[[[ Maksim, I lurk on the Epic A boards and it seems your [[[ [[[ comments have been voiced there? Also I have seen a lot [[[ of other points being brought up, but no real resolution. ]]]
I'm a regular poster and I think that many of my comments are being read and that I am having at least a little influence in keeping the game from some undesired directions. Jervis has read and responded to at least a few of my comments.
Some of the other playtesters are incredibly sharp and I love their feedback. There are a few that seem like GW "parrots" toeing the party line. Most of the playtesters, however, seem to being giving excellent feedback and I hope Jervis uses it the best he can.
In a few cases, however, I haven't liked what's happened such as with the Stompas, which have had their stats decline bit by bit. They were unbalanced as individual units, but in light of much of the rest of their list being very limited, I found them balanced. I'm finding that the Orks seem to be getting more and more limited while the IG and SMs seem to being revised, for the most part, to be better and better. In the SMs case, they badly need that since they are very hard to win with. In the IG's case, I think they need to be toned down. Call it a hunch, but if the current rules hold, the first Epic GT should be won by an IG army.
[[[ What are your feelings on how they are handling the [[[ [[[ feedback? ]]]
It seems reasonable and fair. Jervis reads what he wants and comments when he has time. I don't have any illusion that the playtester's board is anything more than a tool to give Jervis a little direction. It certainly isn't a democracy (I wouldn't want it to be one either) and I'm glad that Jervis is making decisions, for better or worse. A "council" would be a bad thing for E-A. It works for NetEpic, but NetEpic exists under very different conditions.
Unfortunately, the "post-hogs" (playtesters who post so much that every post on the board gets a comment from them even if it's a cut and paste "repeat" from Jervis' comments) seem to get a very large proportion of Jervis' attention. I sometimes wonder if Jervis values the quantity or quality of a playtester's feedback.
This doesn't bother me overly, but I don't like to think that the game's direction might be steered by frenetic posters.
[[[ Do you feel that your input is being heard? ]]]
For the most part, yes. There's is a time post discrepancy on the boards that posts receive a time stamp from the local person's time zone, which means that US posters have their posts placed several posts behind (meaning not at the front of a line of posts) UK posters. In some cases, I think that this means my posts are glossed over (it wasn't at the front!) even though they are the latest in a line of ideas.
[[[ Is it your opinion that the game design is moving in the [[[ [[[ desired direction? ]]]
The game is currently pretty solid. I like it and it will work with a little support from GW and a hopefully available line of miniatures. Most of Jervis' choices have been good ones although I think that in the current incarnation of the playtest rules, the Imperials have some horrendous advantages that the only "enemy" race, the Orks, does not. Of course, the game has only four "Jervis-approved" forces currently (chaos, IG, SMs, and Orks). I can't comment on Chaos yet since I haven't playtested them or even played against them.
I'm not sure that the game will be great tournament wise, but as a game for two individuals playing who can add house rules, it's a great system. I don't plan to play against Deathstrikes unless they have LoS limitations or I'm in a tournament where I just have to bite the bullet (or better yet use them myself).
No matter what happens with the rules, what I am really waiting for is the new miniatures. I think they're going to be great. The few peeks we've had so far have been stupendous!
Primarch,
I personally feel that E-A can use your feedback as long as you don't become a NetEpic commissar. Your comments and feedback would be invaluable to Jervis. At the very least, noone will be able to say that your criticism is unwarranted if you have participated.
Shalom, Maksim-Smelchak.
|