|
Post by charlzheimer on Oct 12, 2019 8:29:17 GMT
you will always need SOME form of playtesting. no developer is good enough to See certain combinations coming simply because they didn't think of it. nobody starts a game gooing like "if i can kill 1/3th of my army and succeed on these 2 distance rolls i have a turn 1 kill" but hey HR on mk3 launch was a thing.
|
|
cain
Junior Strategist
Posts: 243
|
Post by cain on Oct 12, 2019 12:26:48 GMT
I think the article is spot on. CID should be axed. But the article also takes up other interesting stuff like the realase schedule. One thing i really liked going from GW games to PP, was the yearly release books for all factions over the codex version.
Sadly i think PP is downscaling heavy on the resources used on warmahordes. The new warcaster game, riotquest and monster apocalyse is where the future is.
It seems clear that PP doesnt have the resources to do heavy play testing in-house. Which is understandable. I would prefere a closed extarnal play testing group as much better than the open CID. Under heavy NDAs. This are used in other games like xwing. And combined with a more liberal will by PP to do a fast dynamic update If they didnt hit the mark.
|
|
seul
Demo Gamer
Posts: 15
|
Post by seul on Oct 12, 2019 23:54:57 GMT
The next person who posts saying they are slowing down Warmachine/Hordes should put in the work. Show how many releases by month/quarter/year/etc and how it has slowed down. This should be easy to show if it is really happening.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Oct 13, 2019 0:32:14 GMT
To be fair, if Riot Quest models weren't being made WMH compatible, then WMH work would have slowed down in favor of Riot Quest and Monsterpocalypse. They haven't stopped, as we see Illuminate and Infernal models coming in, but they aren't coming in nearly as quickly because of Riot Quest's recent release (of which, I'm not complaining, as diversity is strength in business).
|
|
seul
Demo Gamer
Posts: 15
|
Post by seul on Oct 13, 2019 0:38:30 GMT
I think being fair would be counting the models that are coming out that can be played in WMH. This includes models that can also be used in Riot Quest. You don't think those count as producing WMH models?
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Oct 13, 2019 1:46:36 GMT
I think being fair would be counting the models that are coming out that can be played in WMH. This includes models that can also be used in Riot Quest. You don't think those count as producing WMH models? They are not originally produced for WMH. And as I said, IF they weren't receiving rules for WMH, it would be considered a slow down.
|
|
|
Post by gedditoffme on Oct 13, 2019 2:05:06 GMT
I think being fair would be counting the models that are coming out that can be played in WMH. This includes models that can also be used in Riot Quest. You don't think those count as producing WMH models? They are not originally produced for WMH. And as I said, IF they weren't receiving rules for WMH, it would be considered a slow down. But that “if” turns it from a non-release into a wmh release. They definitely are releases, and at least half will be viable models for their factions
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Oct 13, 2019 2:39:49 GMT
They are not originally produced for WMH. And as I said, IF they weren't receiving rules for WMH, it would be considered a slow down. But that “if” turns it from a non-release into a wmh release. They definitely are releases, and at least half will be viable models for their factions
Quite the opposite, actually. That "if" turns it from a wmh release to non-release when true.
Why is it people have such a difficulty with how "if" statements operate?
|
|
|
Post by anoddman on Oct 13, 2019 3:38:14 GMT
I think being fair would be counting the models that are coming out that can be played in WMH. This includes models that can also be used in Riot Quest. You don't think those count as producing WMH models? They are not originally produced for WMH. And as I said, IF they weren't receiving rules for WMH, it would be considered a slow down. I don't know that that's an accurate claim to make. They're produced simultaneously with Riot Quest rules, and the existence of Riot Quest is I think in large part due to this dual design. They didn't nail the small model-count, fun skirmish game with Company of Iron, but they couldn't justify putting an entirely incompatible ruleset on the market. Hence, crossplay. The way you have it worded, the WMH rulesseem to come second to the Riot Quest rules, and I really don't think that's the case. Boomhowler2, for example, has been pretty game-changing for Trolls and was even pushed by PP as a defining addition to the Oblivion Remix of Kriel Company. All semantics, of course, but still an important distinction.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Oct 13, 2019 4:01:30 GMT
They are not originally produced for WMH. And as I said, IF they weren't receiving rules for WMH, it would be considered a slow down. I don't know that that's an accurate claim to make. They're produced simultaneously with Riot Quest rules, and the existence of Riot Quest is I think in large part due to this dual design. They didn't nail the small model-count, fun skirmish game with Company of Iron, but they couldn't justify putting an entirely incompatible ruleset on the market. Hence, crossplay. The way you have it worded, the WMH rulesseem to come second to the Riot Quest rules, and I really don't think that's the case. Boomhowler2, for example, has been pretty game-changing for Trolls and was even pushed by PP as a defining addition to the Oblivion Remix of Kriel Company. All semantics, of course, but still an important distinction.
Semantics is the study of meaning in language and its permutations.
Consider the fact that they are being sold as Riot Quest models, period, and then the rules are just added. Even in their blisters they are Riot Quest models, and not a hint of WMH when you first look at them. Their model design is also slightly more heroic than the normal solo models in WMH as well. Technically, unless their is some rift we don't know about, they wouldn't even technically be in WMH as part of the story lines (but then, neither would any Cryx Goreshade, and all the normal models with an Epic or more line).
