You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Scenario Design and Discussion
Moderated by HockeySam18

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.943 replies, Closed
Age of Kings Heaven » Forums » Scenario Design and Discussion » Review Requests: about Reviewing and Tutorials III
Bottom
Topic Subject:Review Requests: about Reviewing and Tutorials III
« Previous Page  1 ··· 6 7 8 9 10 ··· 20 ··· 27  Next Page »
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 07-22-10 09:35 AM CT (US)         


Here you may request a review for your file or for another's, whether it be because you would like a second opinion or because you believe a certain file is rated unfairly or is even over-rated. To do so simply leave a comment and the Thread Reviewers here will take a look at it. Please be patient as a skilled review can take some time to write.

BECOMING A THREAD REVIEWER


If you would like to help out with the community and become a Thread Reviewer, you need just four approved reviews. Please post your request in this thread or send a mail to panel@heavengames.com, naming your last review. You do not have to review regularly, but keep in mind that if you have not posted or updated a review within three months you will be put on inactive. To become active again, simply find your name below and post a review. If your name is not listed inactive anymore, your last review will have dated before 01/01/09 (DD/MM/YY) and you may re-enter the thread after one posted review only.




ACTIVE THREAD REVIEWERS
(In order of number of reviews)
* = Official Reviewer

169 Possidon*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS, AI-Files
107 Lord Basse*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS
92 Mashek*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
80 Sword_of_Storm (Jatayu)*: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS, AI-Files
45 Panel*: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
35 alekshs: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, Recorded Games, RMS, AI-Files
30 dragonslayermcmx: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
27 Sarn: Single Player, Mod Packs
18 Mayank Sharma: Single Player, Multiplayer, Mod Packs, Utilities
9 RladalFatih: Single Player, Non-Playable Scenarios
6 Dead_End: Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
4 HockeySam18: Single Player

CURRENT INACTIVE THREAD REVIEWERS
(In order of time of inactivity)

11 Leif Ericson: Single Player, RMS, AI-Files
55 Popeychops*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS, AI-Files
26 Julius999*: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios
25 Dtrungle*: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Utilities
09 joshua4missions: Single Player, Mod Packs
10 Fanica: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities
05 Jecon: Single Player, Utilities
08 hailstorm65: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities
27 Cilibinarii: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Utilities
23 FuzzyFurry25: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities
16 Guthan: Single Player, Multiplayer, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS

OFFICIAL REVIEWERS


Mashek
Lord Basse
Popeychops
Julius999
Jatayu (aka Sword_of_Storm)
Possidon
Dtrungle
Stephen Richards
Panel

HALL OF FAME


231 Tanneur99
95 Lord_Fadawah
92 BrandNewCar
61 clayperboy
54 rwilde
31 Stephen Richards*
30 zyxomma100
25 Magnum Zero
24 RF_Gandalf




REVIEW LIST

The list below consists of a number of requests and/or downloads recently rated by thread reviewers. Requests are marked R and updates U. Thread Reviewers are free to review whichever file they want, but should be aware that the designers at the top of each list are waiting the longest for a review. Files that have received a review in the time of request in this thread (whether by a thread reviewer or not) will be removed from the list unless a second opinion is requested.

AI Files: None

Utilities:
R Notepad++ AI Editor, by beladar; No Reviewer
R Enchanced Editor, by GeneralR; Reviewer: panel 3.3
DirectDrawFix - Color Update, by scripter64; Reviewer: panel 5.0
All Bitmaps of all Units, by dragonslayermcmx; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
All Bitmaps of all Buildings, by dragonslayermcmx; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
Advanced Genie Editor 2, by Keisari Tapsa; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
SLP Editor 2.2.5, by Hawk_Ruralist; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
DirectDrawFix - Color Update, by scripter64; Reviewer: Possidon 5.0


Mod Packs:
U Age of Vampires, by Khan Ivayl; Reviewer: Mashek 4.0, alekshs 5.0
Explosive Turtle Ship, by dragonslayermcmx; Reviewer: panel 4.0
AH-64 Apache Armed Helicopter, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: Lord Basse 4.3
Archery Range Pack, by Rageofempires; Reviewer: Mayank Sharma 2.8
Transformers BUMBLEBEE, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: dragonslayermcmx 3.3
Oriental shield king, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: dragonslayermcmx 4.3

Cinematic Scenarios:
ACSC10 - The Last Samurai - Blood Memories, by Sebastien; Reviewer: Mashek 4.6, Lord Basse 4.4
A Tribute To RU42, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: panel 4.6

Single Player:
R A Mans Home is His Castle, by joshua4missions; No Reviewer
R Sir Spart on Trench Shores, Demo, by Algren t l s; No reviewer
R Brotherhood of War (updated 1.3 version), by kahn1969; Reviewer: Panel;
R The Arabian Nights, by Jackrum; no reviewer
R ICE AGE ICE MAZE, by Xylon Draganthus; Reviewer: Panel 3.2
The Jaguar Gold, by Lord Basse; Reviewer: Sarn 4.8, dragonslayermcmx 4.8, Possidon 4.6
R Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, by Celebi Megatron; Reviewer: panel 4.4
The Conquest of Kent by Andrew W; Reviewer: Sarn 3.8
Phoenix (Unfinished), by Teotl; Reviewer: panel 4.2
Demon Town, by Devastator; Reviewer: panel 3.8
the TWO KINGS by Genghis, by Pro_Designer; Reviewer: Alekshs 3.0
Britannia Colonia, by Yekkelle; Reviewer: Sarn 3.0
Treasure Predator, by Devastator; Reviewer: Sword_Of_Storm 3.8
Helm's Deep by Magnus, by Lord Magnus; Reviewer: Sarn 2.4
MGC12-An evil "surprise", by Alekshs; Reviewer: Sarn 4.0
MGC2012 - The Siege of the Fort, by Mephiles5; Reviewer: Sarn 2.8

