Forums

** Grossman's Holiday
21 August, 1943
Gotha, NE of Kharkov: [Version-2.0][H2H][HISB) [EA][N VV] Immediately
after Kursk the Soviets attacked along the front to exploit the
exhaustion of their enemy and maintain the initiative. Operation
"Rumantsyev" was launched to take Belgorod and Kharkov while
enlarging the Kursk bridgehead. This would also allow their armor
to drive deep to threaten Army Group South. Von Manstein knew
he had to slap back at each enemy breakthrough, while his forces
withdrew to shortened defensive positions. Eventually the Ukraine
would have to be abandoned. But, von Manstein was going to make
it a step at a time. The Soviets advanced with thoughts of victory.
The Germans retreated in hopes of keeping their units cohesive
until they could find a place to counterattack. In this spot
two years before the Germans rushed to Gotha in hopes of gaining
a "holiday". There they met T-34's instead and fought to just
have a few few hours rest. Today there may be no rest for the
weary of either side. No holiday again for Oberst Grossman.

** Pferd und Schmetterling
15 August, 1943
"Horse and Butterfly" Petrishcheva, 35km N of Smolensk: [Version
2.0][H2H](Hypo-HISB) [EA or not][N VV]As Kursk proved a grinding
yard that reduced the power of the Germans to command the field.
The Soviets became empowered and began to launch attacks along
the front. Scraping together reserve units Zhukov put together
strange combinations to just drive deep into the German lines
as he prepared the coming onslaught from his careful calculations.
This is one such battle. A Soviet task force has driven deep
behind German lines to set up hasty blocks to slow a German retreat.
The Germans rushed units forward and tried to form "fists" that
could punch through these Soviet blockades. The Soviets must
hold. The Germans must breakthrough to fight another day. Russian
paratroops were often thought of as "butterflies". On this field
they will be trampled by German horses and armor. Or, they will
hold and capture the fleeing cavalrymen?

____________________________________
Both of these scenarios have been uploaded to the scenario dBASE. It was determined that they were too long in H2H testing without reaching final approval. Although these scenarios were close to final approval "technical issues" causing the removal were in some testers not finishing the games to a final rating.

Testers, please do not sign up to rate scenarios if you may encounter real life issues. Or, if you do, please contact the H2H custodians or scenario designer to have your names removed from testing.
Designers, please keep up with the testing process and communicate with the testers and H2H custodians.

I will soon be uploading a couple more scenarios to H2H testing and I hope that some members will sign on and see them through to completion. :smoke:



HSL

(04-09-2010, 07:25 PM)Herr Straßen Läufer Wrote: [ -> ]Testers, please do not sign up to rate scenarios if you may encounter real life issues. Or, if you do, please contact the H2H custodians or scenario designer to have your names removed from testing.
Designers, please keep up with the testing process and communicate with the testers and H2H custodians.


HSL

Good advice Ed! I think it is especially important for designers to "keep on top" of their scenarios under development. If developers don't follow up with ensuring their own designs stay on schedule... they should not be suprised when play testers don't hold to their end of the testing agreement.

Additionally, it should be made absolutely clear to play testers how the rating works?

Basically, should the play balance rating be voted as 7, other ratings do not really matter "at all" (enjoyment, descriptions)... E.g. a rating of 7, 9 and 9 gives a balanced rating of 7,93.

The requirement for four ratings with an weighted average of 8.0 or better is a very tough one, with the current weighting, but that is obviously how the H2H is planned.

The designer should perhaps do a bit of lobbying with the testers to ensure he gets the rating he believes the scenario deserves?

(It goes without saying he should reflect the feedback he receives back to the scenario.)

I am not an expert with the process as such, but thought I would give my 0.02 regarding the importance of voting / rating the scenario per what is the actual opinion of the tester: :thumbs_up: or :thumbs_down:.

EDIT: The opposite is true of course as well: should the balance be let us say 9 it does not matter if the enjoyment factor truly "sucks". I do not mean to :stir: but rather to point out the weighted importance of balance.

EDIT2: I was going to post that I do not mind giving ** Grossman's Holiday a test but what HSL is actually saying is that the sceanrio was posted to database without the H2H stamp? This cannot be right either?

