Jump to content

Newb comments on SB

Recommended Posts

I do wish that there was some sort of review process for scenarios that wound up with those that passed being placed on an "approved" list, with the idea that the "approved" scenarios meet some sort of agreed-upon quality checklist.

Slapped-together scenarios that illustrate a certain feature are fine, but it would be Sweet Crunchy Goodness if there was a list of fully tested and refined scenarios that were known to meet a certain standard. Right now, hunting down quality scenarios is a serious PITA.

It might even motivate me to start fixing up some of my own scenarios so that they met those standards, especially if there was some sort of carrot for the designer for jumping through the QA hoops.

Some of those hoops are:

- doctrinally feasible mission (for both sides) Not necessarily "right out of the book" but something that makes some sort of sense;

- a reasonable Op O or Frag O written for both sides;

- properly functioning scoring and victory conditions (for both sides);

- thorough testing for all the various combinations of conditions, triggers etc so the thing never "runs of the rails"


Perhaps the first step would be defining the quality standards a scenario would have to meet before being admitted to the ranks of the "approved and/or official"


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
That particular issue is being (slowly) worked.

The SBSDG, while it doesn't necessarily speak to design quality issues, does mention some things to do if you want to make better (or if nothing else, more-functional) missions.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now