Non-Playable Scenarios:
R Forest, by Dragonslayermcmx; panel 4.0
The Jungle Thinghy, by IsuckatXbows; panel 1.5
R District of Allin, by Algren t l s; panel 3.0

Random Maps:
R Fertile Crescent, Revision 1, by OtmShankIiI; no reviewer

Multiplayer:
R Compilation of Multiplayer Games, by jburnell; No Reviewer
R Persia - Non Random Map, by Lakayaa; No Reviewer
R UDP - Deathly Cliffs - V3.2, by Heroes; No Reviewer
R Battleships, by TheReal_Hunter; No Reviewer
R The Seas of Egressa RP, by Guthan; No Reviewer
R city catastrophe(complete version), by bigboy37731; No Reviewer
R UDP Prison Break, by Alevo; No Reviewer
R Paradise Lands, by sathcooperation; No Reviewer
R SAVE YOUR @$$ (beta2), by rohit021089; No Reviewer

Recorded Games:
DM 1 vs 4 Hardest.mgx, by zebratangozebra; Reviewer: Alekshs 1.5





FILE UPDATES AND OBSELETE REVIEWS

Please edit your review after an update. A designer can ask for the removal of all reviews after an update if he feels that they do not represent the actual version of his submission. Reviews that address issues that are fixed, altered or ameliorated do not serve the visitors of our site. A review has to be a valuable tool for the designer and the downloader.

RECENT UPDATES/ REVIEWS TO EDIT
(In order of date of the update)

10/23/11 Roots to Noah's Arc, by Pancho Villa 347; Reviewer: Mashek
11/25/11 Age of Vampires - Blood Reign in Transsylvania, by Khan Ivayl; Reviewers: Mashek




Please read the REVIEW GUIDELINES

Without trying to enforce the Review Guidelines as something as law, they are still a very important part of the review system here at Age of Kings Heaven, and are used to create consistency between reviewers at the Blacksmith in order to establish fairness and equality for reviews. With the Review Guidelines’ recent update all reviewers need to take into account the new addition of rules when reviewing. However, Angel SpineMan’s primary objective for reviewing in the Old Guidelines still applies today:

“This article will provide a description of how to write quality reviews for Age of Kings Heaven that are scored consistently between reviewers and are helpful to both the file's creator as well as the potential downloader.”

In some cases, a small percentage of reviewers tend to review files according to their own rules, leading to inconsistency between reviews at the Blacksmith, which is neither helpful nor fair to anyone. To have reviews at the Blacksmith that are fair and helpful, reviewers have to follow some rules to score consistently.

If you have any questions about reviewing, please do not hesitate to post in this thread!




Single Player Campaigns and Scenarios


There are many invaluable lessons to learn when becoming a good reviewer, and a few other things besides that will result in a good and fair review. Some things are self-evident when reviewing a file; in general, do not review game styles you do not enjoy and review files according to the date of its release. There are many files back in 2000-2002 that received a score of a high 4, which would not fit the standards of today. You have to take into account the standards of the day, and rate accordingly. In addition, if the scenario is designed for original Age of Kings, review it playing AoK.

Below you will find a general breakdown of each category from a review for your convenience.

PLAYABILITY is about the fun you had while playing a scenario, and here you need to mention what affected your enjoyment in a positive and/or negative way.

BALANCE is about how easy or difficult a scenario was for you. You should mention which difficulty you played on when reviewing, although this is not mandatory. A good approach to reviewing a file would be to start with moderate and later change to standard, to see if the scenario was too easy or too hard or well-balanced overall; before ending off with hard difficulty. However, reviewers will need to take into account that not all files are difficulty-level-dynamic. In general, remember that you are rating the file according to your own skill level and not that of others.

CREATIVITY covers every aspect of a scenario. Remember that a file does not need anything new to achieve a high score.

MAP DESIGN scores compared to a random map which rates 2.0. Anything worse or better than a random map may be rated up or down accordingly. Some tips for rating this category is that you rate what you see during game play, which means no Marco and Polo. The map size and how much of the map was used should not affect the rating.

STORY/INSTRUCTIONS is a little more interesting than some. Probably the most common detail reviewers tend to overlook is that this category covers two aspects of any scenario, story and instructions. Not just one or the other. If the file is lacking in one then you can make note of that in the review and mark down accordingly. However, this does not pertain to multiplayer scenarios, whereby a story is not mandatory. In general, the presence of a functional story (while not necessarily being a good story) with instructions should be midpoint, a 3. From there you should be able to give an accurate overall rating for this category.

