Talk Fantasy Football

I am also trying to clean the data for the formats of playing online, and not having all selected options and allowing write-ins has really borked the data. So much extra cleaning.

Sorry! Looking forward to your conclusions. >500 fumbbl mentions is something pretty special!

Ok, this is quick and dirty. Some charts to peruse...
(I can only do one attachment per post it seems so the other charts will be in subsequent posts.)

TT Games/Month
-58% of the respondents do not play TT, and another 30% only play 1 or 2 per month.

TT Games/Month of Only TT Players
-This chart excludes those who do not play TT.
-72% of TT players only play 1-2 games per month.

Online Platforms
-I cleaned this data as best I could, it was painful. I also excluded 28 singleton results that I could no longer bear to keep cleaning. They have little to no effect on the final numbers.
-A large % play exclusively BBCE, but this may be greatly skewed now with many moving to BB2, I don't know. Regardless, it shows a lot of players are using this platform. You have to add all the variants, but it is over 80%
-8% of players are not playing online, which means 92% are, not an insignificant number.
-6% of respondents play exclusively FUMBBL, adding in the multi-platform players it is closer to 13-15% total. This number is also skewed by the exclusion of FUMBBL as a default choice, making it a write-in.

So what does it all say? am no expert, but to me at least, it puts to bed the argument that game rules should be focused on TT, with online to adapt house rules to fix broken rules. I can only see the shift to online growing.

sann0638 wrote:Sorry! Looking forward to your conclusions. >500 fumbbl mentions is something pretty special!

No need to apologize. I was just making a point if you do it it again, but I am sure you have learned a lot of lessons in the process. I know you and others put a tonne of work into it, well done.

TT players only.

Online platforms.

WhatBall wrote: TT Games/Month
-58% of the respondents do not play TT, and another 30% only play 1 or 2 per month.

Yeah, this is a big one (though I will need to put in caveats into everything I write in this thread) - but the question will be what the response should be:
- encouraging the transition to tabletop as much as possible?
- supporting online tournaments as much as possible?
- other stuff?

I have no idea what the answer is either.

I think a lot of the older generation, like myself, started on TT. I played back around 91-93ish (3rd edition). I was young and unmarried. Once you are older, have a family, etc., playing TT requires more effort, and for myself, I have zero desire to.

With the younger generation coming in via online play, it will be even harder to convert them "back" to TT. I am sure some will definitely do so, but the majority won't.

What I am saying is, worry about growing the community as an inclusive whole, not about getting people to jump from online to TT or vice versa.

WhatBall wrote: What I am saying is, worry about growing the community as an inclusive whole, not about getting people to jump from online to TT or vice versa.

Bingo. This has been my overarching mission for a while.

Shteve0 wrote:This is not a survey with a small reach. Yes, 2800 is not the full community,

If only that many people were interested in NAF elections.

It's good though - this isn't a crisis, it's an opportunity. I certainly don't think that we should be abandoning the things we do well, by any stretch; rather we should consider how coaches and commissioners in each popular setting require support and decide whether we can help deliver that (and not leap to conclusions about whether support for one format comes in the same form as support for another).

That said, let's not lose sight of what unifies the formats, there's still a lot of room we haven't explored in terms of focusing on the overlap in the different settings. The growth of resurrection didn't tear us asunder, I've no concern that celebrating the growth of online play should do so either. Tabletop is still in rude health.

Darkson wrote:

Shteve0 wrote:This is not a survey with a small reach. Yes, 2800 is not the full community,

If only that many people were interested in NAF elections.

You won't get any disagreement from me (or any of us, I suspect) on that front. Probably needs another thread through rather than derailing this one.

Whatball - your percentages are out (multiplied by 100 it seems). Would you be able to repost a collected version? Otherwise send over your email address and I'll invite you to our dropbox folder

sann0638 wrote:

WhatBall wrote:What I am saying is, worry about growing the community as an inclusive whole, not about getting people to jump from online to TT or vice versa.

Bingo. This has been my overarching mission for a while.

This sounds a bit odd to me, to be honest.

I am no NAF member any more and I haven't been for a long while now.
Why? Because I don't like the very competetive environment of a tournament and I saw no other reason in a membership other than sanctioned tournaments.

Anyway, this just sounded like if your only concern is keeping membership high, no worries about where those members come from.
Does that also mean, we haveto expect sanctioned online tournaments? And if so, will all available teams be allowed to play in such tournaments?
But wouldn't that mean to allow all these teams to be played in TT tournaments as well?
So we will let Cyanide make the rules, no matter what? What about FUMBBL and those inofficial rosters there?

I'm a bit worried that this mash-up of all these different directions people will be coming from, with all these different views on rules and rosters, will be more of a problem than being a step in building a community.

If you don't mind me saying, I don't think there's any cause to be alarmed. Tabletop is in great health, online is in great health. We're entering into a slight period of adaptation due to some changes in the environment, of course, but that's cool, we know that and we're choosing to do it in a way that's responsive to the realities of the community. It doesn't mean we have a one size fits all model, not by any stretch (and nor should we).

In about two weeks time the biggest tabletop tournament ever is going to take place, don't forget. If at the same time a lot of people are playing on a PC, that's also laudable. Both groups are playing blood bowl; both can potentially benefit from *some form* of engagement with the NAF. It's not a zero sum game

What i get from this (purely selfishly and ignorantly reading only the bit I want to ofc :p ) is that BB:CE is the main source of BB played these days and that the NAF should work at creating stable LAN leagues for us before the BB1 servers are shut and the BB2 turd swallows us whole

LAN leagues exist already, OFL being an excellent one, but having a nice NAF one would also be lovely.