhaps the cardboard will have a greater impact on things?

Great point!!

I didn't track objectives, but will do so this time around. It would be interesting to know all kinds of things about objectives. Who took them?, what the 1st players chooses?, who then wins? I'm not sure we can get that level of data collected though.

I will track them as best as we are able this time around.

I think this is a great idea, but I don't know if looking at specific ones will give anything useful. Each fleet will have it's own objectives it is good at. I think looking at the type of objective played the most/least will be more revealing. Like how many times does blue get picked over red.

Ergh, data collection for data collection sake is meaningless.

This is not so true these days! Data Lakes and Big Data say- gather it all and figure stuff out later!

I think Objectives should be tracked!

With the Corellian Campaign, we are gettting a bunch of new ones.

a) Will new Objectives make older ones obsolete?

b) Perhaps, FFG Organized Play will mix up the tournament legal objectives to shake up the meta?

We always look at the plastic but perhaps the cardboard will have a greater impact on things?

Great point!!

I didn't track objectives, but will do so this time around. It would be interesting to know all kinds of things about objectives. Who took them?, what the 1st players chooses?, who then wins? I'm not sure we can get that level of data collected though.

I will track them as best as we are able this time around.

I think this is a great idea, but I don't know if looking at specific ones will give anything useful. Each fleet will have it's own objectives it is good at. I think looking at the type of objective played the most/least will be more revealing. Like how many times does blue get picked over red.

I see what you mean, but we are about to double the pool of objectives going into the next tourney season, so I think it'll be useful to track.

You basically have everything covered with that list (it is quite broad in scope without accompanying definitions). It's just a matter of defining how much of each variable is required to fit a certain archetype.

One interesting thing to add would be the objectives played. Objectives play a HUGE part in the course of most battles and the outcomes. Of course, this would be really hard to capture accurately (minds get muddled, and it's a lot of repetition), but it could work. It's just hard to decide how one would organize it

Variable definition suggestions:

Differentiation between heavy bombers and light bombers. Not the keyword, but the amount of dice in battery (1 v 2). I'm thinking X/Y wing swarm versus B swarm, and Fireball v generic Rhymerball (which I think you already had this last one last time).

Cross analyzed with # of BCCs in fleet.

Squadron-Lite: </=4 fighters (or go by points instead, and use ranges to define lite, medium, heavy lists)

Kontrol Lists: 1+ ISR, and 3+ control elements (PQ7, Konstantine, experimental upgrades except for Scramblers)

Stuff like this.

Edit: Ninja'd so hard

Ergh, data collection for data collection sake is meaningless.

This is not so true these days! Data Lakes and Big Data say- gather it all and figure stuff out later!

They are actually starting to say the opposite. Realised that gathering large amounts of data is essentially pointless as it breaks the scientific process and then becomes too overwhelming to be of any use.

I'm curious where you hear that... I've been doing data consulting for many years now, and every single day clients and customers are getting big insights from data. Yes, a lot of it is useless, but storing data is so cheap you just don't care about what may be redundant.

Anyways- to tie this back to my point... I'd love to see it get granular so we can enable analysis. To do that the data needs to be atomic... on the other hand, that is asking a LOT for TOs. I'd love to have a game by game breakdown!

I'm curious where you hear that... I've been doing data consulting for many years now, and every single day clients and customers are getting big insights from data. Yes, a lot of it is useless, but storing data is so cheap you just don't care about what may be redundant.

Civil Engineering in the UK. Data enables smart infrastructure, but it requires focus.

As an aside. Schmitty you need to use this www.tableau.com It allows multilevel graphics rather than just two dimensions.

Tableau is great but pricey! Periscope could do?

PLEASE no PIE Charts.

Honestly, I think the data you collected previously was quite good considering. You're going to have a hard time getting more granular without intense TO buy in.