Non-Playable Scenarios

For files such as those where playability is void and map design is the only feature of the file (e.g. entries to the Totally-Terrain Contest), the category should therefore be used to take a look at the technical and creative qualities of the map design, while referring to how that design pushes the boundaries of realism in an AOK environment. One particular thing to note here is that just because the file is all about pretty map design, that doesn’t mean it cannot feature any creative features that might breathe life into the design, such as towns brought to life by wandering villagers, people going about their everyday lives, and other unique devices besides. Basically, anything that goes into making the map more alive and as such realistic should be taken into consideration. As the file will likely feature little anything else other than map design, a single overall rating between 1 and 5 will be fine.

Scenarios without Fighting

An exception to the balance category is when the author of a particular file did not intend any fighting, or very little of, to feature in the scenario. From the review guidelines:

One important note about scoring the balance category for scenarios is that where no fighting takes place, such as some puzzle scenarios and some RPG-style scenarios, is that just because the player cannot die in such scenarios, that doesn't mean the scenario isn't balanced. Difficulty can also be present via puzzles or other devices, and the balance of these should be taken into account.

For files such as the Pretty Town Contest entries whereby there is a great degree of walking and nothing else much, reviewers should therefore take into account the author’s intention. If it was intended that you walk around and gaze at the beauty and wonder of a landscape, then you need to rate on that account.

Rating Cut-scene Style Scenarios

Cut-scenes rate like any other scenario, the only difference is that most cut-scenes do not allow any interaction for the player, requiring only that the player sits down and watch as the story unfolds. Cut-scenes are a mixed bag of lollies; some designers appreciate them, others however do not. The purpose of a cut-scene is to tell a story, to continue or conclude a project, like in Ulio with the old man in the forest and the two travellers. In the general sense of the word Playability, we rate the fun we had while watching the cut-scene and how playable it is.

The very definition of Playability denotes many errors, some already obvious. In Tanneur99’s words, the previous Blacksmith administrator and owner of this thread, “playability is a bastard word. It does not exist in the English language and separating the word into play and ability gives an incorrect meaning for the category. Ability to play would be listed under balance, the ability of a player to play a certain difficulty level of a file. It is a common error to believe that cut-scenes are unplayable. Gordon Farrell wrote that you play a cut-scene in the same sense as you play a CD on your CD player. If the CD has scratches and/or is dirty it is less playable to unplayable. A cut-scene is less playable to unplayable when we encounter bugs and/or lag. In closing, rate the fun you had watching the cut-scene and deduct for bugs and lag.”

For rating Balance in cut-scenes, the review guideline gives us this description:

for scenarios with no interactivity, such as cut-scenes, this category should be used to examine the flow and technical merits of the cut-scene: did it run smoothly? Was everything technically put together well

This means that reviewers can now rate down in this category for all those dodgy timing sequences, overlapping music, and anything else that would not necessarily affect one’s enjoyment but the technical aspect of a cut-scene. This also gives balance in cinematic scenarios more depth and meaning, and contributes more to the overall rating of a review than previously attained. Every technical aspect is to be taken into account, and what happens on-screen should generally correspond smoothly with dialogue and the overall transition of the story. Generally speaking, the less the cinematic leaves up to the viewer’s imagination, the higher the quality of the presentation. In saying all that, a cinematic should never feel rushed or sluggish, but proceed from scene to scene as the atmosphere and story suggests.

Demos, Teasers, Unfinished Scenarios

Unfinished files, demos and teasers are common at the Blacksmith and make up a great percentage of submissions. Many designers, like writers, look for feedback on their work: to help get past a certain point in their project where they might be hindered from progressing, or to catch up on any bugs that might be bothering them. Some authors return to the file and provide the Blacksmith with a complete update of the file as a result of the feedback.

When reviewing unfinished files, it’s important not to discriminate because it is an incomplete work. There’s no reason to knock down points just because somebody put Demo or Teaser in the title to get some feedback to know what he/she could improve on in an update. Rate a demo as if it is a finished product. This will achieve the best possible feedback for the author of an unfinished file.

Multiplayer

The Official Review Guidelines is the directive for rating single player scenarios and multiplayer scenarios, with an exception to Balance only. When judging BALANCE in multiplayer scenarios, you rate nothing else but the starting positions of each player, which should be equal for all to achieve the highest rating. For more on this please read post 264 of the previous thread.

Random Map Script


AI-Files

The first question to ask when rating an AI-File is what is the AI intended to do and how well does it perform in that specific area? There are AI-Files developed for many intents and purposes: for scenario design, training, specific maps (e.g. Arabia), death match, tournament, defensive/ aggressive files, water maps or land maps only, etc.

If the AI-file is developed for Age of Kings test it playing Age of Kings only. Rating an AI according to your own experience might be biased unless the AI cheats. Cheating AI-files, as forbidden for tournaments, are meant to play against human players. A good way to test a non-cheating AI is against the standard AI. If its performance compares to the standard one, it is average and the minimum rating should be a 3. In general, rate the AI-file according to its time. Many AI-files were developed to beat another specific one. It would be unfair to knock off points of an AI developed in 2000 because it loses against a more recent one.

Modification Pack Script

A Modification Pack Script (MPS) is mainly an item for the player, which has a limited use for designers; the content will not always suit a designer’s endeavours in scenario design and is very limited to its audience. Keep this in mind when you rate mod pack scripts for USEFULNESS/NOVELTY and QUALITY/INSTRUCTIONS. The main categories are USEFULNESS and QUALITY for the overall rating of a MPS. Use NOVELTY and INSTRUCTIONS to correct the category rating. Still, for a perfect rating the MPS has to excel in all four categories.

