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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSamyon
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.
|
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSamyon
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.
|
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSamyon
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.
|
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSamyon
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.
|
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.