Guru Engagement

[Jontia]

Are there any collected metrics for Guru engagement?

I can only see the arena format votes for the games I am a guru for, but even in the best case the engagement level around 15%

I would love to know if this is just the games that I play, or if it is common across the board and if any else thinks this is an issue.

I'm not sure what it says when over 80% of people that play the most games aren't bothered about what settings that game will have in the 'competitive' format.

[tarongot]

Over timeI was guru in around 15 games. I think its pretty common, and 15% i would say its one of highest score.
I also think that is problem. I even in 1 of games I'm guru now, I asked for opinion about guru's having more impact on shape of game and arena. I don't recall single response.

Even on Arena rules, guru's have small impact. 1 round - 1 proposal win. Round 2 that proposal Is compared to previous arena rules.

Other then that guru can sometimes vote on alpha tutorial for game to being accepted. And also there is usually only 1 tutorial to chose from.

So in total, being guru is for nothing much. So why people should bother? Many doesn't even know they are guru, because info about that is no flashy shining like achievmenst you get.

[tbhp]

How does one become a guru? I know it's based on how much you play, but how do you actually check that and see the exact conditions you need to fulfill to become one?

[Ceaseless]

How does one become a guru? I know it's based on how much you play, but how do you actually check that and see the exact conditions you need to fulfill to become one?

https://boardgamearena.com/faq?anchor=f ... agamegurus It's competitive, so there's no exact check you can make. It will always be relative.

[tbhp]

Right, but there should be a list somewhere so that we can see where we are positioned and try to be in the top 100 by the monthly deadline.

[Jontia]

So in total, being guru is for nothing much. So why people should bother? Many doesn't even know they are guru, because info about that is no flashy shining like achievmenst you get.

I'm on board with this as an idea. I think to find which games I'm currently a guru it's the lowest positioned tile on the Community page. Which is itself a fairly neglected part of the site. At least for me.

It would also be nice to see how many games you need to play to become a guru in a given game. Just posting a number on the game page, like the arena positions for the last season would be great. To see if it's worth trying to push into guru for games like Catan, or if I'm so far off it doesn't matter.

And then maybe a 'disinterested' marker on gurus could be something to explore. If you've been a guru for several months, but have never engaged with the Arena options, maybe you could be marked as 'disinterested' and then the site pulls in player 101 to fill your spot? Eventually you might get a long way down the 'most games played' list, but actually get a high rate of engagement and/or even discussion about the settings beyond just the votes?

[Ceaseless]

Are there any collected metrics for Guru engagement?

I can only see the arena format votes for the games I am a guru for, but even in the best case the engagement level around 15%

I would love to know if this is just the games that I play, or if it is common across the board and if any else thinks this is an issue.

I'm not sure what it says when over 80% of people that play the most games aren't bothered about what settings that game will have in the 'competitive' format.

If anything, rather than be bothered, this might actually be a good thing. The game setting is stable, and the players are generally unafraid of something bad happening.

So in total, being guru is for nothing much. So why people should bother? Many doesn't even know they are guru, because info about that is no flashy shining like achievmenst you get.

I'm on board with this as an idea. I think to find which games I'm currently a guru it's the lowest positioned tile on the Community page. Which is itself a fairly neglected part of the site. At least for me.

It would also be nice to see how many games you need to play to become a guru in a given game. Just posting a number on the game page, like the arena positions for the last season would be great. To see if it's worth trying to push into guru for games like Catan, or if I'm so far off it doesn't matter.

And then maybe a 'disinterested' marker on gurus could be something to explore. If you've been a guru for several months, but have never engaged with the Arena options, maybe you could be marked as 'disinterested' and then the site pulls in player 101 to fill your spot? Eventually you might get a long way down the 'most games played' list, but actually get a high rate of engagement and/or even discussion about the settings beyond just the votes?

Though you'd still have to keep in mind there is no obligation for the numbers of a previous season to have any relevance to the numbers required this season. That said, I don't see why you'd need high engagement for the settings. If people are comfortable, you don't need to dig down to try and create controversy. If it's not broken no need to fix it.

It would also be nice to see how many games you need to play to become a guru in a given game. Just posting a number on the game page, like the arena positions for the last season would be great. To see if it's worth trying to push into guru for games like Catan, or if I'm so far off it doesn't matter.

Right, but there should be a list somewhere so that we can see where we are positioned and try to be in the top 100 by the monthly deadline.

This might actually be intentional. To be a guru, just play, but they're not looking for people to play for a number. They're looking for people who are playing because they want to. I'll note that if you create a visible ranking, you don't see what it takes to get there, you only see the present markers. Everyone else can see them too and then keep playing to stay or reach those spots accordingly. Having people play games just to rack up a game count for a number might not be how you want this to go. You try to play enough to hit the spot, then someone else sees you pass them and they add games to pass you back. Unlike a rating contest, quality isn't a factor, it's sheer quantity.

[Jontia]

These are good points. Specifically about tracking how close/far from guru status you are. And honestly anything that creates incentives to play for reasons other than wanting to play is not ideal.

In the forums I'm active in, mostly Catan and Wingspan you can see general annoyance with the current arena settings. Far from being comfortable with the current or any set up, the settings are actively driving people away. That's not to say giving complainers what they want would lead to a better state, very likely you just end up with a different group of people being unhappy.

The guru system isn't a core part of he BGA experience, but I think it is easy to under estimate how important it is. The way Arena is gate-keeped behind a minimum ELO presents it as the more serious way to compete on the site. As such it feels like the system that determines what the settings for that mode are deserves more prominence.

[Ceaseless]

These are good points. Specifically about tracking how close/far from guru status you are. And honestly anything that creates incentives to play for reasons other than wanting to play is not ideal.

In the forums I'm active in, mostly Catan and Wingspan you can see general annoyance with the current arena settings. Far from being comfortable with the current or any set up, the settings are actively driving people away. That's not to say giving complainers what they want would lead to a better state, very likely you just end up with a different group of people being unhappy.

The forums show members exist that don't like the system. But they aren't the only group of players out there, and by that I don't mean an unknown group we haven't heard from, but an active part of BGA given a chance to have their say. Their votes show that they're at least accepting of the current system for now. If there are people that don't like that position, then they'll have to become active enough to get the votes to overturn it. They get a shot each arc to do it.

The guru system isn't a core part of he BGA experience, but I think it is easy to under estimate how important it is. The way Arena is gate-keeped behind a minimum ELO presents it as the more serious way to compete on the site. As such it feels like the system that determines what the settings for that mode are deserves more prominence.

100 isn't a real elo, as you're not allowed to go below it. Once you reach 100, even if you asked your pet rock to play for all the games you joined, you wouldn't go below 100. The 100 minimum is probably to avoid completely new accounts entering and going "how do I push buttons?"

[ChiefPointThief]

So in total, being guru is for nothing much. So why people should bother? Many doesn't even know they are guru, because info about that is no flashy shining like achievmenst you get.

I'm on board with this as an idea. I think to find which games I'm currently a guru it's the lowest positioned tile on the Community page. Which is itself a fairly neglected part of the site. At least for me.

It would also be nice to see how many games you need to play to become a guru in a given game. Just posting a number on the game page, like the arena positions for the last season would be great. To see if it's worth trying to push into guru for games like Catan, or if I'm so far off it doesn't matter.

And then maybe a 'disinterested' marker on gurus could be something to explore. If you've been a guru for several months, but have never engaged with the Arena options, maybe you could be marked as 'disinterested' and then the site pulls in player 101 to fill your spot? Eventually you might get a long way down the 'most games played' list, but actually get a high rate of engagement and/or even discussion about the settings beyond just the votes?

Bga couldnt post a # of how many ganes are required to be a guru because the guru system isn’t consistent and they don’t even know lol. Some games don’t even have 100 gurus despite more than 100 ppl playing in them so it isnt the top 100. There also isnt some min requirement because in some games Ive become guru after one play and others that didn’t have a full guru list Ive played more than 70x in a short span and didn’t make the guru list.

Disinterested isnt a bad idea.

As for ppl being unhappy with arena settings in popular games like Catan & ttr if the decision was mine I would just make everyone happy and have dual seasons to appease player counts. There are more than enough players in these popular games to split them in 2 and still have a healthy arena community.