Utilities

There is no official guideline for reviewing utilities, but for some ideas you can go here. A utility is a tool for the designer and has hardly any use for the player; keep this in mind when you rate utilities for USEFULNESS/NOVELTY and QUALITY/INSTRUCTIONS. Often you cannot rate the novelty factor because the file is another eye candy map of Lord of the Rings, a Volcano, Waterfall, Trigger Guide, Tutorial or collection of battle sounds. In other words, nothing new. Originally the fifth category was Creativity but this was too close to Novelty, better to have the two rated together if possible. When you feel Novelty does not apply, you can replace it with Creativity. The four categories are of equal importance for the overall rating of a utility.

Recorded Games

The value of a recorded game is highly subjective depending mainly on the purpose for which the submitter uploaded it. A recorded game must have a specific and defined purpose so the viewer can gain knowledge and/or entertainment value from the game. The submitter must specify exactly what to look for, what the point of the upload is.

It is up to the reviewer to check if there was any purpose and how well the recorded game met the intended goals. If it is supposed to be an example of a rushing tactic but no attacks happen until 30 minutes into the game, it is a bad example of the tactic. The rating is not about how well everybody played, if the teams were equally strong, you can mention that but it should not affect the rating.

The questions to answer: What is the purpose of the record? How well does the game show the intended goals? Is it entertaining and/or can the viewer gain knowledge from it?




Review Thread History

Luke Gevaerts started the Review Request Thread 03/30/2002. Tanneur took over 11/30/2002 until 7/11/2009. I (Mashek) have since taken over and updated the thread as best I can (disputable) to feature more relevant information according to today’s guidelines.

[This message has been edited by Dead_End (edited 05-18-2012 @ 07:04 PM).]

AuthorReplies:
Leif Ericson
Seraph Emeritus
posted 01-24-11 04:08 AM CT (US)     246 / 943       
Just read your review Popey! Thanks alot. Its my highest rating so far.
Just don't forget that most of it was my work.

~`o´~|\  Join the fresh and exciting AI Ladder for its fourth season!
´ `  |_\
       |    Learn the joy of AI scripting in my guide: The World of AI Scripting
______|______
 \        /
   .....Hinga Dinga Durgen! - SpongeBob
  `-=<.__.>=-´
Possidon
Slayer
posted 01-24-11 10:39 AM CT (US)     247 / 943       
Yes I do kniow that leif. You have been credited loads for it. I may take some time to create another one soon.
Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 01-25-11 11:40 AM CT (US)     248 / 943       
Mashek, you're basically asking us to ignore the guidelines and rate old scenarios with nostalgia then?
Why should they be rated any differently to today's scenarios?
Therefore, on what basis do they deserve a higher score than if the same file was released today?
Surely skewing the results to favour older scenarios eschews the whole point of reviewing, and the whole point of the "best of" category.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 01-25-11 05:42 PM CT (US)     249 / 943       
Mashek, you're basically asking us to ignore the guidelines and rate old scenarios with nostalgia then?
Why should they be rated any differently to today's scenarios?
Therefore, on what basis do they deserve a higher score than if the same file was released today?
Surely skewing the results to favour older scenarios eschews the whole point of reviewing, and the whole point of the "best of" category.
To be fair, yesterday's standards were considerably poorer, simply because designing was still developing (and I've heard many people argue that Ulio is even beginning to age, although I disagree with them). I'm simply asking you to put aside your perspective and some of the things that you know today and take into consideration the standards of the day of that particular file's release. No one said anything about rating higher or disregarding the review guidelines, but there's no use rating a scenario back 'then', which for its time was considered very creative, and then spouting how there weren't enough trigger tricks, use of Genied, no modified data files and no fancy mechanics. You're trading what you know today in favour of a fair review. It's the same as a military tactician of the Second World War looking back and criticising the tactics of the Great War twenty five years earlier (although you couldn't blame him, but you do get my point). Today asks for something new, so how it would it make much sense to go back ten years and rate something that is old to us? As I said in my post before, you'd only be penalising a file for its age and nothing more. That is not to say that every file with a good rating deserves it. No. Even taking the standards of the day into account there are some files rated highly simply on err of the reviewer, because he didn't really know what he was talking about or because it was the first file he played and thought it was the best thing since sliced bread.

The point is, would it be fair to rate a file down several years later simply because it doesn't hold to today's standards? That's basically what you're attaining to. Some of the 'Best of', those files that deserve to be there, made in the past and that scored a 4.6+ wouldn't achieve higher than a 4.2 today. Take this for example, From Prince to Renegade by Lighthouse Creations designed back in 2000. At the time of reviewing, I wanted to give it something like a 3.8 but Tanneur very quickly explained to me the very thing I'm explaining to you now. I had a look at a few other files of the day and realised it was actually a very big scenario for its time. The story is about Moses, and tricks like the 'burning bush', entering the Pharaoh's palace and saving a villager from an Egyptian soldier were enough to warrant a 5 in those days. I admit my review is a little over-done, and a more accurate review might award a 4.6, but the file is a good example of what I'm trying to get across here.

Whoa, long post.

[This message has been edited by Mashek (edited 01-25-2011 @ 05:45 PM).]

