Thoughts on The Proving Grounds

[rocketman]

TPG was launched a while back, and as a scenario maker I welcomed the initiative. I'm curious to know what people think of it and how it works and can be improved.

I have submitted one scenario and to this date it has been downloaded 40 times in about 5 weeks. I have yet to receive any feedback ...

I know people are busy and scenario testing might not be on top of their "want to do"-list. Feedback though is vital to become better at scenario making. Playing your own creation as a test is seldom really productive beyond a certain point. You basically know too much about it and need "a fresh set of eyes" on it. It can even be hard to tell if it is fit for release as it is or utter crap that doesn't deserve to fill up space on someone else's hard drive.

For me, the main problem with TPG as it is, is that I have no clue who has downloaded the scenario and in an indirect way said "I might be willing to do some testing". Thereby I can't contact them and ask what they think (even the shortest comment - good/decent/awful) or if they pass on doing tests - which is perfectly ok. It might be better to have a few people PM me instead to open up a dialogue about the scenario. Is this something TPG can facilitate?

So, you who have submitted - what are your thoughts? Have you received feedback? Was it helpful?

[Bulletpoint]

I submitted a scenario. At first, I was reluctant to make it public, because I was sure there were some kinks in it. As you said, after a lot of time working on a scenario, you develop a blind spot and need other people to take a look at it from the player's perspective. I didn't get much feedback back then though, so eventually I went ahead and uploaded it, because it seemed stupid to just keep it collecting dust on my computer. 

More than 100 people eventually downloaded it, but only one person gave feedback. He was disappointed to have found flaws in the scenario, and that actually bothered me, since I'm a bit of a perfectionist, and I knew that was what was going to happen when you release something that hasn't been properly tested. However, that guy's feedback was also really thorough, so I spent a lot of time tuning and updating the scenario based on that.

Edited November 21, 2015 by Bulletpoint

[Bulletpoint]

Actually now that I look at it, the scenario was uploaded to the Scenario Depot. Thought I had put it on the Proving Grounds. It was all new to me.

[sttp]

I really like the way they're headed with the Scenario Depot and Proving Grounds, overall. The one big thing I don't like about those sites, though, is that there appears to be no search feature? (How could this be? I'm missing something really obvious, right?) 

Anyway, what's your scenario's title? Normandy, Italy, or Red Thunder?

I'd be happy to make yours the next one I play, so long as it's not too big. I'm a micro-manager, so don't have the patience to spend an hour between turns, LOL. Also, it could easily be a week or two before I could start. Due to the holiday, plus I'm only ~10 moves into CMFI's "Keep of Majella"... a beautiful map, BTW, so kudos to the scenario designer Kari Salo. (An added plus is that its snowy conditions are really getting me into a Bulge state of mind....)

Oh, last thing: one of the problems right now with The Scenario Depot is that the BF Repository's files are still not all transferred over. So I've mostly still been downloading things from here. Not sure if that issue would be applicable to the Proving Grounds, but I suspect most people won't make the true switch in their minds until every file has been moved there.

 

[rocketman]

Thanks sttp for volunteering. No hurry though. It is a tiny 35 min CMRT battle with few units called "the Last Resort". PM me if you want to know more or provide feedback that way.

[sttp]

Just DL'd it. Sounds very interesting, especially the trigger use. And who doesn't love a good mystery!? Thanks.

[RockinHarry]

The original TPG concept with registered users and individual non public threads for to be tested missions was way better IMHO. Somehow I dislike the open blog style feedback section on the test mission main page at TPGII. I find it striking that there´s just 14 downloads of the TPG Playtest form, indicating maybe that the majority of downloaders mistake TPGII as an extension of SDIII? With a self made mission almost finished now, I´ll likely follow the approach of just uploading it to TPGII and link it to a seperate thread in BFC CMN Maps & Mods section, to get a more open discussion triggered, like it was at old TPG. Personally I don´t need a fixed playtest form and would rather explicitely tell and discuss, what the test mission is about, what I need tested and what sort of feedback I want. Not that it won´t function with TPGII open blog system, but I´d suspect more of the serious potential playtesters beeing around at BFC forum and more less interested mission grabbers at TPGII, yet time will tell.

 

[Bulletpoint]

indicating maybe that the majority of downloaders mistake TPGII as an extension of SDIII?

For people like me, who haven't been around to see things develop, that site is very confusing. Am I uploading to "A few good men", "The scenario depot", or "The proving grounds"?

[BletchleyGeek]

I don't find the "blog style" confusing or intimidating. Writing substantive feedback and not reading like an asshole isn't easy, it takes time. And there plenty of hoarders out there in the Internet who never do actually interact with the stuff they download. ...

