I'd ask the ERC and ACs (both past and present) to let this run for awhile before throwing their own ideas in. Let's say until Friday.

What do people see as the responsibilities of the Army Champions?

Specifically, I'm after things the ACs should be doing (what, where, how often, with who, etc). In other words, something the community, ACs and NetERC can use to evaluate whether or not the AC is doing a good job or not.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

TESTING.

and more testing.

and sometimes listening, and knowing when to give up on a pet idea.

but mostly testing.

Can you be more specific? What kind, how much, etc.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

What kind? The right kind.

How much? enough.

If you're comparing two units with similar roles and similar natures, then a bit of math might be in order to assess design choices objectively.

EG, for my Stygian fanlist, the next thing for me to do will probably try and measure the damage output of a round of shooting at different targets for the different options. If anything sticks out as glaringly unbalanced, then I'll have to fix it.

If you're comparing two units that are completely dissimilar then perhaps trying two small lists vs each other might be helpful.

As always fielding your army against orks, marines, eldar and titans will be a good way to get a 'feel' for how robust the list is.

Once a list is reasonably stable its much easier to target these specific problem areas.

Testing. Responsible, fairly impartial guidance for the army lists under their remit. Regular presence and participation in discussions regarding those lists. Clear explanations for the decisions they make, especially when the community disagrees.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

well. the Army Champion as title (ie: folks in blue, who are infact, Faction Champions) should maintain an interest in the other armies in their care. they should provide guidance, but not dictate, regarding the decisions made by the 'lesser' champions in their care.
in i believe virtually every case, the Army Champion has a relatively stable (eg: approved or high end developmental) army list as their main remit. they're entitled (and infact, should) continue to find ways for the list to evolve. continue to tweak things.

they should not, under any circumstances, make decisions about lists not under their direct care. their role should be advisory in nature.
they should be willing to attempt to playtest any/all the lists within their faction, to an extent (not to say that they should do the work of the list developer for them, but they should be willing to back their advice up with actual experience) especially as they approach the later stages of "developmental"
they should probably be willing to attempt the stress tests of said lists

they should consult with the ERC in regards to elevation of lists within their remit.


as to list developers themselves (of which the "Army Champions" are no doubt aswell)
as has been said. their job is to test and develop the list. they should be able to back up their decisions with reasons and in most cases, playtests how they go about testing, is on an individual basis really, and up to them

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

This is a modified version of something I posted in the Army Champion's lounge, before I stepped down as Mechanicus Champion and became a lesser mortal:

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

- Test and collect input from other testers for the armies he is responsible for.

- Ensure that the lists he is responsible for are balanced, both internally and externally, but precedence given to external balance.

- Work towards getting lists Approved.

- For main AC, oversee the various sub-ACs to see if they are working on the list actively and that they aren't making too exotic decisions (e.g. Zombo and the new Necron lists). AC doesn't need to veto anything, but it should be his decision wether a given list is a NetEA variant or a fanlist.

- Be active. If he is not active, take responsibility for finding a replacement, or at least notify the ERC that a replacement is needed.

- Don't solve problems that aren't there. Lists don't have to 'evolve' - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

To E&C's point. I think 1 year is too short a time

In regards to the topic:
- an AC (incl sub) should actually reply to posts in a timely manner

- an AC (incl sub) should actually reply to posts in a civil manner and not take offence

- an AC (incl sub) should actually look to progress the list. If there is nothing to progress then it should be approved.
--> If it is not Approved and not placed forward as such, they are not doing their job

- an AC (incl sub) should be active on the lists (does not need to post in threads but should have a consistent overview to catch any questions they can take ownership of)

Also usually an AC cannot be found and so you get the best that you can. As an example, this happened with the Death Guard. I took it on because there was no-one else. Look how long it took to get a AMTL AC and still there is no-one for the squats. So in reality, sometimes you have to allow a little lenience (refer to E&C's post) regarding the position. If there are eligible people requesting to do it, then the 'black and white' view is fine. Other times (such as with a few of the current lists), we are just happy to have someone managing it.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

i'd like to add that i despise the "fanlist" label (or atleast, how unevenly applied it is)
every single list we have is a fan list. no list has survived untouched from the published GW days. none of us work for GW, we are all "fans"
creating a false "second class" list is a bad thing. approved vs developmental vs experimental is enough already.

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

Well, you do need some sort of label for lists that get written by people who have no intention of ever testing them personally, and that noone else has any interest in either.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

If the NetEA project is to have any legitimacy at all, it needs to have some guidelines for armies and lists, like using the same stats and most of the special rules as other lists of the same faction. Not everybody wants to comply with that, so they should be called something different, or be deleted from the board.

Uhmm i think this is a misinterpretation.
I usually label a new list as "fanlist" to show that it is just below Experimental. Just to look how many peaople areinterested in this kind of list and then lobbing in ideas until a V1.0 is created (a playable list) until then i would see it as Experimental.
For instance the Red Corsairs started as "Fanlist".

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

as far as i'm concerned, they should just be stuck in "experimental" until such time as they follow the basic naming conventions and support the list themselves (as covered in my "how the various stages should work" post)

fanlist as it is currently used most often is a perjorative term and should be scrapped altogether, or applied universally (preferably scrapped)

just because a list doesnt comply with the rules you've decided to play by doesnt mean it should be deleted from the boards, cast out, or even forced to wear a scarlet letter. as has been said before, there is an element of darwinianism to list development. there is no added need to attempt to force certain lists to advertise their "sub-list" status
it's certainly not the ACs place to make declarations that theirs is the One True List (and thou shall have no other lists but me)
people should be able to create a list, and quite possibly get it to "approved" status without the support of the AC if need be.

as to blacklegions method of creation. i still think that the "experimental" stage covers "highly experimental/untested/spitballing" phases. my tanith list was released with less testing than i normally require of a list before letting it into the wild, but i would still consider it an experimental list at worse (likewise, i've made no efforts whatsoever to expand or develop it in the last month or two, except some apparently aborted attempts to source a model-set for them, and dont intend to do so for ateast another month or more. they're not abandoned, but they're not actively being developed beyond their current state either. that doesnt make them less than experimental either.)

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

No, they shouldn't. If NetEA is to mean anything, then it has to have some requirements, and those should be upheld by the AC. If the NetERC feels that an AC is doing a poor job or suppressing lists they can overrule/replace him, but otherwise it's actually his job to oversee the lists in his faction.

Books need editors, army lists needs them too.