| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas
|
A couple things:
>>
Maybe once we get a new AC we should contact the BFG Tau playtesters and form a Greater Good... I mean, a common front in getting the efforts of each community for these two great and mutually complimentary game systems recognised more widely at SG. Maybe we can also spark the interest of any Tau BFGers who like Epic to help out here and vice versa, I'd like to think I wasn't the only one interested in both incarnations of the Empire!
<<
Sorry if I'm a little late on this one, I hadn't been monitoring this thread. So...where is the Tau BFG community? Is it on these boards? I looked around about a week ago and didn't see anything that really stood out to me.
>>
Tau Champion
<<
I have thrown my hat into this ring as well. I know that you have only seen me for a little while, but I had been monitoring discussions since the beginning, but work and hardware issues prevented me from participating...well, work kept me from doing a lot of stuff, but that's another issue... 
Lest you get overly concerned or perhaps to assure you that I have some idea of how to do this, I was the Warmaster Kislev champion when we took the list from "trial" to "production".
My style is to facilitate discussion both up and down the line, strive to get to a consensus (or as near to that as possible), and take incremental steps until we arrive at "our" solution.
Now when I say "our", I do mean that. However, I also have my own opinions and it would be my job to use the set conditions (i.e. SG framework, and don't underestimate those) and get us where we need to be.
If I was given a chance to lead this effort, I'd want to do something like:
1. Identify the friction points. Now some of that work has already started because the community has opened up threads on things that annoy them and are discussing. That is a good thing as it means that we are a step ahead.
However, we also need to realize that we're not going to go back and re-do the entire list again. I feel that the list is close, but that it needs some tweaking, so we've work to do.
2. Incremental changes. That means that you don't change everything all at once. If all the variables change simultaneously, then there isn't a way to measure the change. That would mean some changes might not arrive for a bit. That's Ok as once we "fix" something, then we can lock it down.
3. Schedule. We'll need one and I'd lay one down and be the task master. That would require a focused effort on everyone's part. Here in Houston, we are re-starting an Epic group (meaning people who have played the other versions before), composed of some of the best players in the area. That would be one focus group, but we'd need more.
That means that we would start using game observations and results vs. opinions like "I think seekers are broke". Also, everyone would have the ability to contribute, however, a greater weight (for the Greater Good ? ) would be given towards those who play. That's the only way we can make this work.
So, a lot of words and I haven't the slightest idea if I'll get picked, but that is the kind of "development" shop I would run.
Cheers,
_________________
Honda
"Remember Taros? We do"
- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
|
|
?Yes, it would be nice to have Jervis' official stamp of approval, but NetEpic has proven that there are enough talented minds here to continue the development of E:A.
