03-12-2010, 12:08 AM
Gents: :smoke:
IMHO, it is important that designers; prior to uploading their new designs into H2H, run intial test games against both the AI and a few regular opponents.
This will help identify and shake out any "gross abnormalities" (e.g. skewed victory conditions, strange unit starting positions, terrain that does not make sense, etc.)
Some of my earlier scenario designs, I did not follow these initial steps... and as the play testers began their test games... these "gross abnormalities" began very evident :eek1: ...and I mentally "kicked myself" for not being aware of these issues... and having to spend (at least) another test round ironing them out. :mad:
I also believe that a scenario design that goes through an initial "shake down" prior to uploading into H2H will also test "better"... and while players who test H2H designs are not playing the scenario to "play it," but looking more to review the design for a number of variables, players may get more "enjoyment" out of testing a design that plays better intially then one that does not? :chin:
Maybe one reason more players don't step forward to help play test H2H designs is the "fear" that their time will be "wasted" on a poor design? :chin:
Obviously, scenarios in H2H are "designs in progress" that will go through multiple revisions and are not the ultimate, final product. But, IMHO, a designer who takes these initial steps in the design process, will reap more rewards during the "formal" H2H phase. :smoke:
IMHO, it is important that designers; prior to uploading their new designs into H2H, run intial test games against both the AI and a few regular opponents.
This will help identify and shake out any "gross abnormalities" (e.g. skewed victory conditions, strange unit starting positions, terrain that does not make sense, etc.)
Some of my earlier scenario designs, I did not follow these initial steps... and as the play testers began their test games... these "gross abnormalities" began very evident :eek1: ...and I mentally "kicked myself" for not being aware of these issues... and having to spend (at least) another test round ironing them out. :mad:
I also believe that a scenario design that goes through an initial "shake down" prior to uploading into H2H will also test "better"... and while players who test H2H designs are not playing the scenario to "play it," but looking more to review the design for a number of variables, players may get more "enjoyment" out of testing a design that plays better intially then one that does not? :chin:
Maybe one reason more players don't step forward to help play test H2H designs is the "fear" that their time will be "wasted" on a poor design? :chin:
Obviously, scenarios in H2H are "designs in progress" that will go through multiple revisions and are not the ultimate, final product. But, IMHO, a designer who takes these initial steps in the design process, will reap more rewards during the "formal" H2H phase. :smoke:
