HoME General Discussion Thread

[caps]

I am serious about wanting to restart this project. My first step would be re-forming the ERB as myself, @White Knight , and @Son of Arathorn , if they are interested. It needs to be a group of at least three people at all times, to avoid a repeat of what our solo-ERB did before *cough*.

From there I would look at forming lead teams around the remaining units, featuring a group of up to five people (including one ERB member). Probably only one lead team at a time until we get things really humming along and/or have a lot of people interested. This model seems to be working okay for the AotV project.

With lead teams that large we probably don't need to have prior playtesting as a prerequisite to being on a lead team. I would love to have contributions from @TREX , @OrcElfArmyOne , @boromir96 , @Splash , @KingZombie if any of them feel they have the design (or playtesting!) chops to step up to the plate.

I would probably wait to give anyone else a permanent role (editor, playtester, art, design department, etc.) until they've proven they're sticking around. But being on a lead team and playtesting are usually the fun parts anyways.

[Porkins]

[caps]

Originally Posted by Porkins

You're a great candidate too, Porkins!

[Son of Arathorn]

I’m gonna be moving in the next month. Between that, job searching, and VC, I definitely don’t have time to participate, much less head a project. I appreciate the ask though, and I hope things get back up and running!

[Splash]

I'd love to be part of a design team, and I can playtest too. Lemme know if enough people join up.

Ya know, if this ERB business was causing all the ruckuss, there could be a Fellowship instead, with a quorum maybe. Also what exactly does that entail/what is an ERB?

[Splash]

So just reading over the last two days posts, I suppose I could opine a bit and get my thoughts out there.
Firstly, consensus should be valued above all else for any successful project; for here, it should preferably be had before play-testing.
Personally, I see no problem with cards equal to Hasbro level simplicity/complexity, as the Hasbro figures are still fun, and playing with Middle Earth heroes should of course be fun. If it's not fun, I guess that's a design problem.
C3G is not recommended with regular Heroscape, so there is a differential there and sort of a line that can be drawn, however HoSS, which I think would be the closest parallel to a good Tolkien project, is required to work with Heroscape, and being honest that's the sort of direction I'd like to see.
I do see the argument that Gandalf could of been stronger point-wise and whatnot, as he is basically the most powerful wizard in all of Middle Earth (at least by the time he's Gandalf the White) and he's not up to the level of the strongest human heroes Katsuro, Spartacus, or SotM Drake. There are also elves higher than he is with Sonlen and Ulginesh.
Also a random side note, bringing up Gandalf the White, another thing I like about HoSS (C3G does this too)is that it can be broken up by sort of era or film. So there could be a Fellowship Gandalf the Grey and a Two Towers/Return of the King Gandalf the White. I think going by novel/film is a cool way to do it. Also that way there would be less arguments (if that's really an issue) about design and ideas that weren't quite the right fit for one might work for another. Characters would still feel definitive, even though they might have different versions.
In general, I'm good with whatever though as I'm pretty easygoing and don't really like to lean to heavy one way or another as there is always potential in every path taken. I'm also more of a casual Tolkien fan, so I don't think I'd get caught up in anything unnecessary or hammer on anything. If I were to hardline on anything, it would be that we don't use the generals and have Middle Earth feel like its own thing thematically, while, of course, running perfectly smooth with Classic Scape, once again similar to HoSS. I don't know if getting HoME up and running again would be more of a continuation or a soft relaunch, but I would assume that cutting out generals might require more of the latter. It's perfectly understandable if that does not happen, but personally while I would still contribute, it would be less substantial. Nevertheless, I look forward to seeing HoME cooperatively put out some amazing work and hope to be a part of it.

Sorry, that turned into more of a messy commentary, it's late and i should go to bed.

[infectedsloth]

As I told you privately, I'm game for starting up again.

[Porkins]

Originally Posted by capsocrates

You're a great candidate too, Porkins!

Thanks, but I think I'll just for now. I'm not sure there's enough support for the clone of C3V type project you are envisioning...particularly with everybody having different goals and a different vision from your own.

[caps]

Originally Posted by Porkins

Thanks, but I think I'll just for now. I'm not sure there's enough support for the clone of C3V type project you are envisioning...particularly with everybody having different goals and a different vision from your own.

You made several sweeping statements there that I'm not sure you can actually defend. Why do you think my goals and vision are different from "everybody" else's?

I'm not envisioning a "clone of C3V type project." I am thinking something a lot closer to the AotV project.

[White Knight]

I'd like to restart this project, but I think it needs to run much differently from C3V or C3G or even HoSS. My recommendations:

1) We allow anyone to join in the beginning. Those who join become voting members.

2) We make a list of all the characters/creatures we want to make cards for in the Fellowship of the Ring

3) We do a Round 1 draft--each member gets to choose one card where they are lead designer. (A few of the cards might need to be grouped together under the same person.) Members do not get to abstain--if they want to join the project they should lead a design.