Besides that, people get really timid on the Internet unless feedback becomes "safe" as in: 1) nobody contests my statements,  therefore everybody can feel like a genius or 2) giving constructive feedback is hard, basically because being considerate and thinking about what you write on the Internet matters isn't precisely something we're used to. 

Rocketman, Bootie's design principle lies on not having an "I like " kind of button. So you can't get one star ratings without comments. So unless someone comes along and sh*ts on your designs, the more downloads the more endorsements!

[Badger73]

I submitted a scenario. At first, I was reluctant to make it public, because I was sure there were some kinks in it. As you said, after a lot of time working on a scenario, you develop a blind spot and need other people to take a look at it from the player's perspective. I didn't get much feedback back then though, so eventually I went ahead and uploaded it, because it seemed stupid to just keep it collecting dust on my computer. 

More than 100 people eventually downloaded it, but only one person gave feedback. He was disappointed to have found flaws in the scenario, and that actually bothered me, since I'm a bit of a perfectionist, and I knew that was what was going to happen when you release something that hasn't been properly tested. However, that guy's feedback was also really thorough, so I spent a lot of time tuning and updating the scenario based on that.

I regret to have caused disappointment by my feedback.  That was not my intent.  It did allow you to discover the CMBN v3 bug with CMBN v2 TOE which contributed to most of the flaws found.  Please know that your reworked v2.2 changes produced a mighty fine scenario.  It is a challenging situation which brutally punishes bad tactics and eventually awards good ones.  Creative use of combat engineers is well rewarded.  I expect to post feedback for it at TPG later this week.  Thank you for creating "Pierrefitte-en-Cinglais" and putting it out for the rest of us.  Anyone else looking for a good solo game should try it.

Edited November 23, 2015 by Badger73
fix typo's

[Bulletpoint]

I regret to have caused disappointment by my feedback.  That was not my intent. 

By no means, your feedback was great. It's just that I knew that I would have caught some of those basic issues (the double squad leader bug) if I had had some more beta feedback prior to uploading.

[RockinHarry]

I think every mission/campaign maker requires somewhat different feedback, dependent on numerous topics. Whether a mission is fun, no fun, too easy, hard or balanced, just scratches the surface on matters the mission maker has more detailed interest in usually. Personally I´d also like to know what particular tactics a player applied and at what stages during a game. Supplementing a report with screen shots and save games would also help to get a picture of what happens during a game, the more if the mission uses rather elaborate AI plans, which become more and more tricky if triggers are used as well. Now find some playtester who is interested to invest the nesessary time and efforts for some more elaborate feedback, which I think is rather difficult. Whether this info is rather communicated via private or public channels, is another question (Spoilers).

Prerequisite is also the mission maker does the most play testing himself and that repeatedly, before uploading anything anywhere, to be sure that at least none the essentials have been overlooked. That also depends upon experience and expertise of a mission maker, so a beginner likely needs some broader feedback, while a veteran has more interest in particular details.

So with regard to TPGII, it needs time to develop to something like original TPG, where over the years a good number of mission makers and skilled play testers assembled to a well functioning community. Until then, as mission maker I wouldn´t solely rely on it and rather using all available channels (BFC forum, private mail, ...) to gather valuable feedback.

[LukeFF]

Personally, I like the idea behind these two new sites, but the ability to easily find what I am looking for needs some more work. Case in point: on SDIII, if I want to see the full listing of Red Thunder scenarios available for download, I have to select the CM Red Thunder link from the jump list; clicking on the CM Red Thunder [Scenarios] link below it will only bring up a partial list of scenarios. 

[JonS]

There's a new CMBN scenario at TSDIII here

http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/combat-mission-battle-for-normandy/cm-battles-for-normandy/le-noyer/

[rocketman]

Thanks JonS

[Bootie]

For people like me, who haven't been around to see things develop, that site is very confusing. Am I uploading to "A few good men", "The scenario depot", or "The proving grounds"?

Its rather simple really... nothing gets upload to The Few Good men site itself....  The Scenario Depot is for completed scenarios and The Proving Ground is "an aide" to assist you in finding play testers.  I admit TPG hasn't had as much feedback as hoped but I can only build it and hope people use it constructively

Actually now that I look at it, the scenario was uploaded to the Scenario Depot. Thought I had put it on the Proving Grounds. It was all new to me.

Nope you submitted it to the Scenario Depot.  See my last comment.  Unfortunately I'm unaware which scenarios have been tested and which haven't or I would have mentioned that point.