Actually the rating system is very fair. 8+ ensures the quality and the balance. We are not talking of 50% equals balance. We are talking about rating a scenario for it's balance of play.
If it can be won from both sides with relative equality then it should receive a higher or the highest rating for it's balance?
I think most testers misunderstand that concept. The better the balance the higher the rating. Balance is not based on fun to play. It is based on the ability to win it from both sides, all things (including player skill) being even?
I wanted fair ratings that were not based on the designers "likeability" or arm twisting. ;)

My problem was not in staying up with the scenario or the testers. I had a couple of testers that had real life issues which seemed to go on for a longer period of time than I hoped. They could not be remove individually from testing.
I was told that I could scrub all test reports and start over. Or, I could move the scenarios to the dBASE. Since we do not want to have scenarios sit in H2H for too long, and my scenarios were in the longest, and I did not want to scrub all tests to start over, I simply placed them in the dBASE. I would not restrict myself from what we want others to do.

H2H means that the scenarios is designed to be played versus human in PBEM. Neither scenario was uploaded with [BZ], which means that it made it through the H2H process. I used the Matrix template to describe the scenarios. There should be little in the way of confusion? :chin:

It's all good and part of the H2H system. It's the way it is going to work from now on too! :smoke:



HSL

I was not critisizing (sp?) the H2H system as such although I admit my post was not very clear on that.

I tried to point out how people typically use a voting scale of 0 - 10, and of the fact that on this case it should be understood that giving a balance rating of 7 means "not good enough" vs. "quite OK", (almost) regardless what the other ratings are...

I agree that 8 or above is how it should be, but again, pointed out that it is all about the balance score.

I remain confused however (no worries, that's how I spent most of my life it seems :whis: ) on the demand for four reports of 8 or better:

What if say a scenario receives four reports that rate the balance as 7, and mention that let us say there is not enough turns for the other side, or that the reinforcements arrive too late.

If the scenario is then "fixed" with a simple fix of adding a few turns and / or having the said reinforcements arrive a few turns earlier, the scenario still requires another four positive test reports?

I also remain confused as how I can tell between a scenario that has passed the H2H process against a scenario that has not?

EDIT Got it: "H2H means that the scenarios is designed to be played versus human in PBEM. Neither scenario was uploaded with [BZ], which means that it made it through the H2H process."

My apologies for hijacking your thread :)

The system works in a way that the designer can make changes replacing the older version with a newer version. The filed of reports need to be cleared and that "new version" must be tested again to ensure it does make it more balanced and rated to indicate that very thing.
Also the designer can stop the testing process to not allow new testers to join in. Had I done that one of my scenarios would have passed the testing. Maybe it was good that it did not?

Remember four reports are only two games played if both players report each game rating? :chin:
I am not sure that even four players can play a game once and pronounce it as balanced. But, then again to have it be more players would make the process even more of an effort?

I knew you were not being critical. :smoke:



HSL

These are now ready for testers!

** The Spark on the Blues

11 January, 1943

Novgorod, 170km SSE of Leningrad: [Version 1.0] [H2H](Hypo-HISB)[EA or no][N V V] The Russians begin Operation Iskra, The Spark. 2nd Shock Army is tasked with gaining a bridgehead. The Spanish volunteers "Azul", those from the Spanish Blue division who remained with the German army, have been battling in this sector for quite some time. The German command knows that they can count on the Spanish. These volunteers have learned to fight as well as their German counterparts. They are tough as they come but, can they hold the line against the crush of so many Russians who desire their elimination. The "volunteers" have been shifting some assets and preparing for withdrawl to new lines when the Russians finally struck. The frantic calls of incoming tanks and Russian air attacks fill the radio net. The Spanish soon learn that this is the real thing and not a probing attack. All the "blues" wonder where this will lead.


** Baring Their Teeth

15 October, 1941

Butyrki, 90km N of Kursk:[Version 2.0][H2H][Hypo-HISB] [EA or not][N V V] Hitler's shift of Guderian's Panzer Group into the Ukraine caused a delay for Army Group Center's, and it's own participation, in the attack on Moscow. In order to shift out of the Ukraine and turn Northeast toward Moscow a small battle was fought on ground that was to be recognized almost a year and a half later. The small town of Butyrki was to be the site of this battle. At Butyrki the Russians collected some mixed forces to block roads and stall the German advance. Russian units decimated by earlier German victories, were cobbled together and reinforced by militia groups that were pressed into service to save the Motherland. No cheering here by local's who wished to be "liberated" by the marching German forces. The Russians settled in to delay and resist, using tactics that would slow down and stall all movement that could take Germans soldiers closer to Moscow. As the Germans moved through Butyrki the Russians bared their teeth. A grimace or the smile became a frightening symbol of Russian resistance.

Hope you enjoy them and find them balanced. :chin:



HSL