SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

ADMIN NOTE: The first ~30 posts of this thread were moved from the SoV Nominations thread.


Honestly, it's SoV, I'd just assume you'd get a No... barely matters why. If you're in any way entering ground that hasn't been trod, they'll have a problem with it, and if you're entering well trod ground, they might deem that a problem too.
SoV is barely worth bothering with, IMO.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

That kind of talk isn't helpful at all and is very disrespectful to the people who volunteer their time to be SoV judges, LO.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

It's perfectly fine to not like the project, but I don't see what coming into its thread to insubstantively talk down on it out of nowhere is meant to achieve. If you have legitimate criticisms, there are far more constructive and respectful ways to voice them than trying to derail an unrelated conversation.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

I've pointed them out, multiple times. It stifles the custom community by being an alleged 'gold standard' for every design and designer to strive for, while being elitist, restrictive, critical of creativity and cliquey. I honestly think this project has done more harm to the community than good, all told.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

I see you arguement and mostly agree, that is why I'm responding instead of not. I think a lot of creators would be better served by making customs they want to play and think are fun. I happen to like the "theme" of SoV, well trodden land fitting with the designs and aesthetic of the original game. I also like that is vetted against all original units and C3V customs. it is also nice that the minis are normally fairly plentiful and inexpensive.

I do think the SoV workshop should move into the SoV section as to not dominate the customs board in the same way al C3G stuff is hidden in a sub form. I actually think SoV works better when someone else nominates the unit instead of work shopping your own unit to get it approved.

So your argument is good but the vemon is a tad extreme, however i guess this is the internet after all. I actually think it may be worth discussing the workshop thread and the nomination process as a group and not dismiss these concerns outright.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Yikes.

I would never come into another project's thread and trash the project. If it's not your thing, that's fine, but please respect those of us who put a lot of time, effort, and thought into the project.

But to your points, I disagree that the project is elitist, critical of creativity, or cliquey. It is restrictive, but that's by design.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

It's not just 'another project'. It's monolithic. VC brands itself as being the face of Classic Heroscape now, to the point that Classic creators are overshadowed (I remember someone criticising Dr.Goomonkey's contests because they weren't putting out 'official' content and therefore held no value), and, honestly, does a pretty bad job of it, as far as I can see.
C3G manages to be engaging, exciting, creative and prolific. VC is glacial, restrictive, and aggressively elitist, at least from an outside perspective. That's honestly part of the reason Classic became less interesting to me than Superscape, and in my book that's an absolute crying shame.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Dude this hasn't been my experience at all. The SOV judges have always been encouraging and constructive every time I have submitted. I'm sorry that hasn't been your experience however vitriol and bitterness are not effective conflict resolution skills at all.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

I do think that there is a ton that VC could learn from C3G in terms of community engagement. I'm incredibly jealous of how seamlessly C3G is able to bring in community members to the project. That said, I don't think that antagonizing VC, its members, and its standards is the right way to do it.

I do dislike that most, if not all, classic custom activity seems geared towards SoV induction instead of creative and explorative customs. The idea of making something just for fun seems to be devalued, as noted with Dr.Goomonkey's contests.

Very much agreed. I don't love that there seems to be a lot of "career custom makers" focusing on getting their own customs through SoV processes. I wish there was more creativity going on in general, and that nominations came from members noticing others' creativity and nominating it. Much like a C3G process I'm super jealous of (don't know the actual name, but they nominate designs, vote through them, and the winner gets workshopped into their canon).

I think this is an often misunderstood and undervalued point.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

I agree with you to an extent. Too many creators focus solely on trying to appease SoV for sure. Part of that is a testament to how most of the active playerbase left uses C3V to some extent--of course if someone has an idea that they're very proud of, they'd like for it to achieve the same level of recognition. That's a natural feeling. Unfortunately, because VC is intended to be an extension of the original game, which was largely simple enough to appeal to children and broad masses, this leads many people to focus on designs that they think will pass instead of what they want to make. Luckily, I've never seen a VC member push a creator to design solely for SoV--just the opposite, in fact.

That said, there are still multiple creators out there who don't just design for SoV and have plenty of great units because of it. I always enjoy looking through threads from creators like @Scytale , @flameslayer93 , @Pumpkin_King , your own thread, and plenty more. Not all of the stuff I see is something that I think belongs in SoV, but it's still great content that I appreciate.

