My thoughts on the H2H and CS.

[medlinke]

Well it sounds like there might be a better way to handle H2H then based on what I'm seeing.

Incentivize the Process for players:

1. Provide another factor complexity factor point for playtesting. So if your size modifier for the scenario is 3 it becomes 4 when playtesting.

2. Provide playtesters another 50 points for writing a review of the scenario to drive the feedback that designers want.

So...

A draw on a 3 size modifier scenario would give players 24 points (6 * (3+1)) = 24 Then if each player wrote a review they'd end up with 74 points for single playthrough.

3. Allow H2H playtests to count as played games. They are after all supporting the club. The club has officially supported the H2H scenario by posting it for play. Just because it's not on the official roster shouldn't detract that folks spent scarce gaming time helping make TheBlitz better.

Incentivize the process for designers:

1. Appropriately promote the new scenario. If people don't seem to be biting maybe add some other kind of incentive to get people to play it.

2. Lower the barrier to for approval as Smedly noted from 4 reviews of 8 to 4 reviews of 7. Looking through the most played scenarios I don't see that many with 8s and above. It seems pretty unrealistic to assume that every follow-on is going to achieve that highly. This may also encourage first time H2H participants.

3. Any H2H that gets included in a tournament automatically gives the designer a 100 point bonus and a new badge for designers with scenarios that make it into a tournament.

It just makes sense that if you don't see the participation you're expecting a change needs to be made based upon player feedback. Hopefully folks will continue to contribute constructive ideas about how to appropriately incentivize the whole process and this makes it into policy here.