(01-13-2012, 06:49 AM)Hobbes Wrote: For the scenarios I have made for CS and the AGEOD WiA games I spend far longer testing than creating the scenario. Maybe a H2H process is the way to go in order to get more scenarios out there. I just find it very difficult to release scenarios until I am very happy with the balance and playability - with AGEOD games there is the added problem of finding script bugs.
Also the method of rating scenarios here is a great way of understanding how balanced a scenario is for PBEM - although I doubt many designers ever go back to rebalance a scenario if the ratings show it to be too one sided. Anyone ever do that?
Cheers, Chris
I agree Chris! I think it is a rare occurrence for a scenario to be balanced in a first round of testing... regardless if the scenario is taken through the H2H process or not.
My Rising Sun
"Sorrow on Saipan" scenario, that is currently under development in the H2H Section, is a good example of the difficulty of achieving balance. Here is a relatively small battle (Complexity 4), but after a dozen test games (counting both the games prior to uploading it into H2H + H2H testing)... two revisions... the Japanese are still over classed by the American Marines... and suffer a Minor to Major Defeat in each game! Balance can be a difficult benchmark to reach... but necessary (in most cases) if developers want their creations to be played in ladder competition.
It would be interesting to know if developers go through any "re-balance" exercises
after their scenarios have been uploaded into the db and balance issues arise after repeated play?
Regards, Mike / "A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week." - George S. Patton /
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}