To say that VC has done more harm than good to the community feels very misguided to me. Yes, there are downsides to the project and now, nearly a decade after cancellation, too much of the community's focus is placed solely on it. That said, we're looking at the community nearly a decade after cancellation. To say that just because most of the remaining active members place a high level of priority on VC means that those 9 years of effort have hurt the community far more than helped it is incredibly disrespectful to the many years of work that people have put into these projects.

VC brands itself as a continuation of Classic HeroScape because that's what it is designed to be. That's why the designs, the many processes, and everything strives to make the cards feel as much like official cards as possible. That's one of the reasons that many of its fans like it so much. Sure, just like official 'Scape, there are some designs that I personally don't care for. However, for every one of those, there are more creative and exciting cards that push the boundary of official 'Scape in meaningful ways, despite the many restrictions inherent in making "official"-esque cards.

Again, it's perfectly fine if you don't like VC's style (although honestly "does a pretty bad job of it" is hardly a compelling criticism of the designs, but oh well). Everyone I know in VC has made a point of not trying to homogenize random customs. One of the things that I personally like about Dr.Goomonkey's Contests is that they aren't just VC-ish designs. Even if it's not my cup of tea, I can still appreciate the hard work that goes into those designs, and I'd never dream of constantly going into those threads to trash them.

I agree that these seem like reasonable actions. My impression behind the Pre-SoV Workshop being outside the C3V/SoV section was that it originally had a lot more commenters and wasn't primarily associated with the judges, but the two seem closely enough related at this point that I think moving it out of the general Classic Customs section is justified.

I also like it when people nominate customs that aren't their own (and would like to see that happen more frequently as a general note), but I think that the workshopping and whatnot would still go on in any case.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Well met!

Ditto.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Hmmm well I can understand certain feelings and vitriol towards the project and this process. It often does seem rather limited and could be considered a problem in the face of continuing the game we all enjoy so much. Which has now been discontinued for the better part of this decade. Xotli wrote similar things iterating every detail when he left C3V a few years ago. I agree C3G does feel far more open for opportunities and their expansion of the game is and always has been stupendous. They of course do have the benefit of almost being able to build the Superheroes side of the game from the ground up, where as C3V/SOV has had to work within a much larger established game. That both limits things and makes it more complex by far. Marvel and DC have done the work for C3G. Trying to fit concepts that will work well in classic Heroscape isn’t easy. Now while I believe this type of discussion is important it doesn’t seem the place for tearing people down.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

First of all, everything robbdaman said. Down to every detail.

Second of all, some historical perspective.

Back in the stone ages, prior to the invention of the wheel, the customs community was very different. It was wholly unconstrained, with (as far as I can remember) relatively little effort put into making things balanced for competitive play. And why should there be? The official designers took care of that. People made things like zombies carrying barrels of dynamite, which can be viewed early in this thread, because the official designers sure as heck weren't going there.

When the game was discontinued, though, the C3V and the SoV rose from the ashes to fill that gap. It was never our intention to be the gold standard for all customs. Just to identify the ones suitable for a continuation of the canon. I am fairly confident that each current judge of the SoV feels the same: people should design for themselves, and the ones that look right for the canon should come here. At the time, I thought (and I wasn't the only one) that we would see mostly people digging up each other's worthy candidates and nominating *them*, rather than designing with us in mind.

What's happened, though, is that, by setting up the target, there has organically arisen a culture of sharpshooters. Who are great! I love that people are pushing to get units through the SoV, and designing with that in mind.

But it hasn't always been that way.

I applaud all the customs makers on this board. For myself, I am fond of the ones who surprise me, like LO and her goofy brain with legs as a science fiction scientist. I understand her grievance that the zaniness isn't what it used to be, that the culture has moved away from the Wild West it used to be. That we've changed.

Not that LO needs any defending from me. She is more than capable of looking after herself here. But I don't think there's much to gain from attempts to persuade on this point, by anybody. After all, you are all mostly right.

Except for Robb. He's completely right.

edit:
The Zombikazis. I love 'em.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

I appreciate this conversation here. As I look in at the project from the outside Ive seen both sides of the conversation. I know there are standards to be met, but I see exactly where @Lazy Orang point of view lines up. This is one of the reasons you guys have never seen one of my designs come to this thread. I have talked to @Sir Heroscape privately about it a small amount. Ultimately watching the discussion has had a negative impact on my view of the project and reduced my interest in it. I do not expect any change in how things are run but it is nice to see some discussion about it.
Edit: The only reason I bother saying anything is because what happens here does affect me if I choose to go to a tournament, as these customs are allowed at the ones I now seldom participate in.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Yikes. There may be worthwhile criticism here, but it's buried by negativity.

I for one have a strong appreciation for the SoV and its process. The process feels necessarily critical - it makes sure quality comes out. If we are really going to compare it to C3G, I'm just going to say that SoV feels seamless next to classic, whereas C3G feels like something else entirely. I dont mean any disrespect to C3G, I have hundreds of their designs in my collection, but the openness and creativity has allowed it to evolve into it's own thing. I don't mind that for my Super Hero scaping, but don't want that for my integrated VC.

Metal minis don't feel seamless. It's like playing catch with a bucket of baseballs, but having a couple tennis balls in there. It just doesn't feel right.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Well met!

Let me re-begin by expressing my appreciation for everyone taking part in this conversation. Even and, perhaps, especially for those with whom I most disagree. Clarity, of a sort, emerges.

Soon after entering the obsession, I (with chas, Sherman Davies, and Taeblewalker - the Gang of Four) began experimenting with customs. There was a bit of conflict. But we are all agreed in accepting C3V and SoV. I’ve learned how to make better customs in general through the kind of focus submitting to SoV requires.

[Ninja'd while writing again.]

The Gang is going to test 4 of my customs on October 12. I'll most likely discuss the test over in the Pre-SoV forum. While presenting them, I'll present the process/philosophy of their creation - and in so doing, the broader issues of custom creation addressed herein.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Vitriol aside, I appreciate this discussion taking place. It is probably long overdo and I would recommend someone making a separate thread to continue the discussion provided that some ground rules are set in place to make sure its constructive.

I've been involved in Heroscape since the day it released but have had it in storage for a long time. When I was finally able to come back to the game after 6 years a few months ago, I was delighted that the VC community was still so active! Congratulations for such an achievement! I hope that there are many more years ahead for SOV and C3V. From a personal standpoint, I really enjoyed submitting my first custom to SOV and loved the feedback. It's great fun.

In that spirit, I would also like to add that for those who feel their personal goals and vision no longer are in line with the C3V and SOV to perhaps start their own projects with other community members. As far as I know, there is no written rule that says only these projects along with superscape and star wars can exists. The more the merrier I believe especially since It really does feel like some of the new generation of players have different ideas for the game. While the game was once made directly for kids, those kids have now grown up and may want to express their creativity in new ways. Mark my words, if the game was to re-released it would look much different than what we know. So please, don't be discouraged, be motivated and help grow the community.

I plan on taking my own advice and will propose a new custom project soon to fill a niche not currently covered by the VC community yet. For those who interact with me on the Facebook group and on this forum, you know I am very passionate about this game but passion alone isn't enough to start a project, you need community involvement and buy in. Hopefully I'm able to inspire others to join the project.

I hope that this discussion will inspire others to take proactive action and help the VC community improve by providing constructive feedback while at the same time investing in Heroscape as a whole to keep the game alive for future generations.

By the way, it's good to see lively discussion on this forum again! :-)

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

I fully encourage people to start their own customs projects, and design their own customs that have nothing to do with SoV.

For better or for worse, VC is what it is. A few things have changed over the last 8-9 years, but for the most part we keep on our path. If we change things, it will be slowly and deliberately.

If you're a church guy like me, that makes us Presbyterians. We like the old ways :)

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Haha great analogy! Looks like some of the charismatic non-denominational members need to create their own reformation :-)

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

This game is fun, custom creating if fun, and the way I see it SoV and C3V encourage nothing but having more fun. I say forget all this and just enjoy the game. Something is better than nothing, and we definitely have something special here with all of VC. Can't say the same for C3G cause I know nothing about it, but I can imagine you wouldn't take kindly if I were to jump into your threads and start spouting obscenities about your process, products, projects and the people involved.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

While I think that there's some over-emphasis on VC stuff, I think there's still a huge amount of just casual fun. At least in our Discord conversations about customs, we make the distinction.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Hmmmm.. I'm lucky to play Heroscape 2-3 times a year if that. For a discontinued game having a tournament available is a testament to it's support and the people who play it. Power creep is an issue, particularly in light of units like Cather Spearmen and other A and B units. C3V and SOV haven't put in many units that are below that mark and none that are below a considered C. Xotli mentioned this concern as well. Though overall the highest ranked units in classic 'scape still are as good as anything that has been created by C3V/SOV. Sure, I'd like to see some weird outliers added that aren't as expected to be played as much and of course terrain but it's just a limit of not truly manufacturing the game but adapting what exists. I'm sorry if you don't feel you can participate in games because of C3V/SOV if that is the case. That's not the intent at all of course. The fanscape continuation of the game is now almost as old as the original game from when it was first published and then discontinued. I'm just happy it is alive and well despite that.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

I just agreed about some of the points being made about how I viewed the nature of this project. I also have supported these customs groups and know that they take alot of time and dedication. As I also said, I dont expect that the attitude in which I see some of the members acting, or others being treated to really change, that is where I see the problem. I dont care to talk further about it myself and will exit the discussion in this thread. You guys have a good day.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

That's a feature, not a bug. We're making units that we want to be suitable for competitive play. So none that grade out too high, and none that grade out too low.

I'm satisfied that we've generally stayed in that range. Sometimes we miss a little high and get an A unit; sometimes we miss a little low and get something in the C range. That's not on purpose, but I wouldn't have it any other way. Regardless, it's been many years since tournament formats did not account for the efficiency disparity between Unit A and Unit B.

Though I do reject the term "power creep," in that the power level of C3V/SoV units does not seem (to me) to be climbing. It's just that we try to avoid making (or approving) units that have no reason to see the table in competitive play. I don't think the tide is rising on power level, though.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Not saying it's by plan or anything though specifically designing somewhat competitive units by default would lend itself to creeping up somewhat. There are no Dund or Marro Drudge or because they're made to not be that level. At the same time some classic units have been boosted by C3V/SOV units to a higher rank which does help the game. So there is good and bad to it. For those that casualscape rather than play tourneys that may not appeal to them. At least in my local scene that is the case, it's more about playing to have fun than win something. Not that they don't appreciate the C3V/SOV stuff, much of it is fun and interesting. Truthfully the biggest limitation is still always going to be the out of print ness of figures. Even those created by C3V/SOV, some released years ago and others that aren't even out yet have that issue.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

@robbdaman I respectfully disagree with your assessment of power creep. Honestly, you are free to have your own opinion, but I have a hard time taking you seriously when you’ve self proclaimed only being able to play the game 2-3 times a year! It’s true life is busy and some of us don’t get as much time...but I’ll be frank, I don’t think you have a place to tell people with much more experience than you that the units they design are unbalanced or creeping higher in power ranking. It’s just not true. The majority of us that are part of the project probably play at least 2-3 games a week, if not more, not including regular tournaments 2-3 times a year (or every month in some areas). Playing that much with a wide variety of units does something, it gives you experience. I’m not trying to toot my own horn or declare “I am better than though” I’m just trying to be honest about how I see yours (and others) declarations about this project. Let experience speak.

SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

I love the SOV and C3V. As someone who has invested hundreds (multiple hundreds now?) of dollars in SOV/C3V customs, I have a vested interest in seeing these projects continue to thrive and be successful. Putting these characters together, printing and cutting the double-sided cards, and even painting a figure once in a while has provided my wife and me countless hours of bonding and fun. It really is a great project and I wish for many years of continued success. I truly believe these communities are providing future generations a great service by keeping a game alive that spurs creativity and adventure.

With the recent uptick in community comments and concerns regarding the two main custom projects of Heroscape dominating a few other threads, I decided to create this thread to provide an outlet for feedback. My goal for this thread is to bring our community together and make it even better than what it is today by providing an outlet for positive and healthy discussion. I also felt I was probably the best candidate to create this thread since while I have been involved in Heroscape from day one, I only recently got back into the scene a few months ago. Therefore, I have only positive feelings towards everyone and hopefully that is reciprocated allowing this discussion to get off on the right foot. :-)

I’ll start this thread off with my own feedback laid out in a way that I hope others will follow if they wish to participate in this discussion. I will ask the moderators and admins help steer the conversation in a positive direction and I will ask others to be as polite and respectful as possible.

These are just suggestions and not demands so please read them under that light. :-)


SOV Feedback

Standardization of Basics
It would be helpful if the SOV council laid out a document with the basic standards that are required for miniatures, power names, and the basic layout of information. Does the SOV accept metal minis? What are the quantities needed for a mini to be accepted? What is the “look” of a lawman, Kyrie, Zombie? These are questions that I think if answered, will help the designers better able to get the basics out of the way before they even submit their custom. It will also help eliminate some of the discussions that are brought up on a semi-regular basis. Furthermore, once something is accepted as being allowed, like a metal mini, the SOV panel can accept it whether they like the ruling or not and we can avoid those conversations in future submissions. I would also recommend that they recluse themselves from voting if something is submitted that, while allowed by the standards, is still not something they enjoy and therefore it may affect their voting.

