Return to Index  

Hold On a Second

February 19 2004 at 5:29 PM
Sirian  (no login)
from IP address 65.128.204.115


Response to Aye

 
First step is to refine and publish a tactics list and to outline the scope of the tourney

This was not the first step in the creation of the Epics. Nor the second, third, or fourth.

The first step was to gather intelligence on the game. Remember, I waited for more than six months after play first started on Civ3 to put the Epics together. Note that I did not wait with MOO3, and remember where that effort ended up.

The second step was to wait for enough patches to be released to plug enough holes for the game to float, rather than sink, while carrying the weight of a rigorous tournament.

First step, figure out the game and its balance. Second step, upon discovering the balance issues, lobby for fixes and wait for enough of them to be delivered.

We had four months of active interaction through SG play, as well as six months of single play experience AND the benefit of watching the mistakes made by the "rush em out the door" tournaments. That, plus I invested a lot of personal time and energy into an often-painful lobby effort to get many of the game's worst problems fixed up -- almost all of which took place away from RB eyes.


We've had ONE Maso SG for GalCiv, and it has revealed problems to me. Big problems. I did not say I do not want to do this tournament. I said I do not believe I CAN do it now and get it right.

Are you sure you want to blow past that, grab the reins, and try to run with this thing? That is not to say that the way the Epics were done is the only way that could be successful, but you will be breaking with several elements of the Epics that I consider essential to their success and longevity.

The Epics have been steady and largely unchanged from the word go. We've never had to scrap core elements and start over, never put our players through experimental stages and "public beta tests". I made sure to work out a stable system first, and open the doors only when the product had already been polished and primed. I even tested what would become the Epics rules IN A CFC GOTM EVENT before finalizing them, where I discovered a number of issues I had not yet accounted for at that point.

If you do this, and you end up having to assemble and reassemble it in front of the public... If you open the doors to rules by consensus rather than rules by vision... If you break with Epics traditions... If you can't carry the load on scenario balance or creation...

Every move you make will set precedent. I've concluded I can't get it done from here at a quality level worthy of comparison to the Epics. Perhaps you can. There are ways besides how the Epics are done that could work. But I'm not seeing signs in your remarks that you've done any of that work yet. Instead, you seem ready to wade in on the strength of enthusiasm alone, and do the work as you go. That's directly contrary to a core principle of how the Epics were made successful.


- Sirian

 
 Respond to this message   
Responses

  1. Answering Zed's Point - Sirian on Feb 19, 2004, 6:38 PM
    1. Questions on timing - Zed on Feb 19, 2004, 10:03 PM
      1. Another thought - Zed on Feb 19, 2004, 10:16 PM
      2. Reply - Sirian on Feb 20, 2004, 1:09 AM
        1. Thanks for the reply - Zed on Feb 20, 2004, 5:15 AM
      3. Self-nit and more thoughts - Zed on Feb 20, 2004, 5:28 AM
        1. Some comments - Jaxom on Feb 20, 2004, 7:36 AM
          1. Reply - Zed on Feb 20, 2004, 7:14 PM
          2. AP expansion availability - Kylearan on Feb 21, 2004, 2:05 AM
            1. The hacking incident - Jaxom on Feb 21, 2004, 3:01 AM
     
  2. Eyes bigger than stomach? Shoot first and ask questions later? - Bam-Bam on Feb 19, 2004, 8:01 PM
  3.  
Create your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2014 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  

 
 




     



     
     
(reserved) Other Quick Links - FAQ, History, etc..