Thoughts on Feedback Questioning

[ty_taurus]

In regards to the scores I've received, I do believe it's important to take these values with a grain of salt because there's a limitation to the amount of people, and what type of people have responded. That said, there's also no way to tell what that error margin looks like either. If we did get a massive influx of responses from the larger player-base, would scores go up? Would they go down? Would they change by 1 whole point? 2 points? half a point? We have no way of knowing, but I do think it's worth mentioning for this discussion.

Regardless, I'll also share my own thoughts on the scoring system currently. With how it's organized now, any score I consider "low" would constitute of a thorough collection of the written response answers and use that as a method of identifying the core issue, and also looking specifically at what low-scoring reviewers complain about as well as also looking at what high-scoring reviewers are saying they like also. As a general rule of thumb, I'd look at a 7.5 average or higher as 'at or above a healthy range' and does not necessarily require something, though I'd also want to see that across all categories, not just the overall satisfaction. If a job were to have only a 7/10 score, that's not a 'bad' score, but I'd want to see if there are commonly mentioned QoL improvements that the job could use, though I most likely would think the job wouldn't require significant changes beyond that. It's when things start approaching 6 and lower that I'd look into potentially more notable changes, but again it's all case-by-case, which I think goes without saying for the everyone's answers here as well.

That said, I've also been doing some light research, and 0-10 over 1-10 is being described as better and to keep scales odd rather than even. I'm also seeing that 1-5 has the problem of accuracy. Values will naturally cluster around the 3-4 range, and it makes it more challenging to actually identify if there's a difference across multiple jobs, but there's also the 1-7 or 0-6 scale option also which is more a midpoint. Any preferences on 0-10 vs 0-6?

I also want to remove the "other" option from the "what does this job need more of/less of" questions and increase the amount of options to have more accuracy, and also make it easy to create a visual for that information next time around. For the healers, this is what I'm currently thinking:

What does (Job) need more of in future updates?

• Animation Updates
• Higher rDPS
• Stronger MP Economy
• Burst Healing Actions
• Regen Actions
• Barrier Actions
• Attack Actions
• Party Mitigation
• Party Utility (Expedient/Warden's Paean/etc.)
• Personal DPS Buffs
• Party DPS Buffs
• Crowd Control (Stun/Silence/etc.)
• Mobility Tools (Swiftcast/Icarus/etc.)
• Unsure/Nothing Specific

What does (Job) need less of in future updates?

• Total rDPS (This job is too strong)
• Total MP Economy (This job's MP management is too strong)
• Burst Healing Actions
• Regen Actions
• Barrier Actions
• Attack Actions
• Party Mitigation
• Party Utility (Expedient/Warden's Paean/etc.)
• Personal DPS Buffs
• Party DPS Buffs
• Crowd Control (Stun/Silence/etc.)
• Mobility Tools (Swiftcast/Icarus/etc.)
• N/A (Nothing needs removing)

This would be followed up with the question "Please expand upon your answers below, and are there any other things you believe (job) needs more of or less of?" And after that, a general "Share your overall thoughts on the state of (job) currently."

Do you think those lists are stronger? Are there any options for the more of/less of categories that you think don't need to be there, or options I didn't include that you think should be added to that?