About H2H Section

[Mr Grumpy]

I think the point at issue here is a VERY fundamental one....what is "balance". Seems to me we have been arguing about that since the year dot

Yes i agree that balance can mean a different thing to different players, but to my mind it is producing a scenario that two players of equal ability each have a chance of victory at the start and the result will be down to who plays the best and maybe who gets the lucky breaks.

Because of the ability/luck variables, perfect balance is almost impossible to achieve, but the H2H section is there to try to do the best job it can.

Personally i have never known a Panzer Campaign scenario to come through the testing system worse than when it started, so they all are improved, but by variable amounts.

[Glint]

Just release them, people will tell how they feel about them. (Keif149)

My sentiments exactly, Dan.
The site needs new scenarios for Matrix, get 'em in and players can decide for themselves whether it was ok or not?
Glint

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Just release them, people will tell how they feel about them. (Keif149)

My sentiments exactly, Dan.
The site needs new scenarios for Matrix, get 'em in and players can decide for themselves whether it was ok or not?
Glint

That was where I was leaning. Good points to both! :)

The H2H area made the designer and testers jump through hoops before receiving a "seal of approval" that never ensured anyone was going to play them anyway.

Foul wrote: "Yes i agree that balance can mean a different thing to different players, but to my mind it is producing a scenario that two players of equal ability each have a chance of victory at the start and the result will be down to who plays the best and maybe who gets the lucky breaks."

Spot on for both points Foul. That is why I think letting players determine over time what is balanced and what is not, should be the way to go. There is too limited a "field" of players in the H2H process to actually get a good sample result.
I've often played my designs against opponents to test them. When we play through the first game they tell me "my side" was way too strong. Then we play the same scenario from different sides and I often hear that "my former side" was way too weak. It is at that point that I think my scenarios are almost "balanced".

What I have a problem with, is when players that are more inexperienced report for balance and throw the scenario dBASE off.
I look at who reported what rating and then I look at the whole. I then take out the top two or three favorable and bottom two or three unfavorable reports to attempt to see how "balanced" and/or "entertaining" a scenario might be, without the wild swings being in place.

It's when you look at a scenario that has been played over a hundred times and gets a 50/50 split on wins and losses but ratings that say it is favorable to one side, that I begin to wonder how effective the individual reports are all together. But, there is good info to gleen from the current system.

I think balance can be seen in the numbers and not in what a player says about the game itself? Often the experience of play does not reflect the actual balance or imbalance? It is more the experience of the players.
As I played more and more games I often went back to scenarios that I thought were unbalanced only to find they were more balanced later when I had more experience. :rolleyes:
I've played tons of "AI only" scenarios that I found perfectly balanced for play H2H. Though, my opponents may not have felt that way. ;)

Ed

[Mr Grumpy]

The H2H area made the designer and testers jump through hoops before receiving a "seal of approval" that never ensured anyone was going to play them anyway.

Well we cant force anyone to play approved scenarios, the point of the system was to give players confidence that if they did play a approved scenario they were sure it would have a good level of balance.

Spot on for both points Foul. That is why I think letting players determine over time what is balanced and what is not, should be the way to go.

Well without any sort of structure to the process, it would be open to all sorts of abuse, especially if ladder points are involved.

There is too limited a "field" of players in the H2H process to actually get a good sample result.

Well that is a issue caused by too few players helping out the Blitz community at the H2H, not the system itself IMO.

I've often played my designs against opponents to test them. When we play through the first game they tell me "my side" was way too strong. Then we play the same scenario from different sides and I often hear that "my former side" was way too weak. It is at that point that I think my scenarios are almost "balanced".

Yes i agree that can be a issue in any sort of testing, that is why over at the OpC H2H we have a dedicated team of experienced players to prevent this, any CS designer could do the same if he was just prepared to put some effort in, IMO that is the whole underlying issue with the H2H.

What I have a problem with, is when players that are more inexperienced report for balance and throw the scenario dBASE off.
I look at who reported what rating and then I look at the whole. I then take out the top two or three favorable and bottom two or three unfavorable reports to attempt to see how "balanced" and/or "entertaining" a scenario might be, without the wild swings being in place.

It's when you look at a scenario that has been played over a hundred times and gets a 50/50 split on wins and losses but ratings that say it is favorable to one side, that I begin to wonder how effective the individual reports are all together. But, there is good info to gleen from the current system.

I think balance can be seen in the numbers and not in what a player says about the game itself? Often the experience of play does not reflect the actual balance or imbalance? It is more the experience of the players.
As I played more and more games I often went back to scenarios that I thought were unbalanced only to find they were more balanced later when I had more experience. :rolleyes:
I've played tons of "AI only" scenarios that I found perfectly balanced for play H2H. Though, my opponents may not have felt that way. ;)

Ed

Well you are correct that the H2H scoring is open to human error or any number of variables, i never expect the system to be perfect, as long as a scenario comes out of the system more balanced and fun than when it goes in i am happy with the result, to expect any more would be unrealistic IMO.