At that point, we will have each member responsible for leading one card design.


For EACH design:
A) Start a new workshop thread. All work for that card will take place in that thread.

B) The lead designer comes up with a concept card. He or she can ask for input in their thread if they want to gather more ideas first.

C) The lead designer posts their concept up for review by other members, and by the community in general.

D) After considering community feedback, and after modifying the card if desired, and possibly after some personal playtesting, the lead designer will post a vote to move the card to public playtesting. This will be a simple majority vote, but I suggest that each member can vote: yes, no, or veto. If a design receives 3 veto votes, it must be redesigned before submitting. If a single person feels strongly that a card needs to be vetoed, then it should be easy to convince two other members to vote for veto as well. If a person is just being stubborn, well then their veto means nothing.

E) Anyone can playtest the design and submit a report. If you playtest a figure, you become an honorary HoME member and are allowed to vote on that card.

F) After enough playtests (and probably some iterations on the design and playtesting), the lead designer can call for a vote to accept the card and move it to final editing. Same votes: yes, no, veto.

I strongly suggest we limit votes on the final design to only those members who did playtests. That will both encourage playtesting and also prevent armchair quarterbacks from stalling the design.

G) Cards that are accepted move to final editing. After a few days of editing, a final vote is made to accept the card. No veto on this vote: just a yes or no. This is just final acceptance of the wording and card layout. It is not a vote on the design.


With this format, even with a limited number of members, I believe we can make a lot of progress and see some great designs.

[caps]

Originally Posted by White Knight

I'd like to restart this project, but I think it needs to run much differently from C3V or C3G or even HoSS. My recommendations:

1) We allow anyone to join in the beginning. Those who join become voting members.

2) We make a list of all the characters/creatures we want to make cards for in the Fellowship of the Ring

3) We do a Round 1 draft--each member gets to choose one card where they are lead designer. (A few of the cards might need to be grouped together under the same person.) Members do not get to abstain--if they want to join the project they should lead a design.

At that point, we will have each member responsible for leading one card design.


For EACH design:
A) Start a new workshop thread. All work for that card will take place in that thread.

B) The lead designer comes up with a concept card. He or she can ask for input in their thread if they want to gather more ideas first.

C) The lead designer posts their concept up for review by other members, and by the community in general.

D) After considering community feedback, and after modifying the card if desired, and possibly after some personal playtesting, the lead designer will post a vote to move the card to public playtesting. This will be a simple majority vote, but I suggest that each member can vote: yes, no, or veto. If a design receives 3 veto votes, it must be redesigned before submitting. If a single person feels strongly that a card needs to be vetoed, then it should be easy to convince two other members to vote for veto as well. If a person is just being stubborn, well then their veto means nothing.

E) Anyone can playtest the design and submit a report. If you playtest a figure, you become an honorary HoME member and are allowed to vote on that card.

F) After enough playtests (and probably some iterations on the design and playtesting), the lead designer can call for a vote to accept the card and move it to final editing. Same votes: yes, no, veto.

I strongly suggest we limit votes on the final design to only those members who did playtests. That will both encourage playtesting and also prevent armchair quarterbacks from stalling the design.

G) Cards that are accepted move to final editing. After a few days of editing, a final vote is made to accept the card. No veto on this vote: just a yes or no. This is just final acceptance of the wording and card layout. It is not a vote on the design.


With this format, even with a limited number of members, I believe we can make a lot of progress and see some great designs.

I think we can definitely meet in the middle here. I will try to integrate this stuff into a counter-proposal today or tomorrow.

[caps]

Want to address some of Splash's posts before we move on.

Originally Posted by Splash

I do see the argument that Gandalf could of been stronger point-wise and whatnot, as he is basically the most powerful wizard in all of Middle Earth (at least by the time he's Gandalf the White) and he's not up to the level of the strongest human heroes Katsuro, Spartacus, or SotM Drake. There are also elves higher than he is with Sonlen and Ulginesh.
Also a random side note, bringing up Gandalf the White, another thing I like about HoSS (C3G does this too)is that it can be broken up by sort of era or film. So there could be a Fellowship Gandalf the Grey and a Two Towers/Return of the King Gandalf the White. I think going by novel/film is a cool way to do it. Also that way there would be less arguments (if that's really an issue) about design and ideas that weren't quite the right fit for one might work for another. Characters would still feel definitive, even though they might have different versions.

I think we were planning to do something like this and I would still like to.

Originally Posted by Splash

If I were to hardline on anything, it would be that we don't use the generals and have Middle Earth feel like its own thing thematically, while, of course, running perfectly smooth with Classic Scape, once again similar to HoSS.

We were definitely going to stick with Valhalla generals, and we still should. We were making alternate-art cards with other factions for people to use at home though.


--


I'll try to address the rest at the same time I respond with a counter-proposal