Glad you enjoyed, and I'm very much looking forward to DTE as well!

Same. I'm an accountant and love statistics too. This was so interesting!

@@MrFettuccine I think they need to report to us monthly, don't you? LOL!

Doug, if you like INDEX/MATCH you may love XLOOKUP. I think it was added in Office 2019 and works how a lookup function should have always worked.

@@vettels6 I'm not actually a fan of XLOOKUP compared to INDEX(MATCH(...)) because XLOOKUP() doesn't dynamically change columns and rows if the table it's looking in is reordered. It's also harder to parse in that INDEX(MATCH(...)) you simply type in the row or column header names while XLOOKUP it's a lot more convuluted if you want to do anything other than put in the row number or column letter. For example, say I have a table where column $G:$G is States, and another is Population. With Index/Match I can do a lookup like = Index($A:$Z, Match("AL", $G:$G, 0), match("Population", $1:$1, 0)) Notice that I don't need to know which column Population is, it could move around and it wouldn't matter. It's also clear in that function exactly what I'm looking up, namely the Population value in the row with "AL" in it. XLOOKUP would have to look more like: = XLOOKUP("AL", $G:$G, $N:$N) But notice that I can't tell what "Column N" is from this. And if the underlying table changes its order of columns, and the Population column isn't actually in column $N:$N any more, then it might not even be looking in the right place. XLOOKUP is definitely better than VLOOKUP, for sure. And it does have an advantage in that you can do approximate lookups which Index(Match()) can't. But for exact match lookups in a table with shifting columns and rows where I want to be able to see at a glance what I'm looking up I like Index(Match()) better.

@@Bodyknock I'm gonna look into both of these! Appreciate the recommendations. Wouldn't mind being able to refine the processes a bit. Though I'll look forward to not have to make all the formulas from scratch next time.

Thanks. Always used vlookup. Will look into index(match) and and xlookup

@@DTChrisYi , if you don't mind me saying, you could also use = SUM(put an array here) - MAX(put here the same array) in 13:00 next time to eliminate the highest case of cross-overs instead of manually correcting each formula. It'll save you some time.

I've only played it a couple times, so maybe I don't get it yet, but I got to agree with the Dice Tower on this one... I don't YET see the magic of this game.

@@CharlesHepburn2 Dang it, not you too, mack. This is a HEINOUS TRAVESTY I tell you!

No Great Western trail also

I miss every vote. Need a link on their KZfaq videos

Yeah good idea and I can also say its much more fun to watch if you took part in the vote. Its always exciting to see a game come up which you voted on.

100% agree

I was right. They are taking new impressions

Don't do it. Run the other way

Yes, I'd love a copy!

We have a Catchupalooza spreadsheet we're slowly working through. It does need to be updated a tad since the A-Team top 100 though, but we're working on some of those as well. Two are airing late this week actually! That could be a fun idea to look at the different Catchupalooza games we've already done.

@@DTChrisYi Awesome,Chris! Will watch for play through videos. I'm glad they have you on the team. I enjoy all the content you do.

@@jeffdekorne7944 thanks man! I really appreciate that!

Absolutely

I agree. Great work. And I love to know when games came out so that I can see which games are likely to become “classics”

I'd be interested in that for sure, but it would have to be in a more robust system than this spreadsheet I threw together. If I could have all of BGG data in a SQL database, I would let rip!

I like this idea

It's nice that a married couple have so many games in ccommon they find fun, but it doesn't always make for the most interesting of videos.

@@petercsm5769 that's a better/nicer way to discribe it 😄

Yeah totally put an asterisk on all of the data and had me as the viewer doing a lot of work to try to parse out the way their choices affected everything

Also, I think it's easy to undersell how much people like the dice rolling. It gives the game a gambling / Ameri-trash/thrash feel that many other games don't have (which admittedly turns a lot of people off). BUT because you roll so many times during the game, the odds tend to work out. I know it's not the most complicated game, but it's my gaming "comfort food" for sure. I also think it has a deceptively high skill ceiling.

I don't know how you could know that?

Minus the dice rolling, Lords of Waterdeep is up there with Stone Age as an introductory worker placement game in the same weight. Mandatory quests can be optional (though IMO, it's just a minor annoyance)

@@mjjjuly water deep and Stone Age use to be my fav when i started playing board games so they both feels very close to my heart but I think Stone Age wins out

I second this

OMG yes!!

Corporate Accountant

It's just creating a different data point. All it's saying is for the people who put it on their lists, is it typically higher up or lower down. It's not there to skew or mislead. If anything, your point is proven, "This game has an average score of 199 points, based on only one rating. Clearly that means one person LOVES it and it's not to the other people's tastes nearly as much." That isn't meaningless, because you just inferred meaning from it. Your idea would give us a broader perspective on each single game, which is a neat idea. But it would be much easier to compare our actual ratings (1-10 scores) on a game rather than try to put it in context of the Top 100 list. Also keep in mind that it would be a ridiculous amount of effort for all 7 of us to go through everybody else's lists and assign points for every game that wasn't also on our list. Especially given that we haven't played every came on each other's lists so how would we determine those numbers? Appreciate you watching, and if you have any other thoughts I'd be happy to consider them for next year.

Yes, and I will third it

if this is just a one off thing, then a database is a bit overkill. But if they want this to be a regular thing, then it might be worth the effort.

@@mjjjuly Yeah, that would be cool to set up a SQL database. I have a good amount of experience writing queries, but not so much setting one up from scratch. Also that's not the type of software we budget for, haha. I do have these spreadsheets set up in s way where in future years all I'll have to do is put in the new lists in the "Raw Data" tab and the rest of the pages will pull from that new data.

It also depends on the person. If you’ve only played 300 games, your #100 is probably quite a bit worse than your #1. If you have played 9,000 games then sure maybe your #1 is only twice as good as your #100. But that is clearly more the exception.

Thanks, but I'm happy with what I did. :)

@@thedicetower You're the boss! Love the videos and even the spreadsheet! I make my own rules too and have Ticket to Ride Europe it's own enrty and lower so it doesn't bring down USA with PA! ;)

It isn't to change the averages, but it's to prevent huge swings in the total "points" each game gets. For example, if a game is #1 on a single persons list and gets 100 points, it is immeasurably higher up than a game ranked at #95 but on five people's lists for a total of 25 points. The model of 200 down to 101 points favors games that cross over on more people's lists because that really is more of a feat than being high on a single person's list. Like Tom said, I'm not saying that my #1 game is 100x better than my #100 game, so the points reflect that with the system we used.