Esoteric terminology written out
"Gold Standard" “Too wordy” “Wrong look” “Doesn’t fit the SOV” “Confusing layout” “Powers not setup for kids to understand” etc. We’ve all seen this used as constructive criticism in the past yet I would argue that few know what each statement really means. I’ve also noticed that these terms change meaning based on who is judging that day and perhaps even what mood they are in :-)

It would be really helpful for the community if these terms are laid out and quantified so that the community knows the “SOV” format they should aim for and the judges can have a basis for providing criticism. This will remove individual bias and perhaps help keep the judging to a more consistent standard reducing some of the frustration I see around those threads.

Partnership in Submission
Looking at how the SOV is setup, in the current lineup it is perhaps too challenging to find success. As someone remarked earlier, “why even bother?” I know the SOV takes pride in weeding out bad submissions and wants the system to be setup so that it is challenging to get through to maintain quality, however, I would ask that the SOV also work to increase their success rate while maintaining their standards. Imagine if you were a retail company and you never could release new products because nothing passed the purity test? You wouldn’t be in business for long lol!

I would recommend a partnership process of some sort for future submissions. What I envision, and this is just a thought, is that when someone submits a custom that 2 or 3 SOV judges volunteer to take partnership in the project with the designer for the purpose of helping see it through to completion and official nomination. They can work in a private thread to iron out some of the basics and get the design right. Between the official Heroscape, SOV and C3V, there are a LOT of powers and synergy to contend with when making new customs. It really does take a small team to help produce a quality piece. The end goal should always be to have both quality and quantity.

Term Limits and Elections
I’m sure such a suggestion is not new but I do think it is worth bringing up. With the goal of the Heroscape community as a whole to grow as much as possible, I would recommend that we set term limits for positions so that others can get involved. Perhaps have a 2 year term followed by a 1 year break.

C3V Feedback

Release schedule
The C3V has done amazing work and has really kept this community alive. I do love the releases and look forward to each and every one of them. However, the release schedule seems to be a little sporadic and unpredictable.

I understand that there is a goal to “get it right” and release when its ready, but keep in mind that if you were a retail business, you wouldn’t have the luxury of not releasing a product. It has been often remarked in business that the most creative ideas and the best products were released under difficult restraints. Think back to your favorite Nintendo music of yesterday. You can remember those songs can’t you? And yet they were produced under very limited hardware which, incidentally forced the designer to be as creative as possible. Keeping to a release schedule is tough, but it does help reduce some of the discussion over the minutia while focusing on what is really important.

It will also help with the momentum for the project. I think if you want the general community to be involved, you have to keep to some schedule so that people can look forward to each release. This is something that I think the C3G does really well since there is always something new around the corner.

YouTube Release Announcements
You guys work so hard with each release for the purpose of giving back to the community. Yet some releases tend to be very quiet. I think this is a real shame. I would highly recommend that you provide a YouTube release video for each wave announcement. Here, you can show the figures rebased, the card printed out (double-sided please) and you can talk about the figure and what it was designed to do, who it pairs well with, and its power and personality synergy. This will help people get excited and really show off your hard work.

I will also add that some figures don’t show well on their cards. For some figures it wasn’t until I saw them in person or in someone’s game that I really saw how cool they were. The Confrontation Wolves were a great example. When I finally had them in my possession, I was like “whoa! I can’t wait to try these out!” Seeing the figures in a video would be a great help with the promotion of your project.

Elections and Term Limits
I will broach this subject with the utmost sensitivity since I am an outsider lol! Think about your favorite shows on TV. Family Guy, Simpsons, whatever. Now think back to when it first started vs. where it is today. I would guess that you would say that it is not as good as it once was. The reason is that even the best creators run out of ideas, get burned out, or just need a long break to recharge.

For that reason, I would recommend term limits for C3V positions so that old members can recharge (perhaps wait a year before they can run again after their term is up) and new members can bring their ideas to the fold. It will also help fight the illusion, whether real or not, of the elitism and cliques that is often spoken about.

Summary
I hope these thoughts and suggestions are received in the best light possible. The SOV and C3V are great projects. Keep up the good work and thank you! I'm looking forward to everyone else's thoughts.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Hey folks, I just created a thread in this forum for feedback. Perhaps these discussions can be moved to that thread so that this thread isn't further derailed.

@sirheroscape just a friendly thought. Your response was a little harsh and combative to Rob. Since you're a member of C3V, remember that people will see you as speaking on behalf of the C3V and since there is a belief whether fair or not that the C3V is standoffish, I don't think that your response helps.

