Breaking out of the Box

[Big Ivan]

I just played a scenario that was specifically re-designed by Huib to be more suitable for play between human opponents, but that had only four previous plays. I took a chance on and selected a scenario with fewer plays and I found it to be challenging, fun and relatively well-balanced during a game with an evenly matched human opponent.

I want to encourage others to take chances, "get out of the box" of playing only those scenarios that have hundreds of recorded games, and record their experiences so we can start to build up a base of knowledge of which scenarios are particularly good for play between human opponents.

I like playing scenarios no one has played, but fair warning. "Oldbones" and I tried one awhile back that was horrible. A complete waste of time.

It's too bad some of our designers don't take advantage of the CS H2H section to test their scenarios. It's difficult, though, since they have to actively advertise and push for play testers. Play testers receive ladder bonus points as a reward, but the standards are still high for the "H2H Tested" distinction and a lot of designers give up and just add their designs into the database, flaws and all.

Designers interested in H2H testing can learn about it here: https://www.theblitz.club/h2h-productions/b-8.htm

and here:  https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards...php?fid=58 

Dave

I love the concept of the H2H section. But my previous experience suggests that it didn't work very well in reality. Testers would agree to play scenarios and then would disappear or wouldn't finish games. That's why I went ahead and added my scenarios ** Find A Way Through and ** Black Eagle and Barbary Lion to the database without going through the CS H2H process.

I agree, we need to rethink/ re-make/ redo or come up with something for testing new scenarios going forward above what is in H2H. The new generation of CS is coming on line and young and old designers need to be ready for it. Thanks Schwerpunkt75!