|
HoME Customs A place for Heroes of Middle Earth Customs |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#1057
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
Just wanted to echo the same sentiments everyone else has already shared Cap.
Best of luck with any & all the challenges (& upsides) that 2021 has to bring. |
#1058
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
Sorry to hear that Cap, just stay strong!
Currently Working with the Explores of Valhalla Team. |
#1059
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
Quote:
|
#1060
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
I think what he honestly need is someone to be the defacto "push" person if the group. Which we should probably decide so we can return to the progress we were making pre holiday season. I know that I've just been doing a lot of waiting and looking as far as this project has been concerned. I'll change that and get some tests in.
|
#1061
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
Quote:
I'm able & happy though to be involved with getting feedback off quickly (responding to notification emails is much easier & faster than hunting down stagnant threads) and contributing through that medium, especially brainstorming cards / powers / ideas. Just intending to clarify where I'm at / what I can reasonably contribute moving forward. |
#1062
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
I'll echo both of those sentiments.
Yeah, I've sort of been waiting around as well for developments to happen. I'm about where Chris Perkins is at, but I can do some playtests every once in awhile too, if that's the main thing holding us up. Are we mostly waiting on the Design Fellowships? I think Orc Deep Drummer and Cave Troll are the only ones in Playtesting phase right now, but the OP needs to be updated with the Drummer. |
#1063
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
Frankly I think HoME is mostly held up by the fact that we never really reached the critical mass of figures needed to allow for easier development of new figures. I.e. the first 20-30 (most in MS1) are the most essential to allow for easier play testing of future figures and we have not gotten there yet.
I'm not sure what the best solution is moving forward. Getting that critical mass likely requires more hours than our collective membership has available at present. |
#1064
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
Honestly, itd almost work better if we treated Army Cards as individual projects assigned to a person, all others in HoME acting as feedback. Then that person is responsible for testing, presenting data and adjusting according to feedback.
If we keep the current work we have and do a rational division of labor with an expected check in, for example once every 2 weeks. Itd be easier to at least get a shadow of what we want at a faster rate. |
#1065
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
I like some of the components of that proposal, but I think the goal of an individual working on a card/cards should be to create a rough draft for discussion, rather than a card that has already gone through testing.
Basically, I think if we got a rough draft of each card in MS1 (and any non-MS1 figures that are already in a fellowship, if there are any such figures) we could have a productive discussion on what types of powers we like thematically, strategically, etc. I also think getting that 'set' of rough draft cards might help initial play testing, since interactions with other HoME cards is crucial (not just interacting with classic cards). I'm not sure that I like the idea of assigning cards though because (1) it assumes time members may not have & (2) card generation works better if someone who sees an idea for a figure claims that one. I do agree that we need some form of structural change if we are to re-gain any progress, because at this point our previous model of 'different fellowships' is kinda broken without having the members to actively run 2-3 different ones. Here's my proposal: We start a new thread for all cards in rough draft stage. The OP of that thread has a list of those cards. Anyone can post ideas of powers / synergies for figures currently on the list; that thread is for debate. Anyone can volunteer for any available card, with some form of maximum at a time (3?) to avoid overloading anyone and let the full group have access (if wanted). I would be willing to create & maintain that thread's OP. Then once that individual person is happy with their card, they make a new thread for feedback on that single card's rough draft & post a link to it from the 'general' rough draft thread. Eventually we can set a time limit for review, but for now we'd likely keep review on all of them open until rough drafts are created for everything in MS1. I've been mostly focusing on MS1 because it's a good starting point, but if a few (5 or less?) other figures are crucial for early development we could add those to the list too. Thoughts? |
#1066
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
I think that would help a lot up to the testing phase, but I think it's a good idea to have a variety of playtesters (people have different playstyles, can offer different in-game perspectives, and a single person exclusively designing and playtesting might lead to imbalances). I'm willing to eventually test each design once. I wouldn't be excited to test the same card 6 games in a row. Biweekly check in is a good idea.
|
#1067
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
Yes, I agree with that as well.
So perhaps we move away from individual fellowships to instead have: 1) Group of cards in development / rough draft stage 2) Group of cards in play testing stage Where in stage (1) a card is owned by up to only 1 person and in stage (2) no card is owned by anyone but we get playtesting done as possible. And we would need to come up with a rule for moving cards from stage 1 to stage 2, and from stage 2 onward. Perhaps something like 2/3 s of 'active' members have to vote 'yes' to move a card from one stage to another? These could be 2 different 'master' threads managed by 2 different people. The biggest downside I can see is a lack of ownership in stage (2), but that's a lot further than we've gotten to date, so I think that could be a problem for later down the road. But I think playing 'scape is fun and if we got enough cards through stage (1) then stage (2) would be easier. |
#1068
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HoME General Discussion Thread
We could just wait on testing until all the drafts are done for the first Master Set (or HoME's equivalent). Then Test 1 could be with HoME designs, Test 2 classic Scape. Like what was mentioned earlier, testing for other projects is easier cause they already have so much released.
I like one person managing a thread and anyone being able to comment. I think with how slow going it's been, considering this a public project at least until there is some Set 1 release wouldn't be a horrible idea. I think that is how some of the others started off. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
General Fan Art and Fiction Discussion Thread | TGRF | Fan Art & Fiction | 15 | December 12th, 2013 08:07 PM |
General Fiction/Art Discussion Thread POLL | TGRF | Fan Art & Fiction | 4 | August 20th, 2012 09:53 PM |
Greek Mythology General Discussion Thread | Fedex worker | Custom Units & Army Cards | 287 | November 4th, 2010 08:54 AM |
TV show discussion: Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends | Menchy | Other Media | 7 | August 16th, 2007 10:16 AM |