Carlos Ferdinand
Squire
posted 01-26-11 04:13 AM CT (US)     250 / 943       
Popeychops, to be honest not using that monk for your mission along with ur army makes a BIG difference to balance. The monk is not just for healing, it can be used pretty effectively to convert enemy soldiers as well, also healing ur units while battles are going on, and healing after battle makes a huge difference between each other.

This was one of your two main points u mentioned in playability section. You observation that it wont make much difference isnt correct. You told that it was boring because of having to run every guy to the monk dude in town. But you dont have to, as i already said, and i verified this from all angles and stages of play. I wont believe that you had a bug specific to your pc just for the monk in my campaign lol.

The way your telling it wont change things much is just unfair to me. I dont ask you to play the whole game again, just edit the review by predicting what happens if u use the monk- its a 50 hp one, and also it can pick up "true cross" in Iviza giving you a boost of resources to train ships and army.

In other words, using and not using your monk makes THAT much of a difference to your game as it is one of the KEY units, along with carlos.

CARLOS FERDINAND 2-- THE MEDITERRANEAN DRIZZLE

MY GOTH MEN-AT-ARMS STRATEGY
CARLOS FERDINAND - 1. A KINGDOM'S DAWN

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Voltaire

[This message has been edited by Carlos Ferdinand (edited 01-26-2011 @ 04:14 AM).]

Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 01-26-11 03:56 PM CT (US)     251 / 943       
Carlos, you can choose to believe what you want. If you actually read the entirety of my review instead of picking out the words you don't like, you'll notice that I place considerable weight on the long boring quest section being the biggest flaw in the game in the playability and creativity sections. My going back to the monk adds maybe five minutes of gameplay. I'm not going to change my opinion of the game balance. It is hard, but possible.

Look, I've updated my review for you, but you're continuing to make complaint after complaint over small things which I've explained to you.

In my opinion your scenario is not deserving a mark higher than I have given. As scenarios go, its not great.
The point is, would it be fair to rate a file down several years later simply because it doesn't hold to today's standards?
I'm not saying they should be marked down for not having AGE, etc. but they should have to fit in with the guidelines, exactly like every other scenario.
Should we discriminate against scenarios released today because they're newer? One way or another, you've got to adopt a double-standard.

Why should we protect old scenarios which have unfairly high ratings, while new scenarios are judged by much harsher criteria? It is possible to make a scenario using only the editor that would score 5's in all fields. All it takes is effort, and if the designer won't put effort into their work, why do they deserve a higher rating?

The way I see the categories is like this:
Playability: Fun
Balance: Difficulty
Creativity: designer's thought put in
Map design: Prettyness
Story/instructions: Readability.

All of these are increased by designer effort and intelligence and decreased by laziness.
The age of a scenario doesn't affect my rating of it. Over the past two years, I haven't seen a huge increase in scenario quality, as the scenario tools have become more widely available. I don't see why going back to rate down a few files that don't deserve their ratings based on the official review guidelines is a bad thing.

Although, if the guidelines change then the "corrective" reviews would become redundant.

For reference, after playing through from Prince to Renegade I believe I'd score it 4-5-3-4-5, overall: 4.2.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
Possidon
Slayer
posted 01-26-11 04:00 PM CT (US)     252 / 943       
Just wondering Mashek it's been a while but do you think my reviews are good enough yet for me to become an official reviewer. If I'm not yet then tell me how I can improve.
panel
Squire
posted 01-26-11 04:58 PM CT (US)     253 / 943       
IMO, the only category in which old scenarios should be judged less harshly than others is the creativity one. But only in some cases.
Carlos Ferdinand
Squire
posted 01-27-11 11:18 AM CT (US)     254 / 943       
Popeychops, you can rate my scenario as you like but not transporting Xavier will make it significantly harder. No questions there. Anyway Im awaiting possible reviews/comments from Sebastien and Andanu, so feels good.

CARLOS FERDINAND 2-- THE MEDITERRANEAN DRIZZLE

MY GOTH MEN-AT-ARMS STRATEGY
CARLOS FERDINAND - 1. A KINGDOM'S DAWN

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Voltaire
Leif Ericson
Seraph Emeritus
posted 01-28-11 01:36 AM CT (US)     255 / 943       
I think that Popey was trying to say that his inability to transport Xavier had hardly anything to do with his Playability score, and instead that it was other parts of the scenario that brought the score down in his eyes.

~`o´~|\  Join the fresh and exciting AI Ladder for its fourth season!
´ `  |_\
       |    Learn the joy of AI scripting in my guide: The World of AI Scripting
______|______
 \        /
   .....Hinga Dinga Durgen! - SpongeBob
  `-=<.__.>=-´
Carlos Ferdinand
Squire
posted 01-28-11 06:32 AM CT (US)     256 / 943       
...Im talking about the balance aka difficulty...

Having a monk along with you will make a clear difference in difficulty since you can use it to heal during battles as well as convert enemy soldiers. That too, a 50 HP one..

EDIT: With Xavier, you can also pick up the piece of true cross (that small relic) which will give you more resources which means more troops.

CARLOS FERDINAND 2-- THE MEDITERRANEAN DRIZZLE

MY GOTH MEN-AT-ARMS STRATEGY
CARLOS FERDINAND - 1. A KINGDOM'S DAWN

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Voltaire

[This message has been edited by Carlos Ferdinand (edited 01-28-2011 @ 08:45 AM).]

Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 01-28-11 10:47 AM CT (US)     257 / 943       
Heal during battles? You're telling me to run a monk up within healing range of my melee guys and risk losing it to cav or archers? If I'd have the monk with me I'd have kept him sat out of the fighting anyway. With one monk you can't risk losing it anyway, not with the amount the odds are stacked against the player.
I'm sure those resources would have helped, but I doubt it would help much. How much would I have got?

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
Carlos Ferdinand
Squire
posted 01-28-11 11:20 PM CT (US)     258 / 943       
Heal during battles? You're telling me to run a monk up within healing range of my melee guys and risk losing it to cav or archers?
Enemy willnot target the monk unless it starts converting, as long as it stays behind your units. Try doing that (only if you dont believe me)first, and you will see the difference. The fact that your monk has 50 hp, as well as that you can garrison the monk in a tower or transport ship, really makes the chances of losing it in battle close to nil. Really, healing during battles helps you a lot and you can protect the monk with ur units easily.

I dont remember the exact res for true cross, i believe it was 500/600 Stone, which can be used to get faster and stronger ships at cuencan university(really worth it) and/or fully sold at market to add more ships.

Remeber one more thing: As enemy finally gets weakened during the battle, converting one or two units/ships with the monk REALLY helps. An example is that 5 galleys are 1.5 times as powerful as 4 galleys, when ships are fighting together- the difference is pronounced.

CARLOS FERDINAND 2-- THE MEDITERRANEAN DRIZZLE

MY GOTH MEN-AT-ARMS STRATEGY
CARLOS FERDINAND - 1. A KINGDOM'S DAWN

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Voltaire

[This message has been edited by Carlos Ferdinand (edited 01-29-2011 @ 02:14 AM).]

Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 01-29-11 07:54 AM CT (US)     259 / 943       
Winning the oceans with 6 galleys and 2 fireships was my method. It took time but worked well enough.

I'm not updating my review again unless Mashek tells me I need to, and that's final.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
Carlos Ferdinand
Squire
posted 01-29-11 08:04 AM CT (US)     260 / 943       
Popeychops, with all due respect:

Why are you so defiant on "not changing the review"? I explained to you how much not using monk upsets the balance. Your last post doesnt answer ANY of them.

I was lucky i found out this, but you played my campaign the wrong way.
Winning the oceans with 6 galleys and 2 fireships was my method. It took time but worked well enough.
And so what? I'm saying that balance will improve for sure if u use the 2nd most important unit in my scenario over to the islands!

The thing is this isnt "subjective" like playability and creativity, but these are facts and figures- almost as simple as that.

CARLOS FERDINAND 2-- THE MEDITERRANEAN DRIZZLE

MY GOTH MEN-AT-ARMS STRATEGY
CARLOS FERDINAND - 1. A KINGDOM'S DAWN

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Voltaire

[This message has been edited by Carlos Ferdinand (edited 01-29-2011 @ 08:08 AM).]

John Mendl
Squire
posted 01-29-11 08:20 AM CT (US)     261 / 943       
So, did the other people who played Carlos' scenario get the monk Xavier Miguel?
Possidon
Slayer
posted 01-29-11 10:26 AM CT (US)     262 / 943       
Finished my Review for Basse's Runescape RPG. It is a great map and I gave it a 4.8.

Mashek you still haven't answered my question about Offical Reviewer.
Basse
Squire
posted 01-29-11 10:31 AM CT (US)     263 / 943       
Wow, thanks Possidon!
Sebastien
Dark Samurai
posted 01-29-11 10:40 AM CT (US)     264 / 943       
Carlos, you should chill out. Arguing and getting angry about it (which you clearly are) isn't going to change the review. You seem to have the wrong attitude.
Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 01-29-11 10:44 AM CT (US)     265 / 943       
Why are you so defiant on "not changing the review"?
Because you expect everyone to play your scenario in the way you intend them to. You ignore its shortcomings and insist that I am wrong in every aspect. You refuse to admit the unfortunate truth, that CF2 is a poor scenario with a very high difficulty curve.
You also consistently ignore my main point: that the first half of the game is DULL!
As it was, I was able to win using micromanagement, all I had to do was make frequent trips back to the monk. Not having the monk didn't make it a great deal harder. Nor did it make it a lot more boring, you'd already done a fine job of sending me to sleep.
I will edit my review to include all this. I'll also edit out the areas where I have been sympathetic to you.
This is what happens when you try to get your own way all the time. You will get nowhere in life with that kind of attitude.

I have nothing further to discuss with you.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile

[This message has been edited by Popeychops (edited 01-29-2011 @ 10:46 AM).]

Carlos Ferdinand
Squire
posted 01-29-11 01:00 PM CT (US)     266 / 943       
Carlos, you should chill out. Arguing and getting angry about it (which you clearly are) isn't going to change the review. You seem to have the wrong attitude.
I see how you get the impression that i was angry, but in reality, with all honesty i was not angry when i made those posts.

