[Website Recommendation] 4.1 Scenarios and Downloads Section

[Apocalypse 31]

Issue:

1. 4.1 Changed how scenarios handle embedded custom maps.

2. When searching thru the downloads section for scenarios, many of the posted scenarios are unable to be played due to the designer using a custom map.

3. Players cannot filter searches by game version (this is a requirement to upload something - so why not a filter-able search?)

 

Recommendation:

1. Modify the Scenarios Download section.

2. Approach this in a similar fashion to SB Gold- Create a pre-4.1 (Legacy Scenarios) section for scenarios that are no longer supported -

3. The other solution (less recommended) is allow players to filter their search results by version #.

[thewood]

I agree with this.  Its sometimes frustrating trying to find scenarios with available maps.

[Sean]

I'll work on getting them organized.  It does not let you search by the pro pe version yet.

[Apocalypse 31]

7 hours ago, Sean said:

I'll work on getting them organized.  It does not let you search by the pro pe version yet.

It is appreciated. Thank you.

[Apocalypse 31]

On 1/14/2021 at 11:25 PM, Sean said:

I'll work on getting them organized.  It does not let you search by the pro pe version yet.

Thanks for the change-

 

More recommendations:

 

1. Fragmentation: Merge the categories of 'easy' and 'difficult' and title it 'Single/COOP' and 'Head to Head'. These categories fragment the scenario searching and make it harder to find what you're looking for. #2....

 

2. Classification: "Easy" vs "Difficult" - There is no standardization for what is considered an 'easy' or 'difficult' scenario. That idea is totally abstract, based on what the scenario designer thinks, and seeing many of the current scenarios - I can confirm that, that idea is MUCH different by player. OR #3....

 

3. I'd rather see scenarios classified by SIZE:  - "Platoon" / "Company" / "Battalion" / "Brigade". Or "Small", "Large", "Massive". That is REALLY what I think players are looking for when they search. 

 

 

Edited Saturday at 01:13 PM by Apocalypse 31

[Ssnake]

Maybe we should let users vote on tactical level / complexity / difficulty. Not every scenario may be categorized for this and the original authors may no longer be around, so I guess the next best thing is to give people who know the scenario (because they tried it out) some input as to where they see it.

[stormrider_sp]

I agree with Apoc that it would make more sense to sort/filter the scenarios by Size than Difficulty.

 

[Splash]

I also agree scenario size is a more useful filter than complexity.

 

The other main thing I look for in choosing mission downloads is the featured vehicles. I like that some makers include tags with that information, or it can be deduced from the description or screenshots (if any). But many force you to download and open before you find out it features vehicle(s) you aren't interested in or don't care to learn.

Yeah, the mission editor allows changing vehicles, but only if the file is not password-protected ... and then you run the risk of ruining playability. Grouping missions by vehicle set is an option, but too complicated probably ... but I would really like to see a requirement or searchable fields in the upload process that includes that info.

 

And I like Ssnake's thought about user votes on complexity ... maybe encourage players to include that assessment in their star rating.

Edited 15 hours ago by Splash
Added thought.

[Apocalypse 31]

7 minutes ago, Splash said:

The other main thing I look for in choosing mission downloads is the featured vehicles

I like this....

 

Maybe make the uploader check-box or pulldown menu as to which vehicles are included (I don't know how effective it would be to use the tag system for that)

 

[Apocalypse 31]

23 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Maybe we should let users vote on tactical level / complexity / difficulty. Not every scenario may be categorized for this and the original authors may no longer be around, so I guess the next best thing is to give people who know the scenario (because they tried it out) some input as to where they see it.

I think it is an interesting approach-

 

But what happens when 10 people download it and 5 say it is easy, because they have been playing SB for years, and 5 say it is complex (because they just bought the game a few weeks ago)?

 

What would the 11th downloader think?

[Splash]

 

5 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

But what happens when 10 people download it and 5 say it is easy, because they have been playing SB for years, and 5 say it is complex (because they just bought the game a few weeks ago)?

 

As you and others noted, difficulty is totally subjective/abstract. I would view a complexity rating by a user with the same eye as a product review on the interwebs. Something to aid in my decision whether to try it out ... and maybe as a field to narrow my search. 

 

I do think a "why" comment with any complexity/difficulty rating should be required.

[Apocalypse 31]

Just now, Splash said:

 

 

As you and others noted, difficulty is totally subjective/abstract. I would view a complexity rating by a user with the same eye as a product review on the interwebs. Something to aid in my decision whether to try it out ... and maybe as a field to narrow my search. 

 

I do think a "why" comment with any complexity/difficulty rating should be required.

I think its a good idea.

 

But hardly anyone now leaves ANY feedback. Would this make them less inclined to leave feedback?

[Splash]

1 minute ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Would this make them less inclined to leave feedback?

 

That might be a consequence. True. But maybe a separate issue from making mission files more easily searchable. 

[Apocalypse 31]

2 minutes ago, Splash said:

 

That might be a consequence. True. But maybe a separate issue from making mission files more easily searchable. 

yeah. Maybe I can go on fivr.com and pay a bunch of dudes for reviews, like a shady Amazon.com dealer. 

[Sean]

I removed all the categories from the single player missions.  It's ultimately up to the scenario developer to explain what their scenario is about and to give downloaders some idea of what they are getting.  Forcing the submitter to fill out extra fields and doing categorizing by mission size was tried in the past and it did not work out.

 

I think the best bet at this point is to use the tag system along with the description to let folks know what they are getting.  I added tag suggestions to the single player category for single_tank, platoon, company, battalion, and brigade.

 

Lack of reviews is a at least 20 year old problem.  No ideas on how to solve that.  Everyone seems to want to read the reviews, but only a select few take the time to write them.

[thewood]

The big issue across all niche game sites is that few want to criticize scenario makers.  You hate to criticize someone's hard work.  You also expose yourself to pushback that you aren't grateful for the effort it took to build scenarios.  Its easier to just not say anything. 

[Apocalypse 31]

39 minutes ago, Sean said:

I removed all the categories from the single player missions.  It's ultimately up to the scenario developer to explain what their scenario is about and to give downloaders some idea of what they are getting.  Forcing the submitter to fill out extra fields and doing categorizing by mission size was tried in the past and it did not work out.

 

I think the best bet at this point is to use the tag system along with the description to let folks know what they are getting.  I added tag suggestions to the single player category for single_tank, platoon, company, battalion, and brigade.

 

Lack of reviews is a at least 20 year old problem.  No ideas on how to solve that.  Everyone seems to want to read the reviews, but only a select few take the time to write them.

Perfect, thanks!