| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas
|
|
I think they should none the less respond to people opinions on what does or doesn't work
in the list.
Ok, let's remember what we all agreed upon at the beginning of the exercise. Opinions and feeling
are "out" and observations based on playtesting are "in".
Honda has mentioned multiple times about posting playtest/battle reports, but I don't believe
I've seen a single one from him since he became sub-Champion and that doesn't reassure us huddled masses
at all.  To just seem to ignore the forum seems unacceptable to me.
Yep, that's true. I stated in an earlier post when you brought this up that I was entering the "busy"
season at work, and it was, and now it has subsided for a bit. I also took my family on vacation. I should also mention that I get to
game around 2-3 times a month and our group has been interested in playing other things (40K & BFG at this time). The one person that
I am sure I can get games with has been... working. That's just the way it goes sometimes.
Also, I don't expect non-Americans to be well versed in what is happening to our economy, but now that we've
seen what "Hope and Change" really means, don't be surprised if you find a lot of us here in the
Colonies having to spend more of our leisure time focusing on bigger things.
But since there has been little playtesting lately, ACs should try to get things moving by not
posting batreps or comments to anything doesn't help.
The whole purpose of working this exercise as a community is so that it doesn't rest on the shoulders
of any one person. If you are depending on the AC's to motivate you to play, then you may not be in the
right place. Not trying to be harsh, but everything involved with this hobby is voluntary. You choose
what you want to do.
Things can be balanced and still *wrong*, and playtesting won't reveal that at all; that's the
point of discussing things.
Well, "wrong" is a subjective concept and wrong is really defined by the list champion. That's why
there is a single point of contact to drive these issues otherwise you get what we had before which
is a list that went through more changes than a ball bearing in a pinball game.
I don't disagree that "things" can be balanced, but not consistent or some other descriptor.
I don't see a pressing need for an update to the Tau list, unless there is some other deadline
approaching (ERC army book project?) that requires ajustments sooner rather than later.
Agreed. The outline for the exercise was laid out at the beginning and for a reason. I knew that you guys
would get impatient. Debating is a lot easier than playing. The list isn't perfect. It wasn't going
to be on the first cut. There are weaknesses in the list that don't fit fluff (e.g. Barracuda's currently
being wimpy). I stated multiple times that the list was going to side towards "weak" and that we'd tune
things up a bit to get us where we really want to be. I said that some of you wouldn't be happy with
some of the changes.
So far, I'm batting 100% ÂÂ
I'm wondering if the ambivalence to Tau is a direct consequence of the news from Forge world?
I'm sure that has affected some people's attitude toward the game. I've been playing EA in all of its versions throughout it's history, so I've seen it go through ups and downs in interest and
support. It goes through cycles like no other game system GW has. So part of being involved in Epic
is being able to endure. Some will, some won't.
However, at our current stage, you will find that the rules still work, despite the level of corporate support.
If points have been raised and can be addressed, and no one wants to keep playtesting the same
things that have already been brought up, what would be the benefit of letting the list sit fallow for
more than a month?
The decision to let the list sit fallow is a personal one. As stated above, the schedule was laid out
in advance, so there shouldn't be any surprises about where we are.
The schedule isn't set in stone, playtesting has dropped off, and players are feeling the absence
of communication as an absence of interest and that worries them; what harm comes from moving up the next
release so people can start playing *that* version?  If the Champs are addressing/correcting these issues
already, waiting does nothing
i wont go into particulars cuz no one wants to discuss it till Aug!!!
Again, the schedule is what it is. I allowed enough time in the schedule so that everyone could participate,
that if people wanted to take a break they could and still come back and be a part of the exercise. In some ways, it is a more relaxed approach than some methods of development. The challenge with trying to grind out development in a short period of time is that it is easier to miss something significant. It was my observation from previous efforts that the lack of reflection on observations resulted in the list becoming destabilized.
Also, "findings and/or observations" should be discussed. The more you share the more everyone will learn, attempt
to duplicate, and verify whether or not one person's perspective is what is steering the results.
As far as placing requirements on AC's, careful what you ask for. You could end up with only two guys who meet all the requirements. Always keep in mind the Law of Unintended Consequences.
They have been given a break... Honda hasn't posted, anything or anywhere on these forums,
since May 22, yet his last logon was at the start of July... that's almost two months of no communication
from the person who was taking the "lead" on continued development of the Tau; No comments at all in any of
the subsequent playtests?  No follow-ups or reports on any of the playtesting he said he was going to do? ÂÂ
Not even, "Sorry, been really busy."?
First off, I already have one boss who tells me when I can take a vacation and for how long. Without knowing all the
things that are going on in a person's life, it would be difficult to make a decision like the above.
As far as comments goes vs. logons, perhaps it was lax of me to not say anything. Judging by how quiet the boards
had been, I made assumptions (time off for summer, FW, etc.). So, I wasn't intentionally snubbing the list, but
often times all I had time to do was take a quick peek.
I'm sorry, but that kind of lack of presence doesn't engender confidence in the lower ranks nor does it
inspire people to playtest when if *appears*, and I only say appears, their efforts are ignored.
Rather than say "ignored" I would say, "filed for later". It probably looks the same to you as ignored, but
I did post in a few battle reports that I was filing observations for later. Also, I got some interesting
comments from a newer poster that I saved so that I could refer back to them.
If you don't have the time to interact as an Army Champion, then you may need to pass the mantle on.  If
you *do* have the time to be an Army Champion, even if you're doing it all off-board (which is actually
against the ethos of the NetEA Project), then at least let people know that's what you're doing.
Well, I hate to deflate any conspiracy theories out there, but I haven't been selling out the Poles or the
Israelites while you guys were safely playing games. There have been no outside communications on the list. I have been very open about what I was doing, even if that meant using "out of the box" solutions. The testing phase was and is an open exercise for all to see.
So The Tau v5.1 has been out for almost four months, surely there's something to comment about in all
that time.
There are a few things, but again, they are just a few observations and the correct time for working on those
items is when we get closer to cataloging the observations.
Wow, an angry debate and I'm not involved? I feel unloved - Zombocom
I'm sorry, this made me laugh so hard I almost sprayed my monitor with fluid via my nose. Thank you very much
for that. 
_________________
Honda
"Remember Taros? We do"
- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
|
|
Though I hope they did an attempt at the OGBM!