Although i always am interested in players feedback about the H2H section, in reality there is no issue about if it works or not as the same system works just fine at OpC and CM, i believe the difference is that there is a desire to see the H2H succeed in those areas which is lacking here, all we need is a designer to come forward and have the drive to orgainise some tests and see the project through.

The whole area is designer driven, if they are halfhearted about the process it always fails, how many designers have uploaded a scenario and just left it there, yup plenty. :chin:

[Herr Straße Laufer]

<snip>

I'm not here to argue your ability to defend your "baby".
The H2H area is too cumbersome to use for CS designers. That is my opinion and I will stick by it.

Although i always am interested in players feedback about the H2H section, in reality there is no issue about if it works or not as the same system works just fine at OpC and CM, i believe the difference is that there is a desire to see the H2H succeed in those areas which is lacking here, all we need is a designer to come forward and have the drive to orgainise some tests and see the project through.

I'd rather my designs get "tested" in a simpler manner. It's one reason that I do not use the H2H area. I also like to play games and have fun. I already have a job and the "system" for getting the "stamp of approval" takes way too much time for an average CS scenario design.
The system works for some games but not for others. Maybe we can see what happens over time as the "approved" scenarios get played and the players begin to rate them?

The whole area is designer driven, if they are halfhearted about the process it always fails, how many designers have uploaded a scenario and just left it there, yup plenty. :chin:

Halfhearted or unwilling to jump through hoops? Now it becomes a matter of symantics? :chin:
I guess that I am a failure then? I simply grew weary of jumping through the hoops.
To each their own?
And, glad we have the choice! :)



Ed

[Mr Grumpy]

Of course using the H2H area is down to personal choice.

I am aware the trying to create an system that fits all games will end up suiting some more than others, perhaps that is the issue at CS.

Anyway thank you for your opinions. :)

[Kool Kat]

Chema,

I'll test anything you made, whether it's in H2H section or not.

Thanks Huib, Everybody knows of your great implication in designing tasks.

The problem arise when a scn is ready to test...At this moment, a question appear to designer: Post the scn to H2H section or do it myself?.
A scn tested from H2H area means the scn passed several testing games and it is improved.

I would like to pick a scn from de general scn depot that previosly was in the H2H section... It give me a relative guarantee about playability and fun, but due to minimal activity of the testing section many designers decide to realease to general depot directly. What implication have this fact on the new scn? Players prefer to pick " already played scns" or a new fully tested instead of new ones from a new designer...

This have a serious implication :There are a lot of fantastic scns out there, unplayed, no voted, and finally missing...
I noted that, when a new threat is posted in the forum looking for funny scns :)

Cheers.
Chema

Hi Gents:

Need some advice on testing new scenarios. :chin:

I've been designing a Rising Sun scenario based on the Kokoda Track Campaigns (New Guinea) in 1942. Outnumbered Australian troops, facing an elite Japanese Special Naval Landing Force, fighting a delaying action along the Kokoda Track.

If all goes well, it should be ready for testing in a few weeks!

Should I post the scenario to the H2H section... or just create a post in the general threads and have folks give it a whirl? :conf:

Please let me know.

[Valor]

Should I post the scenario to the H2H section... or just create a post in the general threads and have folks give it a whirl? :conf:

It's always your choice, my friend

If I could advise I would put it through the h2H section. However I may be biased here :P

Just adding my two cents into the discussion I believe that it is great idea that needs only some refinement :chin:

I know that our grognards like Earl, Don, Ed, Huib, Chema, Curt, Eddie (please don't look at the order - it does not reflect any ranking or so ) can easily find bunch of players eager to test their new designs, they can carefully choose to whom release their "child" having their choice based on particular player's experience, style of playing etc... but how many would care about some scens designed by someone new in there?

That was the initial idea for the "old" H2H! And should be still the same. I believe that our veteran designers can live without it, but lets help those who are on the start of their road to prefection.

Best regards

Slawek

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Should I post the scenario to the H2H section... or just create a post in the general threads and have folks give it a whirl? :conf:

It's always your choice, my friend

If I could advise I would put it through the h2H section. However I may be biased here :P

Just adding my two cents into the discussion I believe that it is great idea that needs only some refinement :chin:

I know that our grognards like Earl, Don, Ed, Huib, Chema, Curt, Eddie (please don't look at the order - it does not reflect any ranking or so ) can easily find bunch of players eager to test their new designs, they can carefully choose to whom release their "child" having their choice based on particular player's experience, style of playing etc... but how many would care about some scens designed by someone new in there?

That was the initial idea for the "old" H2H! And should be still the same. I believe that our veteran designers can live without it, but lets help those who are on the start of their road to prefection.

Best regards

Slawek

In this I totally agree with Slawek. :smoke:

Ed