|
Post by easye on Nov 19, 2007 6:50:43 GMT -5
Greetings,
We are heading into the end game for the 2nd Semi-annual Unofficial Warseer Campaign. With that in mind, we would like to open a thread to provide the Mods with feedback about your experience.
What did you like? What didn't you like? What would you like to see continued in the future? What do you think would attract more players?
Thanks in advance. Happy gaming and Holidays.
Regards, Easy E
|
|
thechosenone
Chaos
Hallowed are the Gods! Divine is their path!
Posts: 23
|
Post by thechosenone on Nov 19, 2007 18:30:33 GMT -5
What did you like?
I love all the hard work everyone puts into writting up their games and the great fiction that results from it. Its really good.
I like the progress of the overall story and i like that the mods get everything done on time no delays.
What didn't you like?
I wish we knew a bit more about the scoring system and how to advance a story or advance a side's score. Maybe i'm unsure since i wasn't part of tirol campaign.
I wouldn't mind if the story involved specific players at times, especially when the number of players involved is so small.
What would you like to see continued in the future?
Narrative campaigns are the best thing ever. I love seeing people get into character and turn games into stories. That's awesome. So i guess i'd like more campaigns, the more you can run the better.
What do you think would attract more players?
Not sure what you did to market the game. I'd suggest posting on Bolter and Chainsword, Bell of lost souls and maybe even posting something up at your local GW shop and the players can do the same if they like
Great work Mods
|
|
thechosenone
Chaos
Hallowed are the Gods! Divine is their path!
Posts: 23
|
Post by thechosenone on Nov 19, 2007 22:29:44 GMT -5
Also, a system to include Apocalypse battles for battle reports
|
|
|
Post by LordJET on Nov 21, 2007 8:24:27 GMT -5
All is well th problem with player count is irritating, I mean 20 odd people sign up and then only 4 or 5 regularly contribute grrrr. I think the posting in local games workshop stores would be good if they would let you.
I think a way of improving the way that the narrative runs would be to have some sort of system available for a battle to be played ut over the internet. While I know this would be difficult and not as much fun as playing in person it would be the best way of integrating the story better.
Good work mods keep it up.
|
|
|
Post by kaser on Nov 21, 2007 11:34:21 GMT -5
I've been having great fun, I really enjoy watching the story pan out and become clearer as things get done. My feelings are very in line with everything LordJET and thechosenone have said. It is rather frustrating to have a large number of people sign up but then only have 4-5 people actually contribute. I also seemed to pick up that several campaigns are usually going on at the same time? If it could be arranged so that the campaigns didn't overlap that might help a bit...assuming of course that is the case. But overall excellent job, I'm already looking forward to the next one!
|
|
|
Post by easye on Dec 14, 2007 7:52:37 GMT -5
Thanks for your feedback at this time.
Next time, we will try to make the scoring system a bit more clear, but not clear enough to game the system.
We did discuss Apoc scoring, and decided at the time to not score them any different from normal 40K and killteam games.
Incubi created a random dice roller, so we are now one step closer to having an online version of the game. Then, forum members could more easily play against each other. Baby steps on that front, but honestly I'm not sure if it will ever be up and ready. Perhaps for the next campaign I will have some mapped out boards in 6 by 6 increments for measuring. Perhaps...
Yeah, the number of players thing. I'm really at a loss for this one. Perhaps some people are scared by the writing portion, the perceived committment of contributing, or something else. I just don't know what to do on that front. We had links and posts about the campaign all over the internet.
Finally, what do you guys think of the final reports?
|
|
thechosenone
Chaos
Hallowed are the Gods! Divine is their path!
Posts: 23
|
Post by thechosenone on Dec 15, 2007 11:48:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by LordJET on Dec 17, 2007 7:43:10 GMT -5
Final reports were good look foreward to the next campaign, this has helped keep me sane in my hectic 3rd year of uni keep it up.
Merry Christmas everyone and have a happy new year!!!
|
|
|
Post by kaser on Dec 17, 2007 12:52:15 GMT -5
I enjoyed the final reports very much. They seemed very thorugh!
I was wondering if we'd get to the opprotunity to post our "own" ending? I seem to recall that there was some sort of conclusion thread. If not that's cool, just wondering. >.>
|
|
|
Post by IncubiLord on Dec 18, 2007 2:53:52 GMT -5
I was wondering if we'd get to the opprotunity to post our "own" ending? Sure, why not? I'll just wander away from this unlocked door and whatever happens over there happens...
On cross-'net gaming: Vassal is probably a good example of what I'd want an online system to do (though it still looked... unfinished, when I last checked), but they got carried away and used GW-IP imagery (like the Chaos Star that's apparently a trademark or whatever). I'd like to see a system like Vassal up and running for 40K games, but I don't think we can integrate that one without stepping into the muck ourselves. If you choose to use something like Vassal and play games with each other, feel free to report it. Feel free to start a thread in General Discussion so that you can set up games with each other, too. We (the staff) have no interest in stopping you from playing and reporting games - that's the point of running a campaign. We might set up some sort of Arena of Death to allow something of interest between the players on-site, though - if there's interest.
