Quick, someone add "Statisticful" to the tags list . . .

Or maybe pandas. Doesn't matter.

Everything you say about this as a poll and it's lack of scientific validity is completely true. But it is just as true about *all* polls on this site. And all discussions on this site--as the respondents to all polls and all discussions on this (and any) site are completely self selected, no poll here is going to be scientifically valid, and no discussion here is going to necessarily reflect the community at large, as the only people who respond or take part in a given discussion do so for a reason, which injects bias into the sample.

My only question is: Why is this suddenly something people are concerned about, such that it has become an integral part of this particular discussion? Why isn't this going on over, at, say, the "Will no more chase figures affect how you buy the game?" for example?

-Peter

See heres another thing you don't seem to get about the social sciences.

What was actually proven, assuming this poll had any validity whatsoever, was that 'people don't think that powercreep has any effect on their purchases'.

This is vastly different than proving power creep doesn't have any effect on purchasing.

Most people, when polled, say advertising doesn't have any effect on them. However valid studies have reliably shown that advertising does have a vast effect on most people. Just because people aren't aware that powercreep has any effect on their purchases in no way proves that powercreep has no effect on their purchases. The lesson you'd pull away from any Social Psychology course is that most people have very little idea why they do things.

So you're saying that it was 100% pure coincedence that your answer for question 2 was the same as almost everyone who answered that question in this "poll". There was a 50-50 chance that your answer would have been the opposite of everyone else's answer????

You see, I'm not sure that's the case here. I suspect that with very little soul searching a lot of people can dismiss powercreep as a reason for their purchases. Let's take my case: The only thing that affects my purchases is my estimate of how many cases I'll need to get all of the Uniques or Super Rares...or at least enough for me to trade to get the full set. Other than boosters I buy during sealed events, I make one big order when each set comes out. I often make this order long before I know the composition of the set. Since I don't know the composition of the set before I make my purchase, I think I can safely rule out Powercreep as the motivation for my purchase. I saw that many of the people in this thread knew specifically what was the leading factor in their purchasing plans. It appeared there were Collectors who answered similar to me, and the next biggest group answered that their purchases were based on the Characters (Not the statistics), that made up the upcoming set. I tend to give people a little more credit for understanding their own motivations for purchases.

You can give people all the credit you want, and chances are they'll respect you for it. It's referred to as pandering, or perhaps ignorance.

What is your favorite DC heroclix set to date

While I'm not convinced this poll is at all accurate it is missing some of the problems you had in yours.

Do you notice the general increase in satisfaction with more modern sets (sets that have "powercreep").

People like Powercreep, whether they know it or not.

#1 Power creep - I am a fan to a degree. I do not expect my older figures to stay competitive for 20 years. Not to mention I was looking at Veteran Bizaro from Icons the other day - over priced garbage (then and now). And looking back at how much a 16D with Impervious seemed to cost versus how utterly worthless it was against outwit and a myriad of 11-12 attack values - uggg.....

The problem is I think there are more comic accurate people out there because of SP's - but some stats (usually AV or DV) is off to the point where there are better options for tourney play. o you can power creep some people - its ok

#2 Collector, so power creep does not affect my purchasing

And here I thought "pandering" was changing one's stance to impress a certain demographic of voters. I'm not sure how that relates to the accuracy of poll results.


Or it could be that people like the new character cards with the more comic accurate character powers. Which is not the same thing as powercreep.

Maybe you shouldn't get so hung up on the literal words someone uses (everyone makes mistakes) and listen to what he's trying to say. He's providing very good information on the nature of bias in polling, something that you would do well to note as you are trying to collect data, and you continue to split hairs.

It's not like he's just trying to screw with you cause he's an ### (See also: Me) he's legitimately offering you insight into the situation, which, as a man who claims to have a grounding in science (You're running a poll, you've mentioned a grasp of formulas for tactics before, etc) and a fairly intelligent guy (my insults aside) you should listen to him to perhaps refine your poll to the point where it may be a little more accurate.

just a couple more pennies to throw into the well


Also - Pandering isn't incorrect in this instance. You're pandering to their own arrogance (in that they THINK they know why they do what they do) to get results, whether or not they are accurate. Doesn't fit perfectly, but no sense dismissing his excellent points off hand based on a mild misusage.

As I understand it, it's more like catering one's stance to impress a certain demographic.