But as I said, it would only be a serious problem of WMH releases IF they WEREN'T being included in WMH with rules for them.
|
|
|
Post by dogganmguest on Oct 13, 2019 4:19:13 GMT
I could reduce CID toxicity by about 80% with permanent bans of about 8 individuals on the CID forums. It's always good to see this attitude posted. Because every CID participant believes something like this. They all just have a different list of bad apples (I'm going to bet on "people who regularly disagree with me" for the vast majority of those lists). Michael would be on a number of those lists himself. CID brings out the worst in people, when it comes to declaring themselves the arbiter of all that's balanced, and everyone else an idiot who doesn't know how to play. I won't cry if it dies.
|
|
|
Post by anoddman on Oct 13, 2019 4:30:18 GMT
I don't know that that's an accurate claim to make. They're produced simultaneously with Riot Quest rules, and the existence of Riot Quest is I think in large part due to this dual design. They didn't nail the small model-count, fun skirmish game with Company of Iron, but they couldn't justify putting an entirely incompatible ruleset on the market. Hence, crossplay. The way you have it worded, the WMH rulesseem to come second to the Riot Quest rules, and I really don't think that's the case. Boomhowler2, for example, has been pretty game-changing for Trolls and was even pushed by PP as a defining addition to the Oblivion Remix of Kriel Company. All semantics, of course, but still an important distinction.
Semantics is the study of meaning in language and its permutations.
Consider the fact that they are being sold as Riot Quest models, period, and then the rules are just added. Even in their blisters they are Riot Quest models, and not a hint of WMH when you first look at them. Their model design is also slightly more heroic than the normal solo models in WMH as well. Technically, unless their is some rift we don't know about, they wouldn't even technically be in WMH as part of the story lines (but then, neither would any Cryx Goreshade, and all the normal models with an Epic or more line).
But as I said, it would only be a serious problem of WMH releases IF they WEREN'T being included in WMH with rules for them.
Oh don't be condescending. I was specifically taking umbrage with your use of the word "originally." Pedantically quibbling over word choice is semantics. Agree to disagree, I guess. But it seems very silly to point out that the models are specifically designed for Riot Quest as a near-example of slowdowns when the game as a whole very likely couldn't exist without Warmachine crossplay. Yes, they're packaged as Riot Quest models, but attempting to create a light, arena-style game that can cross into the board-gaming community does not at all gel with unpainted, unassembled models. That's entirely because they were designed to be cross-compatible from the get-go.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Oct 13, 2019 4:56:27 GMT
Oh don't be condescending. I was specifically taking umbrage with your use of the word "originally." Pedantically quibbling over word choice is semantics. Agree to disagree, I guess. But it seems very silly to point out that the models are specifically designed for Riot Quest as a near-example of slowdowns when the game as a whole very likely couldn't exist without Warmachine crossplay. Yes, they're packaged as Riot Quest models, but attempting to create a light, arena-style game that can cross into the board-gaming community does not at all gel with unpainted, unassembled models. That's entirely because they were designed to be cross-compatible from the get-go. Who is being condescending? You assume much. I was explaining that semantics is the study of the meaning of language, which it is. It is not about the quibbling about word choice. Ask Merriam-Webster and Oxford and they will clear it up for you.
More importantly, YOU are the one quibbling about what I DIDN'T say, by implying that I actually did say it. Please actually read what I have stated three times now.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Oct 13, 2019 8:11:33 GMT
I can't say what went wrong with CiD. When I first heard of the idea, I was delighted. My previous wargames were GW ones and in both cases (WFB and WH40K) community created rules which made the games much better (note, GW balance and rules were much worse than WM&H too).
Since I remember there existed community balancing patches or composition systems of various kinds created to improve the competitive experience with GW games and the really popular ones clearly showed that veteran players have much better understanding of the game than the devs.
National balancing patches for Warhammer Fantasy (especially broken 7th ed) made it possible for the original WH European Team Championships (which inspired WM&H WTC) to exist. Swedish Comp Score for 40k not only was used world wide for tournament scenes but also saved my 6th ed casual home group from being overwhelmed by pay to win cheese and resulted in its golden age. Fan made 9th Age is better balanced than Warhammer Fantasy has ever been.
Maybe it was the open nature of CiD which attracted not only people interested in creating a balanced game but also sorry individuals whose only aim was to make the things they play better. But on the other hand on WM&H community there's this strange fear of grassroots initiative when it comes to rules but I am sure if respected experienced players/TOs weren't afraid of experimenting with formats which improve balace and player base wasn't reluctant to take part, one of those options could prove good enough to be widely accepted and make the game better as a result (like the ETC balancing patches for WFB or Swedish comp for 40K)
|
|
Miafan
Junior Strategist
Eater of Brains
Posts: 130
|
Post by Miafan on Oct 13, 2019 10:03:58 GMT
I can't say what went wrong with CiD. ... Maybe it was the open nature of CiD which attracted not only people interested in creating a balanced game but also sorry individuals whose only aim was to make the things they play better.
IMHO you have answered your own question. From my point of view, those "apostles of true balance", who wanted utopia for everyone only ever existed at forum discussions and home games. But in reality, when push came to shove, the only people who really were into it happened to be those who would defend their broken stuff/try to denigrate stuff in faction they have troubles with with zealous conviction and foam at their mouths. People who openly and proudly admitted at numerous FB discussions, that they participated in CIDs of factions they do not play only to try and muck it up as much as they can. People do not want equal rights in a highly competitive environment, they want to WIN. Thats a said truth of life, no matter how many beautiful words wasted on wonders of "fair play". CIDs became battlefields as much as actual tabletop ones. You know, in 2013-2015, when there were a super stong animosity betwen our Warhammer (both FB and 40k) community and PP community (mostly because scores of people said "SCREW GW!" and embraced alternative systems, primarily WMH), Warhammerists had a motto "your Warmachine is sh*t not because of the system, but because of how people play it". Back then, we laughed and flipped them off, because stagnant elitist jerks they were. Now it seems, those words were kinda prophetic.
|
|