On a personal note: One of the few reasons I didn't report battles for this campaign was that I felt I'd have an unfair advantage knowing all the inner workings of the system and having full access to the reports as they come in (not even the other staffers get the scores of the batreps until near the end of the week). An open system would be nice for the staffers, but I get uncomfortable about letting the details get out where the players can try to manipulate the system - I worry about attracting unsavory characters to our little funhouse. Perhaps it is time to try something very close to an open system? Tell the players that you'll score X points for the given results plus or minus Y 'discretionary points' which the staff control? That way, you know roughly how you're doing, but the players can't try to 'work the system' so that their chosen faction is a sure win?
|
|
|
Post by LordJET on Dec 19, 2007 7:02:12 GMT -5
Could you not use an adjudicator? For example if another online campaign was in a similar situation one of (or all of) their staff cold be responsible for scoring our campaign and vice versa? Then the staff of both games can play in their respective campaigns with an independant bunch keeping an eye out for metagaming and independantly scoring?
|
|
|
Post by IncubiLord on Dec 19, 2007 14:32:40 GMT -5
Could you not use an adjudicator? Then the adjudicator can't play in the game he's ruling on - and we're back to square one. Let's be clear on something: Good campaign staff are busy people. They need to read a good chunk (if not all) of the BatReps, work together to make the stories mesh for the different factional reports, write up a nice bit of story each week, and act as the campaign's contact for an entire faction (usually more). It's a fair bit of work and it can get a little stressful with the tight schedule between end-of-reporting and when the Weekly Updates go up. Those aren't the people who are going to be learning a different campaign system and watching over that at the same time as they run their own. I know that I wouldn't dare attempt to work on two campaigns at once as a staffer for both (which is really where an adjudicator comes in) - and if I tried it I wouldn't have time to report games myself, completely defeating the purpose. Besides, we already have a panel of adjudicators - our staff keeps each other in check pretty well (and they've out-voted me before ). I tend to be the one who seems to be running things to normal campaigners, but trust me - these guys have a say in whatever you see coming from the campaign staff. I think that the term "discretionary points" may have been misleading. The staff isn't whimsically handing out a few more points to the Tau because we like them today - there's set criteria for earning these bonus/penalty points which are either met or not - I just want to keep some of the 'guts' of the system from the players so they worry a little less about the scoring and more about the fun.
|
|
|
Post by Scorpio on Dec 20, 2007 22:02:12 GMT -5
I agree with Incubi, even though the Imperials(besides Inquisition) were completely non-existent in this campaign I was still here and helping others.(though to be fair I wasn't around as much as I should have been...alittle busy) About the number of players I'm just stumped. Looking at the sign-up thread we had atleast 5 if not more IG and certainly some SM but none of them ever did anything. I really don't know what happened. I guess they got intimidated by the quality of the other factions or seomthing... -Scorpio
|
|
|
Post by easye on Dec 21, 2007 4:54:47 GMT -5
As for the scoring, I agree; I don't want to give away the entire formula root and branch. However, a clearer idea of what different factions need to do to accomplish certain goals. For example, in this campaign I don't think we explained to the players what the difference between Narrative and Control points were very well; or why they were important for that matter.
|
|
thechosenone
Chaos
Hallowed are the Gods! Divine is their path!
Posts: 23
|
Post by thechosenone on Dec 22, 2007 21:47:53 GMT -5
All things considered i think you all ran a great campaign. The few players we had is rough but still it was something i hope you all felt was worth doing.
Have you considered maybe sending out emails to people that go more then two weeks without posting just to... for a better word... hassel them... in a nice way of course. Maybe if someone directly asks what's going on it might encourage them to get in gear. Its not like these people aren't out there playing games right? They just aren't bothering to post write ups i guess.
As far as us knowing the scoring system, its not really important beyond me knowing the difference between Narrative and Control points.
For goals, if a clear goal was stated weekly or whenever its needed and a factions progress toward that goal was explained in an out of game fashion it would let the players know and understand their progress a bit.
I also think its really important to directly involve players in some way. You don't have to write narratives for people or their characters but to make mention of them, or to allow the players' characters to in some way more directly influence the story would be nice. Especially for people that post every week a battle and some side narratives. That would be nice i think.
I'd certainly make a spot for people to post their own endings too, why not right?
You might almost want to take player suggestions for the type of campaign they want to play next, story suggestions i mean or even a poll. Ask us if we want to be invading a world and slowly claiming it from an NPC source. Maybe a player could be the ruler of a world and the other players trying to take it. Maybe its a barren world with no real value aside from an item or fugitive the campaign is based around. Maybe we're not even playing on a material world but a demon world, the interior of a massive space hulk or derelict space station or something like that. just thoughts.
As far as the moderators playing in the games... its not really a problem. We're grown ups here. If you tell me you have a point system and you know your going to follow it for yourself i'm adult enough to believe you. After all were all playing in this not to "win" but for the enjoyment of a narrative joint project.
Just my thoughts
|
|