Edit:Or what Castle said.

Did you actually look at the poll or are you just guessing?

The upwards trend predates Character cards by several sets. the first card related set is actually out of order.

it went

Crisis (28.34%)
Origin (22.87%)
Legacy (20.29%)
Collateral Damage (14.65%)
Justice League (7.09%)
Unleashed (3.22%)
Cosmic Justice (2.25%)
Hypertime (1.29%)

Of Course Legacy, CD and JL are all out of order, no natural progression is perfect, but the theme of each new set being more of a favorite, while each new set get's called Powercreep certainly seems to indicate a preference for "Powercreep" whatever people think that is (I would say more efficient Dial design).

I really think the biggest problem this poll faces is a lack of proper definition, or quantification for what power creep really is.

this is like making a poll saying "How do you feel about cheese?"

One mans cheese is another mans favorite team, is another mans favorite team to beat.

I hate to see Skrull Ms Marvel, but I don't think of her as particularly cheesy. When LAMP first came out, I wanted to stomp and cry, but now I love to see someone make a LAMP team, cause my team building has progressed in line with my strategic skills to the point where it's not a big issue. Another one (I think you'll disagree on this one brazil) is the R Shazam warbound fiasco running amok in the worlds games.

Are any of these things clear cheese? Not really. Efficient teams, good combos, but I don't personally believe in cheese, though I will groan once or twice when KC supes hits the table.

Many others agree, many disagree. Unfortunately, we can't quantify cheese the same way we can't quantify power creep, so it's silly to ask people if they like or dislike something we can't define.

which is why I'm ignostic

No way! Reread his post. He offered no suggestions as to how to make my poll more accurate. He just accused me of pandering. Said my polls were inaccurate, then went on to try to make some point using results from ANOTHER POLL taken right here on HCRealms. (Same demographic and same shortcomings as mine.) And he seemed perfectly willing to not only accept the results of that poll but to use those results himself to make his point.

You can't say HCRealms polls are inaccurate, then use them to try to prove your point. He's standing on both sides of the fence.

1) I love Cheese, it is a cruel Joke of Nature that I'm allergic to Milk (not just lactose intollerant, allergic)

2) I find when arguing that you can make arguments last forever if no one defines anything.

For instance: Reverse earthquakes are bad for a towns economy.

prove me wrong.

You're right, he didn't provide any bonafide solutions to your poll. We can't all think of amazing ideas to fix things that're broken But he did inform you of some ways it's going to be inaccurate. Now you can stand by and maintain that your information is accurate, but you're only fooling yourself.

He also said that he didn't believe the other poll was entirely accurate either, but was free from many of the problems that yours has (improper quantification for one)

Also, they are completely different types of polls. I can tell you in good standing what I like. I can. I like Batman, hate Martian Manhunter. I just do, and that's it. Easy question. Now, if you asked me to explain implicitly why I like one over the other, or why exactly I hate Martian Manhunter, I doubt I could answer accurately, because I can never fully explain my subconcious and my dislike for MM was a pure gut thing, hard to quantify.

So asking me which set I like is much easier to answer than how I feel about Powercreep, and how it affects me. I just can't know. Surely you understand the difference?

And in all fairness, you are kind of pandering. Like I said, and he admitted it himself, he's not using the term perfectly, but none of us are english teachers, we all make mistakes.


Also, you're kinda coming off as kind of pretentious. Getting really upset that he would dare call into question the validity of your information, and he would dare say you are pandering. He's not trying to be a jerk, and merely disagreeing with you isn't a crime, so maybe cool it down a little bit. I know that's ironic coming from me

1.) Man, I love grilled cheese sandwhiches. I bought a couple loaves of bread and some cheese today for that very purpose. If I were you, I'd raise an army and march against god himself for that cruelty

2.) I'd rep ya, but I gotta spread it around

but I can disprove your point.


In the early 1970's a research project was done in "Lower Lake" a small town in California about 45 minutes north of Nappa Valley. The study was done on the effects of reverse earthquakes and the migration of fish in the rivers around the town. Studies have shown that reverse earthquakes increase the speed at which the fish spawn, and the frequency in which they are able to do so. As a large part of this small towns economy resides on catching fresh water fish and selling them to markets in towns nearby, it was an excellent stimulus for the economy.


So there.