 

I really like the way they're headed with the Scenario Depot and Proving Grounds, overall. The one big thing I don't like about those sites, though, is that there appears to be no search feature? (How could this be? I'm missing something really obvious, right?)

Oh, last thing: one of the problems right now with The Scenario Depot is that the BF Repository's files are still not all transferred over. So I've mostly still been downloading things from here. Not sure if that issue would be applicable to the Proving Grounds, but I suspect most people won't make the true switch in their minds until every file has been moved there.

 

Good job that one big thing you don't like about these sites is there.

Scenario Depot...

And The Proving Grounds....  you can either use the search function or just click the Game you wish to see scenarios available for.

 

So with regard to TPGII, it needs time to develop to something like original TPG, where over the years a good number of mission makers and skilled play testers assembled to a well functioning community. Until then, as mission maker I wouldn´t solely rely on it and rather using all available channels (BFC forum, private mail, ...) to gather valuable feedback.

Exactly The proving Grounds is there as an aide to assist scenario designers... its not there as the pinnacle of scenario testing... just another tool in the means to an end.

Personally, I like the idea behind these two new sites, but the ability to easily find what I am looking for needs some more work. Case in point: on SDIII, if I want to see the full listing of Red Thunder scenarios available for download, I have to select the CM Red Thunder link from the jump list; clicking on the CM Red Thunder [Scenarios] link below it will only bring up a partial list of scenarios. 

Your wrong Im afraid.... If you click on the jump list you get 15 scenarios for CMRT.

This is the total amount of RT scenarios uploaded.  It works fine.

 

Im aware it is having teething problems but from my perspective every person wants it to do something different and I cant please everyone so I please BF and myself.  Im also aware that folk are still using BF Repository.  Its a one man show here and Im transferring scenarios as and when I can. Uploading to the Repository doesnt really help me to be honest as I will have to constantly check what is getting uploaded in areas I have already transferred content.  I suggest you stick to TSD or TPG as BF have every intention of closing the Repository down.

 

[Bootie]

 

[LukeFF]

There's a new CMBN scenario at TSDIII here

http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/combat-mission-battle-for-normandy/cm-battles-for-normandy/le-noyer/

Downloaded! It looks good.

[LukeFF]

   

Your wrong Im afraid.... If you click on the jump list you get 15 scenarios for CMRT.

This is the total amount of RT scenarios uploaded.  It works fine.

If that's the case, it's not working properly here. I see 10 scenarios for download if I click on the Red Thunder jump list option and only 8 if I navigate to this page. Don't mean to be harsh; I'm just providing my feedback on how the site's working for me at the moment.

Edited November 24, 2015 by LukeFF

[Bootie]

That link shows me all 15. Can someone else count the scenarios in that link provided please.

 

[John N]

Nothing wrong with the link, it shows all 15 scenarios.

[Badger73]

If that's the case, it's not working properly here. I see 10 scenarios for download if I click on the Red Thunder jump list option and only 8 if I navigate to this page. Don't mean to be harsh; I'm just providing my feedback on how the site's working for me at the moment.

 

That link shows me all 15. Can someone else count the scenarios in that link provided please.

 

You're both right in different ways.  As Bootie says, all 15 scenarios are there.  As LukeFF found, they don't all present themselves the same way.  On top, is "big" picture of newest scenario showing it's upload date.  Below that appears a 2 x 4 matrix of the next 8 without dates.  Beneath them is a vertical column of all remaining scenarios (6 in this case) older than the previous 9.  It pictures newest on top to oldest on bottom.  There's the forest and then there's the trees . . . .  Its all good!

Edited November 25, 2015 by Badger73

[Bootie]

Glad thats settled then.  Its the theme I use.... its a magazine style I purchased. It is the most asthetically pleasing to be fair and Im happy with how it displays.

Edited November 25, 2015 by Bootie

[Bulletpoint]

 

Nope you submitted it to the Scenario Depot.  See my last comment.  Unfortunately I'm unaware which scenarios have been tested and which haven't or I would have mentioned that point.

 

 

Well, the mistake is mine of course. It's a nice website, and miles better than the old repository. Some user stupidity is always to be expected

[RockinHarry]

TPGII is a good start, as something like original TPG (for CMX1) was badly missing for CMX2. Currently TPGII has bits of  potential for unfinished, not thoroughly tested missions to go into wrong hands, as some people who just want to grab and play, without wanting to give feedback, might be discouraged to grab it again, when it transfers finished/tested to SDIII. That´s no major problem. As said, it´ll take time for certain mission makers and testers get into longer lasting relations, when it becomes clear where individual preferences with regard to mission styles and such lay. Some are more interested to provide and play H2H, others like play vs AIP, armor heavy, small or big battles and so on.