For scenarios, I suggest only those from complete games. Did you want to split them up in to regions first?
I presume these will be Skype games.
Another thing, what is the proposed time frame?
(03-23-2013, 12:24 AM)plloyd1010 Wrote: [ -> ]For scenarios, I suggest only those from complete games. Did you want to split them up in to regions first?
I presume these will be Skype games.
Another thing, what is the proposed time frame?
I was hoping for scenario proposals from the crowd, but I can mine our balance data directly if need be.
Via VASSAL ideally because it avoids board-sync confusion ("I forgot to move so-and-so").
Time frame is whenever we can agree on the details!
One thing which may be interesting is to choose scenarios from one base game only. This would limit the cost of entry for those who would like to participate but do not have a wide collection.
When I suggested regions, I meant it as in game theaters/eras. I was thinking we could avoid the game ownership issue for a while. Start with Eastern Front battles, Pacific battles, and so on for the preliminaries. Sort out which games are required for the next stage when winner's libraries are correlated. Then, if Andrew has access to Vassel modules, that becomes a non-issue.
Since you put my name on it, I start venturing opinions. I took you spreadsheet, and took out scenarios with a net total of 0.1 or less, and had a total total (whatever that is) of 3 or more. I divided them into the 4 regions I described before. The PDF is the result.
I am hoping Andrew can use the player library data to help create the match-ups. Scenarios from books should still qualify, provided the player has the met the other game requirements. ie: not having Romanian Soil should prevent RoSo007 as a play candidate, provided both players have Elsenborn Ridge, Eastern Front and Road to Berlin.
Total_total is (total solo plays + total shared plays).
You sorted first by deviation, second by total plays. I don't think this is a good idea unless a scenario has 6+ plays. I
perceive (note the word choice
) Cass003 to be far more balanced than Cass017, for example.
But if I stand alone in this regard I will defer to the masses.
I chose total totals of at least 3, because 3 is the minimum ecstatically useful number. I only know how to rate my own perceptions. If you have a way to rate collective perceptions, let's do it. There are a lot of scenarios, most haven't been played very much. Perhaps we could do a nomination system along side the statisics.
For me, play via Vassal would be best. Sadly, given AP's attitude on Vassal, the only module available is the one for Airborne and it is a bit clunky.