Keep in mind too that perception is just as important as reality for a custom project. It takes a lot of effort to bring a C3V Custom to the table so if a power feels wrong or too strong, it basically means the custom goes unplayed meaning you are essentially designing for yourself and not the community. Rob was referring to perception and casual play, not just tournaments and you should take his opinion seriously since he is a potential C3V customer.

I would add that since Heroscape is often played casually over tournament play, his criticism is valid.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

I'm far from trying to say I'm an authority on this matter though if we're going to discuss the matter these aren't just my words but are opinions also from people who do play more frequently and have many if not all C3V/SOV units that I know. It's something they have expressed about the units going back a few years now. Whether you can understand that focusing on making units that are competitive or not lends itself toward inching up in power levels or not is up to you to decide I guess. Just putting it out there that experience may lean away from seeing that possibility here. Not saying that Stingers and Raelin or Blast/Glads or Knights or 4th Mass still aren't real strong or potentially stronger than what has been made in the Fanscape era, just that more units have been created to be more competitive.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

Personally, I am totally for this and ready to recharge.

Currently, I am a SoV/C3V editor, which means you really need to know how Heroscape cards are worded (and why they're worded that way) so you can edit new powers so they fit in with Heroscape wording and are as clear as possible.

If anyone is interested in this position, please make yourself known and I and the other editors will evaluate your work.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

In case folks are just joining the discussion, my thread was merged with this one so my post may seem confusing. But I'm glad this discussion is taking place! I would ask that the original intention of my thread be kept and this place be used as a constructive feedback area. Thank you!

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

Thanks for the feedback, Super Sam, and this thread was a good idea.

I'll give you my own personal insider's thoughts on these, which might or might not interest you.

1. Release schedule. Yes. Everything you say. There isn't a good reason why this year has been so slow, I don't think. We have some great things currently finished with Playtesting, so look for a release soon.

2. YouTube release announcements. You think people would be interested? You're probably right. I hope we'll be able to lean on our newest member to help us with that. I've heard he knows a thing or two about YouTube. It's all a mystery to me. :)

3. Card quality. We take great care with the cards. I think there are different versions of the wolves, with different paint jobs. I'm not sure what happened there. Are other people concerned with card quality?

4. Elections and Term Limits. I could be wrong, but I suspect this feedback is actually offered as an attempt at a solution for the "Release schedule" problem you identified above. We're actually pretty good about keeping people active, or needling them into stepping down (or, on rare occasions, pushing them out). In fact, I believe that the reason we're still around and productive is that we've been successful at managing our personnel effectively. The productivity issue is not connected to burnout, I don't believe, though I understand why a person might guess that that was the case.

Those are just my thoughts. I'm not speaking for the group.

Thanks for your interest and your feedback. We also have the C3V/SoV Question Dump, and if you have particular questions about stuff, you are also welcome and encouraged to ask there. Or wherever, just so long as I can find it and try to answer, if I can. :)

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

Thank you for being honest about this. It really helps. Just curious, do you remember when you first felt you needed a recharge? I ask because it may help establish an election schedule.

@Dad_Scaper thank you! Funny story, I actually got into the C3V because I saw the customs listed on ebay. When I could actually see the figures, I really thought they looked cool. It was also nice to see them laid out in a gallery format since the seller has multiples for sale. If you look at our Facebook group, more people seem to be getting into the scene because others are sharing their pictures. It really does help to show off the great work!

Regarding term limits, it really wasn't meant in response for anything in particular but more of a chance to get others involved and to give others a much needed break. As quozi pointed out, it may be more needed than realized.

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

You are quite right. I've only just joined a couple days ago, so I'll have to get used to this now. Thank you for this.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

This is in response to the SoV comments. I will not address the C3V ones.

SuperSamyon, I very much appreciate the time and effort you spent putting together these suggestions.

We'd do that if we could, and we have, as much as we are able. But we can't set up rules for stuff we can't anticipate. We never anticipated affordable pre-painted metal miniatures, for example. We could try to figure out situation after situation and detail after detail and spell it all out, but frankly people don't even read the few rules we do have, much less a huge document.

It's mostly a case-by-case basis thing anyway. There is a general rule that all squad figures must be different, but we bent that rule for the Red Ants. Even availability of miniatures is malleable, depending on the design.

