Scenario Testing for Ladder Points?

[Scud]

A situation erupted awhile back where a member admitted he uploaded new scenarios to the database, tested them with an opponent, took the ladder points and then removed the download from the database. One of his rationales was, why shouldn't he be able to get a few points in exchange for his work?

To avoid further problems, it was decided that he didn't break any rules, but had not behaved in the spirit of the club. Therefore, as long as he reuploaded the scenario(s) for anyone else to be played for points, all would be well.

So...

I think this needs to be discussed openly a bit by the membership. Should this become a rule and if so how does it get enforced? Should it be a "gentleman's rule" and players who break it suffer whatever "shuns" the community deems fair. Or should it be acceptable as long as the files are there for everybody? Should the player be allowed to playtest for points, remove the files and post "work in progress", the points earned considered a reward for final/tested scenarios designed and provided to the club? Should we not allow scenario designers the right to modify their scenarios, once privately tested and uploaded it's considered final?

Or was the action we took, merely having the player agree to have his files accessible by all, even if in his mind they weren't final yet, the right call?

Or is this entire matter much ado about nothing?

Please weigh in.

Thanks,
Dave

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Or was the action we took, merely having the player agree to have his files accessible by all, even if in his mind they weren't final yet, the right call?

I was not here during that time. But, I heard about it.

I believe this was the correct call, considering the current club rules.
If a member uploads a scenario that only he can gain points for, and then takes it down, what protects the integrity of the ladder?

If it is there for all to play, comment upon, and gain ladder points that seems the most fair?

The H2H process should be the only area where points are awarded for working on and testing a scenario?



HSL

[K K Rossokolski]

The H2H process should be the only area where points are awarded for working on and testing a scenario?



HSL

H2H has recently stated that testing under its auspices is not appropriate for "large: and "super large" scenarios. Fair enough.
So for example if I design a size 5, 20 turn scen, I can get benefits by putting it through the H2H system, but a size 10 day/night 75 turn scen will not get me anything, points-wise. That sounds fair, I don't think!!
How about this:
Firstly, we would need criteria for scen size. I suggest anything > size 7 and/or 30 turns is deemed large.
Designers may post these on the scen board, with the caveat that the scen is untested. Perhaps a superscript^or # could be used.
As I understand the situation at present, a designer may remove his work from the DB, or modify it.
I don't see that putting a scen FOR TESTING on the board, having it played a couple of times, maybe modify it, is any different than that. After all,anyone who plays it gets some points, not only the designer.

[Von Earlmann]

Generals,
I guess as sort of a designer I can weigh in here. I have never done the aforementioned. If a designer feels he must be rewarded for his work in this manner, I would suggest his work is not worthy. Scenario design is from the heart, it's done by people who know the scenario should be designed. I mean it's like the mountain climber who climbs the mountain because its there. No reward is asked or expected but the one that comes with the accomplishment. What is described here is a total affront to sincere designers.
I'm not sorry to disagree with the club here. Doing what was described here should be completely and totally rejected.

I'm not interested in being politcally correct....just telling it like I see it....no smilies!

VE

[Big Ivan]

I'd have to agree with HSL all the way.

What then protects the integrity of the ladder?

I see this issue a clear example of a selfish trophy hunt without the opportunity of benefiting the club.

Ivan the Big:smoke2:

[K K Rossokolski]

From the H2H FAQ:
What bonus points will I earn?
Designers are awarded 20 points per Size Modifier once their scenario is moved to the approved list.
Can we keep this discussion to practical issues rather than dabbling in moral philosophy?
Anyone, I suppose, can refuse points offered. I presume the ladder managers could accomodate such a wish. I merely point out the inequity of H2H scenarios being rewarded, whilst no formal mechanism exists for larger efforts.

[Huib Versloot]

Sometimes testgames were logged under Scenario SM*. I thought these general scenario names were created to log your game against a ladder member if the scenario was not (yet) in the depot.
To me it makes little sense to log your testgame under the original scenario name, then modify the scenario based on that same test. That would mean the first result logged is always skewed.
I prefer to log only existing finished scenarios.

[PawelM]

I see to solutions either completely scrap points awards. At the end of the day ladder is a competetive gaming, which cannot be said about scenario testing and creation. I agree with Earl on that. Instead one can ward creators and testers with something like Order of Dragon award type as a token of recognition from the club.

Or if it is decided points are sadly the only incentive for the scenario creators and testers, one can go raound that for instance the scenario file can only be deleted by club moderator. So the authr would have to request it giving the moderator sme control. If then moderator notices any games reported for the scenario they could be deleted. As the result if he scenario files are not in the database the points would be subtracted ......

I would prefer the first option, i.e. Medal awards rather than points. In my view medals are a more appropriate way of rewarding such a contribution for the community. Imagine NBA or NHL awarding points for charitable teams. Chaos.......

[Crossroads]

I quite like the idea for rather awarding medals for new scenarios Mr KK could perhaps design a H2H medal set for H2H approved scenarios, and CS mods could perhaps award other types of medals for new scenarios that have gone the extra mile outside the H2H system.

Now that this has been discussed, I do not see the need to upload any non-finished scenarios to Scenari DB?

After all, one can add the scenario that is still work-in-progress to thread that has to do with testing the particular scenario.

I would like to award any play tester ladder points via the Scenario SM mechanism. I assume finding play testers is quite difficult as is and the possibility for acquiring ladder points should remain possible?

My 0.02, anyway.

[PawelM]

I do not know how the existing system works but agree there has to be a process the scenario has to go through before it is added to DB. In addition only mods should be able to add scenario to the DB. Same with removing the scenarios. This could allow to monitor for any incidents as described by Scud.