I have no problems with you, but you should realise that playing my scenario without transporting xavier severely rigs its balance!.
Because you expect everyone to play your scenario in the way you intend them to
Pardon me, but playing my scenario by using xavier miguel to mission is mere common-sense, which you seemed to either lack or was very careless while playing it.
You refuse to admit the unfortunate truth, that CF2 is a poor scenario with a very high difficulty curve.
Why should i accept that "my scenario is poor" when i am confident it is not? As for very high difficulty curve, that happened partly because you didnt even transport xavier miguel to islands, the benefits of which i already explained to you. (I doubt whether you even read them)
You also consistently ignore my main point: that the first half of the game is DULL!
And please enlighten me on what on earth has that to do with balance of the game which we were discussing now?
Not having the monk didn't make it a great deal harder
I must congratulate you on completely ignoring my last posts. You simply have no idea how much benefit you get if you use your monk effectively(its even mentioned in the hints that xavier miguel is a crucial man in your mission).
Nor did it make it a lot more boring, you'd already done a fine job of sending me to sleep.
As i already told, "boring" has nothing to do with balance which i was talking about. Isnt it funny how he defends every argument about balance, by telling it is "boring" and "dull".
I'll also edit out the areas where I have been sympathetic to you.
Who needs your sympathy points? The pathetic fact is that you reduced my points because i made up legitimate arguments about the sort of illegitimate way you played my game.
This is what happens when you try to get your own way all the time. You will get nowhere in life with that kind of attitude.
Please, stop teaching me about real life. I am already in one of the rather good engineering colleges in my country, despite all the tireless effort i gave to aoc in G&SD, SD and AI scripting, as well as university sections.

CARLOS FERDINAND 2-- THE MEDITERRANEAN DRIZZLE

MY GOTH MEN-AT-ARMS STRATEGY
CARLOS FERDINAND - 1. A KINGDOM'S DAWN

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Voltaire

[This message has been edited by Carlos Ferdinand (edited 01-29-2011 @ 01:03 PM).]

Carlos Ferdinand
Squire
posted 01-29-11 01:13 PM CT (US)     267 / 943       
I request mashek to remove popeychops review of CF2, because:

1. He did not play my scenario using one of the most important units, and even thought that he didnot even get the monk.

2. He reduced the rating of my scenario, taking away his "sympathy" points because i complained about the way he played my game.

3. He defends his act by saying that it doesnt change balance much, which is as FAR from truth as it can be, since he did not play it that way, and i have already done it both ways.

Finally, popeychops is a really immature person who has no idea how he should back up his arguments/ points when discussing. I just feel ashamed because a person like him is part of this community.

CARLOS FERDINAND 2-- THE MEDITERRANEAN DRIZZLE

MY GOTH MEN-AT-ARMS STRATEGY
CARLOS FERDINAND - 1. A KINGDOM'S DAWN

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Voltaire
Possidon
Slayer
posted 01-29-11 01:27 PM CT (US)     268 / 943       
Carlos I agree with Popey here.

Just becuase he didn't use a key unit doesn't mean he cannot review a scenario. A review is a persons oppinion of the scenario. Just becuase he didn't play how you would have liked him to play it is not a reason for the review to be removed.
Francis de Talking France
Squire
(id: Watson)
posted 01-29-11 01:30 PM CT (US)     269 / 943       
Carlos, I understand your impetuosity, but frankly you have very less say to insult one of our most prominent forum members. It was enough to ask Mashek to remove the review, without bringing the subject further. As far as his reviews are concerned, Popeychops' review are quite top notch, in my opinion (though I did find points sprinkled among some reviews I disagreed with ).

[This message has been edited by The Unconvincing Spook (edited 01-29-2011 @ 01:34 PM).]

John Mendl
Squire
posted 01-29-11 02:28 PM CT (US)     270 / 943       
Just becuase he didn't use a key unit doesn't mean he cannot review a scenario. A review is a persons oppinion of the scenario. Just becuase he didn't play how you would have liked him to play it is not a reason for the review to be removed.
Are you kidding us?

So will you justify a review of Gwndlegard if the reviewer leaves out Father Garnas at the start and state that "it wont help much even if you use it"?

The point you and many others miss here is:

It is impossible for the monk Xavier to not convert to your side if you ring the town bell. Popeychops says so. That is absurd and just not possible really. Ive playtested the scenario for CF and its just not possible. The fact that amazes me is how did Popeychops miss out Xavier the second time he played too?

Anyone posting here can answer my question regarding whether you got the monk or not?

[This message has been edited by John Mendl (edited 01-29-2011 @ 02:29 PM).]

Leif Ericson
Seraph Emeritus
posted 01-29-11 02:48 PM CT (US)     271 / 943       
I'll play and review the scenario. Hopefully this will resolve this debate.

~`o´~|\  Join the fresh and exciting AI Ladder for its fourth season!
´ `  |_\
       |    Learn the joy of AI scripting in my guide: The World of AI Scripting
______|______
 \        /
   .....Hinga Dinga Durgen! - SpongeBob
  `-=<.__.>=-´
Shadeslayer636
Squire
posted 01-29-11 02:58 PM CT (US)     272 / 943       
I downloaded a mod, but where do all the files I unzipped from it go?
Sebastien
Dark Samurai
posted 01-29-11 03:23 PM CT (US)     273 / 943       
Depends what files you have? What files do you have?

For an aks file unzip it anywhere and to run it you'll need to download modpack studio. Read the modders guild thread for guidance. (in my sig).

If its a file type with .drs on the end and .dat it all goes into your age of empires 2/data directory.
Leif Ericson
Seraph Emeritus
posted 01-29-11 03:30 PM CT (US)     274 / 943       
Well, for any zipped file, you usually need a program to be able to access the file, such as WinRAR or Winzip.