Same thing as above. All of the things mentioned here are subjective, and often change based on the situation. Well, some of it is laid out in the rules, in particular the rules about having to submit a card instead of just text, but even that is purposefully vague because we won't fail something if the card doesn't look good. That just doesn't matter. (If you saw criticism on card look/design, please point it out. I can't think of any such situations. Miniatures are a different story, of course.)

When it comes to powers, there are no set rules. That's because powers can literally do anything. Whether or not a power fits within the ruleset and does not cause problems takes a deep understanding of the game and all the units currently in it, as does knowing how wordy a power has to be to correctly describe the power in game terms and sufficiently cover corner cases. Even that technical stuff is practically an art form. Whether or not the powers are right for the design is entirely subjective and very much an art.

Being an SoV Judge takes a LOT of time and effort. And frustration. On top of many hours of testing we also have to deal with the stress of angry commenters. Adding to that workload is simply not going to happen. And let's be clear, working as a partner in a design is time-consuming, stressful work. We just don't have the energy or bandwidth.

Nor should we develop such a partnership, imo. That's not what the SoV is founded upon or designed to do. It is not a design workshop. We exist to approve existing customs for inclusion into canon. We are gatekeepers, not designers, and submissions are not ours to modify. The creation workshop role is filled by the C3V. Of course that is private, though there have been a couple of attempts to make public ones for SoV submission, and some of us Judges participated. These have inevitably burnt out because they take a lot of work and are filled with frustration.

The Pre-SoV workshop fulfills this to some extent. Some of us Judges take extra time and effort to help workshop units there, as well as other helpful community members. The quality of submissions has definitely improved since that thread started.

That simply won't work unless we get a lot more interest. When a Judge leaves we sometimes put out a call for new submissions to fill the role, and we normally get only a couple entrants. Sometimes we've had to go seek out people and ask them to submit. Frankly we can only just barely find enough to keep running as we are; there's no way we could keep enough if we pushed people out.

It's not surprise. As I said, being an SoV Judge is a ton of work. It is unfun, sometimes stressful, and cuts deep into one's personal time.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

I am not on the SOV side of the house, so I cannot speak for them, other than I am on the Art Team and I have produced several of the SOV cards.

As for C3V, I don't think people realize how much work goes into getting just one hero/squad developed. And there is no set time for pushing a card, each unit is unique and moves at the pace that unit needs to move in order for it to be at the quality that C3V wants when it is released.

I am really excited to see how many people are now involved in playtesting new units, that is super valuable to us in getting units out the door. And real changes happen from the feedback from public playtesters.

As for Power Creep - I actually feel like we don't have enough competitive units, But I also think that these rating systems are flawed and that C should be the average grade for a unit in rankings(Bell curve) and that the curve is actually too much into the B range.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

On the subject of power creep: at this point, the meta is so well known and we’re so familiar with the game we’d have to specifically design a unit to be sub-C. And, frankly, I don’t think that’s fun.

Is it really a good thing that Hatamato is so bad? Is it fun for the Marro cavalry to be almost unusable and boring on top of that? Why should we design units that just won’t see play?

Re: Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion
 

Don't worry over it. Just keep in mind that I'm a C3V veteran myself so I do come at the subject with direct insight. Even if not working directly in C3V I have the benefit of being able to view it all and do input occasionally.

Overall we want what is best for the game to be not only competitive but fun and continually building despite being out of print. The local NHSD is being hosted by someone who built much of their collection after the game was cancelled. I'll be introducing them to a lot of C3V/SOV stuff they've never seen which I'm looking forward to.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

I think the subject of term limits is one of those things that works on paper in an ideal world but, absolutely no offense intended, is hopelessly naive in practice. :-) And the reason is what Scytale laid out about SoV (but also pertains to C3V and C3G and HoSS and any other high level custom project out there):

These projects take an incredible amount of work and commitment and while folks absolutely burn out and take time off as the years pass, they don't tend to do so on any set schedule, and we do not (any of us) have such an embarrassment of riches in active and eager personnel that we can afford to shove anyone out early! :-)

My experience, coming from C3G, but also having participated in some other groups over the years (including, notably, C3V) is that if you're passionate and excited about a project and you're willing to do heavy lifting (see: playtesting, art, etc.) and you're patient and dedicated enough, you absolutely will be put to work. You'll find a role and you'll be able to hold it so long as you're able to play nice with others and fulfill your obligations.

I see no deep well of people in the history of any of these projects who've worked hard to contribute to the project, participated actively and thoughtfully, and been stuck on the sidelines.

Term limits, while great in theory would result, in reality, in asking people to go and then having nobody to replace them. Why in the world would we want to do that?

