Atlas_TH Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 Got a chuckle out of this one... Two reviews of the same scenario, Rune's "A Battle of Minors". Which review graded the scenario higher? 1. "I was having fun until I got so many reinforcements that it became a chore to keep track of everything. It just got too big for my personal taste and I lost interest due to all the micromanagement of the constant streams of reinforcements. I completed the scenario, but the last few turns I just rushed things." 2. "Loved it! My first game of CMBB and I played against a longimte CMBO human foe. My only beef is that the game crashed on the 25th turn! I was moving my tanks in close to the church, quite confident of the win and blammo - stuck blue bar at the bottom. We tried opening it up as a PBEM but it still crashed. I can only hope it doesn't happen again..." ************************************************** * * * * * 1. 8.00 2. 7.83 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Keogh Posted October 17, 2002 Share Posted October 17, 2002 I'm going to try to explain how my seemingly negative review for a "Battle of Minors" had a higher rating than a review that just gushed about it. I don't think there is anything wrong with "A Battle of Minors" from a design standpoint- it has a great map, a nice briefing, the force balance seems well tweaked, and it is playable against the AI. Thus, my high scores on all those categories. However, I decided not to truly factor in my opinion of the scenario's fun value into my score. Generally, I compute a scenario's "fun factor" (which to me is more important than "force balance" or "replayability" ratings) into my rating for "Playable against the AI," but here I thought my personal prejudice against large sized battles would give the scenario an unfair score. So I gave it a 7 because the AI can offer a challenge in this scenario. If "fun" was a rating then I would have given "A Battle of Minors" a 5 or 6 in that category. As for the other reviewer's lower score. That's easy to explain- his review is about a PBEM match yet for some reason he gave the scenario a very low rating as "playable against the AI," which brought down his entire score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts