VtES history

TwoRazorReign wrote:

There could be any number of other reasons for those declines. Some people discussed an aging player base who can no longer commit to attending VTES events. While this is also conjecture, it's proof there's definitely constructive discussion happening here.

The point, obviously, was to discuss other ideas which can explain such behavior.

Aging player base may be a factor, but we have to understand why it is so as well as somehow explain movements of the tournament attendance at other directions (said 2010-2013 as well as 2004 and 2007).

elotar wrote:

So when do you think "pipeline dried up"? And why? And how it explains 2010-2013 dow-up-down-up picture?

If you need a firm date, I would say: when Walch and Nusser closed shop? But that would only be approximate, because they had run out of the good stuff long before that.

The big story is: one main trend up until 2011, one main trend down from there. You can try
to overfit every single point if you want, but sometimes noise is just noise. For me, the most interesting teaching from those data is: despite very limited marketing effort, the game was still gaining speed when WW pulled the plug.

In fact, the last set published in cooperation with WW was sold out long before it even hit the shelves. Not exactly a downwards trend, tbh. And KoT was a HELL of a strong set. So not exactly newbie anti helpful. In fact, you could build one of the most t1 tourney decks out of 2 starters and some odds and ends from the set, and some other, very, very common cards.

So yes, I do think your correlation from observed phenomena is skewed.

PS: The people here generally tend to have IT/Engineering/ other STEM backgrounds, so tend to be very exacting regarding discussion of hypothesis. If you want a more gentle interaction from those who will not critique your ideas, perhaps facebook is more your speed, elotar? Every single disagreement with any of your suggestions or ideas is met with outright fury. Pointing out that the definition of someone in a constant state of outrage at everything is a troll, makes you even more outraged. If the shoe fits....

Blooded wrote:

In fact, the last set published in cooperation with WW was sold out long before it even hit the shelves.

Actually not.
It did sell out rather quickly, especially the starters, but even those were still available after at least couple weeks after the release. (the set was released on Feb 3rd 2010 and I placed a starter restock to WW Feb 16th).

Boosters I reordered on February, March, August, September, October and finally January 2011. YGO sets often sell out quicker than that.

But with VTES the sellouts with Heirs happened unprecedently quick.
Which is a real shame as it was selling really well and especially the starters Ben designed were finally top notch starters -the ones the game would've needed years earlier.

Lönkka wrote:

But with VTES the sellouts with Heirs happened unprecedently quick.
Which is a real shame as it was selling really well and especially the starters Ben designed were finally top notch starters -the ones the game would've needed years earlier.

I think Heirs just is the most desirable VTES expansion. It had a huge amount of strong cards for the rarer clans/decktypes (Baali, Salubri, ahrimanes etc), and new nice artwork for the old playables. It is by far my favorite expansion and I would want to buy more Heirs boosters if the possibility existed.

There are several cards that I simply want the Heirs artwork for (artwork that is unique to Heirs) since I don't like the other options, such as the Heirs version of sudden reversal.
Basically the entirety of my Unnamed deck comes from Heirs (Unnamed, Arishat, The Horde, greater curse, etc). Its no big surprise that the expansion sold out. It had huge amount of good stuff.

Non-existant user wrote:

but sometimes noise is just noise.

77% looks not like a noise to me.

I think maybe it's really is a "background" problem - I've been playing with models in academia long time ago and now I'm doing it in a business environment, where you have to make decisions with information you got - you will be out of business when you model reach statistical significance.

So lets look at your idea of upward trend till 2011
I'm dropping first year because I think it's just artifact.
Average growth rate 2001-2011 - 31%

So variation with the thrend (%):
2011 0
2010 -33
2009 -19
2008 -30 (KoT at the end of the year)
2007 33 (3rd)
2006 -32 (NoR)
2005 -9
2004 -46 (Gehanna)
2003 0
2002 -14

Gehenna and NoR fuckups looks even more spectacular, KoT also looks much worse than before.

Anekdotically our playgroup experience was interestingly connected with the data. We begin with camarilla edition or even later, but everybody was playing mostly casually with favorite clans (BSC 4thewin), so nobody bothered with event spam or imbueds. Third edition with sabbat cards was extremely positively received, activity spiked, new players arrived, we became even playing less casually, started to make tournaments ets. Than nearly at the same time KoT was relesed as well as we got imbued players, and excitement was changed to annoyance - crap was happening all over gaming tables. As a result influx of new players nearly totally dried up - when Lutz takes the table nobody leaving satisfied, even the winner.