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

Well met!

What is Heroscape? Is it the system of cards/powers/stats? Is it the Canon? Before C3V/SoV? Before D&D?

What is your purpose in creating a custom? To add to, or modify, the system? The Canon? Or to use the system as the basis for a different game?

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

Yeah, the simple reality of the fanbase is just that term limits wouldn't work. There's a lot I think we as a community need to just face up to RE: state of the fanbase.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

In regards to term limits and available staff, I can certainly sympathize with the challenge that can come with finding quality, volunteers. Especially in a game as old as Heroscape with a community as small as it is. Truly, I recognize that my suggestion for term limits is tied to growing the community. If the community grows, then more volunteers will be available.

I will add however, that there are still things that each project can do to turn things around and get more people engaged. Today if someone was interested in joining a team, how would they go about doing that? Is there an email list to email, phone number to call, or a point of contact to submit a resume to? Or is it currently setup so that "we'll call you, don't call us."

The danger with not having a clear path to involvement is that the perception and optics from the outside is that only those who are in the "in" crowd will get asked to join. In my opinion, this is why I believe others have mentioned projects being cliquish. Indeed, it is easy to see that perception taking hold if positions rarely open up and when they do they are filled before someone can announce their interest. While it may be an unfair and untrue position, combating bad optics is a challenge for all projects that involve the community.

I also believe that the community is bigger than we all believe. I've been analyzing some of the metrics for the recent vc releases and so far we hover around 200 downloads for each card. That is impressive since when you go to the books many of the newer ones are empty. We have quite a large silent majority.

So I believe the community is there, just not engaged. How do we engage them? One way is by providing a clear pathway to join their favorite project. @IAmBatman you guys do a great job of doing that over at the C3G. I think each project should strive to do the same. Term limits was just one possible pathway.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

Our main ways are the Public Design Post and Playtesting. Isn’t there a public playtesting sign up area for C3V?

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

If you want to get your name in the ring for C3V membership and you're not playtesting, you're missing the boat. All of our public playtesting designs are available to look at in their subforum, no sign up required. We absolutely love getting tests and we value any feedback.

Outside of the tournament that we're running, though, we don't get much involvement there. Which is a shame because it's a very tangible way to have a big hand in C3V designs.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

Yes, but there's no reward for doing it. You don't get points or anything like that (public members/designs aren't a thing), you don't even get a sneak peak as all the designs are posted publicly (and that wasn't enough when you did get it)... really, it honestly feels almost condescending, even if it doesn't mean to be. 'Here are our designs - little people, please test them for us? No, you can't comment on them unless you've tested them - not even a suggestion. No, you don't get anything for it - the knowledge of a job well done should be enough. Recognition from us is in no way guaranteed.' It feels actively hostile to public engagement except in a very limited, almost serfish way. It's all take and no give.
I mentioned this before years ago, here, but, as you can see, it received no response. Not one. That might be my biggest issue with VC. Any constructive criticism from has been met with, at most, what seems to amount to a pat on the head and a 'Don't worry - it's all under control, back where you can't see it'. That's where my frustration comes from - whatever people say, it's opaque and cliquey.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

I mean, there was C3V rewards where you could see finished cards, cost the same as the C3G if I remember, and I did use it a bit (3 cards if I remember). I'm gonna guess people just stopped using it so.

Re: SOV/C3V Feedback Thread
 

I've also noticed that, while those in VC keep saying they want to see more people designing not necessarily with VC in mind, as far as I can tell, that's basically lipservice - I barely ever see a VC member comment in a customs thread unless the design is being workshopped as SoV material. When TheAverageFan was designing, I was often the only person commenting. (Scytale and, to a lesser degree, wriggz are seemingly special cases who avoided this.) You can say what you want, but when you only seem to value designs heading for SoV and all the other threads are left feeling dead, it does give the impression that SoV is what people ought to be striding for, at least when it comes to peer recognition. It's a culture that I think is quite harmful to the community at large. That's why I think a Public Design system like C3G would be a good idea - then, people can do their workshopped from the ground up for VC designs, with a lesser chance of frustration because it will be worked on collectively rather than trying to decide which of multiple directions to be pulled in (the number of times I've seen initially fun and exciting designs collapse under the weight of trying to appeal to multiple Judges' conflicting ideas is honestly sad) and SoV can be left for the nomination of personal customs which people thing deserve the nod, rather than ones created from the ground up for it, which will then result in a lower workload for Judges and a faster turnaround.