(01-13-2012, 10:04 AM)K K Rossokolski Wrote: That said, it is clear that new management is working hard to get H2H right, and I congratulate Mike for what he has achieved. The major problem, perhaps insoluble, is testing of big and long scens. One of the great advances for our old game is the effect of increasing computer power..once a BN/Bde size game, we can now do Army groups. And some huge maps..... I am slowly working on a Gazala map with 320000 hexes to fill. About 140k to go.
How does one test such a game when (if?) it's finished?
Thank you Rod for your words of encouragement! :)
I agree with you that the testing of both large... and "super" large scenarios... are not appropriate for the H2H Section. The H2H Section has a finite number of testing slots (currently expanded to 15 to accommodate Korean Mod scenarios)... but to occupy slots with designs that may well take over a year to test... limits the available space for other developers who wish to take their creations through these doors.
So... for both large and "super" large (e.g. Army group) scenarios... any testing needs to be done "off line" with the developer utilizing a small and dedicated play tester group... who fully understand the time commitment and effort required... to move these "mega" creations forward.
One suggestion... you could leverage the criteria utilized within the H2H reports.... balance, enjoyment, briefing, victory conditions, etc... to create your own "scoring sheets" that could be used to evaluate the scenarios? It would be more of a "manual" process than the H2H Report submissions... but you could capture test player feedback and comments?
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}
