Scenario Reviews
-
I am trying to create a system for reviewing scenarios. My idea is to specifically rate various features and then try to arrive at an overall rating. Each feature would receive a rating of -, + or 0. Some features might be excluded from the overall rating because they are matter of personal taste such as scenario size
Some proposed features to measure
- Unit Graphics
- Map Graphics
- Subject Interest
- AI Suitability
- Unit Types
- Diplomatic Rules
- Other Rules
- Victory Conditions
- Balance
Anything else I should be looking for?
-
@rogercooper maybe a speed attribute would be good some maps are much quicker to play a game than others
-
@ubernaut Good point
- Speed of Play
-
@rogercooper Your idea sounds great !
By the way, I am new to this forum and this game so please forgive my lack of knowledge : but what specific game/map/scenario are you referring to ranking ? Last I checked there was like a hundred games/maps on the TripleA site that can be downloaded and played. Some are not even WW2 games but are spin offs of the Lord of the Rings, etc. I have tried many but the list of games is daunting.
For your idea I would also add some of AI-playability scale - by that I mean some sort of ranking (1-100) that scores a particular game as being feasible and Fun to play against the computer. I am playing some sort of G40 game now that requires extensive player editing while some of the classic Axis/Allies games are easy to play and the computer provides a decent enough challenge if one plays with limited time to think and allows wide luck swings in the dice, lol.
NOTE. Some people refer to these different AA games as " maps." I just call them Axis and Allies games but I am new - So I need to ask are you calling them "scenarios?" or is scenario referring to something else? Thx
PS. I am new to this and want to start playing in tournaments. Have any suggestions ? And is there, or can we implement, some sort of International Player Ranking system for Axis and Allies much like Chess players do?
