Recommend
53 
 Thumb up
 Hide
21 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » BoardGameGeek Related » BGG General

Subject: Logging games w/ expansions... so now what? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
tom-le-termite
United States
ft lauderdale
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
I think we're going to need a bigger tub.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Although I don't necessarily pay much attention to all the miscellaneous topics of BGG, I remember reading in some distant past (1year maybe?) that logging your games with the options for expansions was not possible due to the fact that BGG system couldn't recognize the entry for expansions or core game.

So far the choice is up to us when we log a game and this leads to disparity in how we log our games when expansions are used. For examples, when I play a game of Race for the galaxy with the current expansion, I log the game in the RFTG entry, not in the expansion. Some will do the opposite, some will do both. Talking about non-standardization...


One of my big frustration is when a game has multiple expansions. Battlelore and carcassone are typical exemples. When I play one of these games, I usually play with all expasions I have, but when the time comes to log in the BGG entry, I only log it in the core game entry. The "dramatic" result of this is that, when I am doing some stats with my entries, the metadata tells me that I never played any of my expansions and completely bias my statistics.

I am sure it was already asked in the past (sorry about that) and the suggestion to have a system like this has already been done:

[x]Core game
-[ ]exp 1
-[x]exp 2
-[x]exp 3
-[ ]exp 4

but I admit that it would be the "ultimate" way to log the games.

So, my question is now this: With the BGG 2.0 being implemented, will my dreams become reality? blush

32 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jonathan "Spartan Spawn, Sworn, Raised for Warring!"
United States
Sellersburg
Indiana
flag msg tools
designer
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
badge
"By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As far as this goes, I seem to have it easy, with Battlelore or TOI etc I simply log the game from which I used the scenario. Same with C&C:A, if I played a Greek VS Eastern Kingdoms scenario, I log a play with Greek VS the Eastern kingdoms not with the base game.

Now with those games that dont have scenarios, I would love to have what you have suggested.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree this is something that is sorely missing the game logging. One would hope that it would be some plan to fix it.

I think you suggestion is best, and I am sure its been suggested before. It won't cover all cases but it should cover most of them.

Heroscape and CCG for example might be hard pressed to be covered under
that system.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
tom-le-termite
United States
ft lauderdale
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
I think we're going to need a bigger tub.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
yep.

However, is it possible now with BGG 2.0 ? That actually was my original question. If it is, then we can hope that it will be implemented in some hypothetical futur . if not, then, lets forget about it...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hélio Andrade
Portugal
Lisboa
Lisboa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
i support this request, that feature would rock my socks off =)
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Leung
United States
Half Moon Bay
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is a great idea and it was something that I was just thinking about as well. When logging plays, I usually add a full play for every expansion, which as you can guess leads to rapid inflation of my play count. But I like seeing quickly which expansions I've played the most.

However, I thought that there is already some way of the database to recognize which entries were games and which were expansions---for example, I don't think expansions are ranked even though they may have high ratings.

In addition, I've started using Friendless' Stats page, which draws info from the BGG database---it seems like the total number of play reported there is the number of base games, not including expansions. (so my play count was much smaller, and I actually thought that his page was missing a lot of my plays). So there must be some way for Friendless to distinguish between game and expansion plays.

Anyway, maybe I'm wrong, but hopefully if there is already a mechanism in place to distinguish between them, it should be relatively easy to toggle the difference in the play count. Just a thought.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
tom-le-termite
United States
ft lauderdale
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
I think we're going to need a bigger tub.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
it's actually while having a look at my stats on friendless site that I decided to post this here. but the problem remains in the situation with multiple expansions...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Randall Bart
United States
Winnetka
California
flag msg tools
designer
Baseball been bery bery good to me
badge
This is a picture of a published game designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I owned this card, and if I added it to this deck, and if I played on this board, I would still log the game under this game.

There needs to be a hierarchy. The expansions and versions should all be sub-games under the main game.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Haskins
United States
Countryside
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tom-le-termite wrote:
One of my big frustration is when a game has multiple expansions . . . carcassone are typical exemples. When I play one of these games, I usually play with all expasions I have, but when the time comes to log in the BGG entry, I only log it in the core game entry. The "dramatic" result of this is that, when I am doing some stats with my entries, the metadata tells me that I never played any of my expansions and completely bias my statistics.

I am sure it was already asked in the past (sorry about that) and the suggestion to have a system like this has already been done:

[x]Core game
-[ ]exp 1
-[x]exp 2
-[x]exp 3
-[ ]exp 4

but I admit that it would be the "ultimate" way to log the games.

So, my question is now this: With the BGG 2.0 being implemented, will my dreams become reality? blush



You have my vote. Great idea. Maybe there is a BGG 2.1 ahead!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gerry Smit
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When I play RftG, I list the games under the original. EXCEPT when I play a solo vs the robot. Those I list under the expansion, as the robot solo came out in the expansion, and is a MAJOR part of the game.

All (Fantasy) Munchkin games go under the original, as the other decks expand the original work, but don't re-build the mechanics. Blended munchkin, I haven't thought thru. SOmetimes my son and I pull out ALL the munchkin games , and play thru (EPIC of course, he's a munchkin!). Maybe I'll put them under Blender.

But an earlier post of "there needs to be a hierarchy" is one I agree with wholeheartedly.

Gerry
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Klinck
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've changed my approach to this a few times, but this is what I'm doing now:

- I only log the play for the base game, and don't log anything for expansions.
- If I have an expansion that significantly changes the nature of the game, I will log the play under that expansion, instead. (This includes Cities & Knights of Catan, and would probably include alternate Power Grid maps, but we don't have any of those yet.)
- Like Gerry, I log my RftG solitaire plays under RftG:TGS.
- Also, like Gerry, I'm still waffling on how to log combo Munchkin games. The last time we played, I just logged one play under each. We only pull out Munchkin once in a while, so I'm probably willing to live with the minor discrepancy in numbers.


ETA: And yes, I like the idea presented by the OP.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David F
United States
Emeryville
California
flag msg tools
Luck in games, in measured doses, is the catalyst which enables shocking game-changers that you'll remember and talk about forever.
badge
Let the Lord of Chaos rule.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I never understand why logging plays with expansion is such a popular and oft-requested feature. It'd be nifty, yes, but far from necessary.

1. Who uses the logged plays data? I've seen a little (and I mean little) of it used in Geeklists, but for the most part, my plays are my plays and your plays are your plays. I know how I record mine, and you know how you record yours, and we both know how to adjust accordingly for whatever analysis we do. Why would I need to care how other people record their plays?

2. Even if you do need to know how other people record their plays, just know that plays data for expansions is inaccurate and under-reported. Plays for the base game should be fine (I'm sure nobody reports a play under Ticket to Ride after playing TtR: Switzerland, for example).

3. Inflate play number? What's wrong with that? I LOVE inflating play numbers! Get me set up with Memoir '44, I'll use this village tile from the Terrain Pack instead of the one in the base game just because, and I'll use Air Rules even though I hate them, and I'll just keep the Commissar chip from Eastern Front around the game just because it looks cool. Whee, 4 recorded plays and I'm HAPPY!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Hein
Netherlands
Delft
flag msg tools
badge
Ceterum censeo RoboRally esse delendam
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
selwyth wrote:
(I'm sure nobody reports a play under Ticket to Ride after playing TtR: Switzerland, for example


Well, that's what I do. Switzerland cannot be played stand-alone, so I log it as with every expansion: under the base game.

I would like to be able to log expansions played without inflation my play count; a frined of mine (and I've seen the suggestion more often here) logs the play of an expansion under the base game, but also logs the expansion by entering a small number (say, 0.0001). Not sure how this works out in the Friendless stats, but it might just be an alternative to what the OP suggests.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
tom-le-termite
United States
ft lauderdale
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
I think we're going to need a bigger tub.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
spellengek wrote:
but also logs the expansion by entering a small number (say, 0.0001). Not sure how this works out in the Friendless stats, but it might just be an alternative to what the OP suggests.


Yes, but As you can see, everybody have a different approach, and therefore, nobody does the same. The entire BGG data concerning expansions have therefore, no reel value.

I don't mind if the solution with one way or another, but we need an "official" structure that allow this data to be standardized.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Corey Allen
United States
Humble
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Please Admins? Can we, can we!?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Krause
United States
Charleston
South Carolina
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This would also be very useful in the upcoming RPG-Geek, where players could log, e.g. D&D 4.0: Adventure H1 - Keep on the Shadowfell.

*nudge, nudge*
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Simon Lundström
Sweden
Täby
flag msg tools
Now who are these five?
badge
Come, come, all children who love fairy tales.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In order for this to be doable, what's needed to do with the database is to link certain entries as "variant of" or "expansion to" other database entries.

And that, I would like very much, as I am a fervent advocator of having the SAME querie/variant/rules discussion forum for all variants of the same game (Incan Gold/Diamant, all Munchkin games, Cosmic Encounter versions etc etc etc).

Loggin expansion plays would be a nice little bonus in the corner, but linking games forums is actually very important for one of the site's main functions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
tom-le-termite
United States
ft lauderdale
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
I think we're going to need a bigger tub.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, we have "manpower" on BGG to do it. Remember the huge task to classify all the picture in the Database into 3 groups? we all participated and moded the thing.

If a similar system can be put in place, then, BBG comunity will slowly, but surely put the entries back together.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
VETRHUS of Rogaland
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
An ash I know, Yggdrasil its name. With water white is the great tree wet; thence come the dews that fall in the dales. Green by Urth's well does it ever grow.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I thought this thread was going to be about your apathy toward Lumberjack-Themed Euros and their ill-conceived supplements.

DAMN, I would have had something to contribute to that debate....
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rainer Kraft
Germany
Burghausen
Bavaria
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shameless bump!!!

(Is something in development?)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
kat costa
United States
Paradise
California
flag msg tools
badge
Who dares disturb the Hobnob Goblin?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Manimal wrote:
(Is something in development?)




SPLU.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.