Jump to content
Sniddy

What DOES 2017 hold

Recommended Posts

Fluff books have been talked about for awhile, but thigns seemed to get in the way.  It woudl be nice just tog et a little bit more to sink our teeth into.  The Alliance of Kurak adn Zenian League books did have far more information than we'd ever had previously, and gave us a more comprehensive look at the history of the setting.  We're still light on that front, but we're in a lot better shape than we were!  

 

So Ic an echo the call, more fluff would be great to push the setting forward, make it better rounded and easier to immerse in.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have preferred they kept the recruitment thread unlocked or started another thread so people could ask questions and get clarification on things. 

Without clarification I think their requirement of 1 game a week is unreasonable when you factor in that they are after volunteers sacrificing their own time. In addition they more than likely needing to make arrangements with another person thus having two schedules that need lining up. I understand the the spirit of it, they want people that will contribute and be productive, but as written I don't think they will retain volunteers.

1: Life happens, people are going to miss a week here and there of getting a game in. Does this equate to instant removal from the group?

2: Relating to the above, if you know your schedule is going to prevent a game in a week can you "bank" a game by playing 3 in one week and then missing the next week?

3: Finding someone else to play and fall under NDA doesn't always happen, failing that do self games count?

4: Pictures, I understand the intent, proof of actual gameplay. But what level of detail are you after, taking pictures can significantly slow down a game if they need to be recorded for individual actions/activations. If it's just something like start and end or turns that's not so bad, but taking, collating and sorting pictures is a time consuming process that can significantly extend time spent on something.

5: How do you define a game? There can be great value in simply throwing down a couple of models/squads and going at it, then resetting and changing one of the forces. That sort of style can be very good at quickly establishing roles/strengths/weaknesses of ships in testing. Another style of test is to respawn ships/squads as they're destroyed and keep cycling them on essentially creating an endless battle, this can be very good at putting a new ship through a variety of board conditions in rapid succession because you can keep cycling it back on and try different tactics/positions without doing a total (and time consuming) reset of the game as a whole. Do the above "count" as a game? They aren't a traditional game but I can say with confidence they have a place when it comes to playing ships undergoing testing. Also I hope I explained that last point well enough, by no means is the above the norm, but it has value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Meatshield to answer your questions:

1. Things do happen. I'ts polite to let the group know but you shouldn't be penalised for missing a week.

2. People did do something similar, I'd take the 1 game a week as a minimum average. I tend to play 2 games a week, most weeks, but payday weekend was spent "out".

3. You don't have to disclose any information to a potential opponent other than "I'd like to play a test game, here are your new stats" and make sure you collect the orbat back from them at the end of the session.

4. We had 2 approaches to this: play a standard game proxying units required which gives an overview of how the helix perfoms as a whole. or play a small game with just the minimum core and the test helicies which shows the balance of a unit. But in both instances I would reccomend playing an actual game rather than theory-hammer...

Your beta leader (Spartan Mike) should be able to define his parameters for testing should you be chosen for the beta. 

Hope that helps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a few problems with the way the Beta Test Group Applications are being handled as well -

1: One game a week, for anyone without the luxury of an FSA-heavy local gaming group (and I'm only aware of two such groups in the whole of the UK, neither of which is anywhere near me), is a complete impossibility due to how sparsely-played the game has become. I, for example, haven't been able to find a game (outside of tournaments) in well over a year, and not for lack of trying.

2. Asking for a game a week, complete with battle reports and pictures, is a pretty huge demand on people's time - assuming a (UK) tournament-standard 2.5 hours of actual playing, you've then got to produce notes and images as you go for the report - that's realistically going to be 6 hours a week, plus however much time gets put into list-planning, explaining new stats or MARs to your opponent (assuming they're not in the BTG), and discussing stuff on the forums.

3. You don't necessarily need to playtest something to be able to determine how it's going to play (roughly). I've made plenty of judgement calls on paper stats and it's uncommon for me to be particularly wide of the mark, and I know half a dozen other people on here that are at least as good at doing the same thing. You'll lose a lot of experienced players who know the game and can therefore accurately predict how things will work, but who don't have the time to contribute to that extent every week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm torn on this particular subject.

I believe this style of BETA group is just here to feedback on how ships perform in game (theory crafting is fine, we all do it, and some of us are fairly decent at it too but it's not regular game play where situations arise that generally don't in self-play/theory craft) and not actually anything to do with creation of ships any more (like the FFG was). So from that perspective I think it's fine to have some minimum requirements for BETA testing. Other games do it very similar, and I know Hawk beta tested DFC over one weekend with 30 people playing constantly. Obviously I don't think this will ever happen with Spartan but we can dream.

On the flip side we have some good gamers who are fairly good at theory crafting and this may exclude them. However starting with a fresh group could be beneficial, especially if they are gaming often, regardless of skill level. New ideas, new personalities etc.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dreadbeard started a thread to ask questions. 

 

 The main thing we're looking for is people that have the time to dedicate to testing. Theory crafting is all well and good but I'm looking for actual hard data and I'm looking for people to play games to test out the rules as it is and then we can adjust them based on the feedback. 

 

We are going to be open to suggestions and constructive feedback but I don't want theory crafting to get out of hand and for people to lose focus when we need to be testing things that  have already been built  in the Alpha phase. 

 Doing a large volume of games will reveal trends and interactions that may happen . If we see something that isn't consistently working then we need to adjust it or change it out right so that it does jive at all point levels. 

I want to be completely transparent and upfront of what I expect from people in the beta group. 

 

So if you have questions concerns or what not please go post them over in the Betaquestion and answer thread and we will do our best to answer your questions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.