Check out this thread to learn how to install modpacks: The Modders Guild

Read this thread for information about scenarios (especially Q133): Scenario Design FAQ

~`o´~|\  Join the fresh and exciting AI Ladder for its fourth season!
´ `  |_\
       |    Learn the joy of AI scripting in my guide: The World of AI Scripting
______|______
 \        /
   .....Hinga Dinga Durgen! - SpongeBob
  `-=<.__.>=-´
Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 01-29-11 05:36 PM CT (US)     275 / 943       
Finally, popeychops is a really immature person who has no idea how he should back up his arguments/ points when discussing. I just feel ashamed because a person like him is part of this community.
Clearly Carlos Ferdinand is the pinnacle of maturity and I have much to learn from his masterful debating skills and obvious genius for scenario design.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
trisatya
Squire
posted 01-29-11 05:57 PM CT (US)     276 / 943       
Guys, this debate is starting to become a flame war. If you really need to, resolve this problem via e-mail.

And no, I haven't finished playing your scenario, Carlos. My comment was based on the few minutes I spent playing it. Therefore, I can't give it an objective review, nor I'm planning to. Also, it's not wise to start name-calling Popey for merely defending his opinion. You're making yourself look worse. Learn to live with the fact that everyone won't be playing your scenario the way you intended it to be. In fact, you should be grateful that Popey is still willing to share his thoughts and review your work, which is what you keep asking for.

Besides, 3.6 is definitely not a bad score, unless you're a perfectionist.

____IN FLAMES____
WE TRUST!

StormWind Studios | BlackForest Studios

[This message has been edited by Trisatya (edited 01-29-2011 @ 06:23 PM).]

Carlos Ferdinand
Squire
posted 01-29-11 10:35 PM CT (US)     277 / 943       
For few of those who dont realise what is going on:

Popeychops reduced the rating of my scenario just because of this discussion, and because i made a complaint to him over the way he played my game. I have full right to ask for the removal of the review hence.

Please realise that popeychops didnt even realise that he got a monk BOTH times he played which really accounts for the careless way he played it.

Seriously it is like playing Gwyndlegard without using Father Garnas, and then telling, "oh, it is very hard on difficulty scale so i give it 3".
name-calling Popey for merely defending his opinion.
Andanu, u shud realise im not telling 3.6 is a bad score or so on. He reduced the rating of my scenario for the sake of this argument/discussion. I dont even regret a tiny bit for telling what i did to popeychops, and i insist on what i told.

If anyone of you realise, read popeychops flaming me first, and not me to him, and he apparently tried to teach me real-life by giving "punishment" for my attitude. That is far enough for me, and shows how much of a pathetic maturity he has.

CARLOS FERDINAND 2-- THE MEDITERRANEAN DRIZZLE

MY GOTH MEN-AT-ARMS STRATEGY
CARLOS FERDINAND - 1. A KINGDOM'S DAWN

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Voltaire

[This message has been edited by Carlos Ferdinand (edited 01-29-2011 @ 10:36 PM).]

John Mendl
Squire
posted 01-29-11 10:57 PM CT (US)     278 / 943       
People, read my post (post 270). Its clearly not a case of Popey not playing Carlos' scenario the way he wants it to be. It is a case of Popey completely ignoring an important unit that should change to your control no matter how you play.

Instead of posting here merely to defend Popeychops, you could my answer my question that Im repeating for the fourth time now (still no answer from anyone yet).

"Did you get control of the monk Xavier when you played CF2?"

Atleast answer this.

A side note: Dont try to make it seem like Carlos is yelling for reviews. Noone of this 'helpful' community even commented for his scenario even one or two months after its blacksmith release. No other decent scenario in the blackmsith had been as badly ignored as this for the first two months.
Sebastien
Dark Samurai
posted 01-29-11 11:25 PM CT (US)     279 / 943       
"Did you get control of the monk Xavier when you played CF2?"

The reason I havn't played it yet is because your both being whiney babies. WAA WAA WAAAA! Throwing your toys out the pram. DIDNT USE MONK! I WANT SWEETS! GIVE ME MY SWEETS MOMMY! USE THE MONK!

I CAN understand where your coming and I sympathised at first and offered to play it and give a full review.

However, you've really made it far worse for yourself and you've probably lost a lot of peoples interest and I've read every post and personally don't see anything wrong with what Popeys review looks like.

Your doing it in the game of the year thread aswell - flaming and trolling and arguing. Really, just get over it and grow up.
Sebastien
Dark Samurai
posted 01-29-11 11:31 PM CT (US)     280 / 943       

A side note: Dont try to make it seem like Carlos is yelling for reviews. Noone of this 'helpful' community even commented for his scenario even one or two months after its blacksmith release. No other decent scenario in the blackmsith had been as badly ignored as this for the first two months.


There are files on the blacksmith that have been downloaded by 100's and 100's of people. Yet only recieve three comments. Thats just the way it goes. If someone truely enjoyed a scenario they'd probably comment on it congragulating them.

If it was average, or they didnt get to play it properly yet, OR they didnt enjoy it then they most likely wont.

And you can't say its one of the best. I'm not saying it isn't. Im just stating that a lot of people have put a lot of effort into projects, that may have not been noticed as much but are still very enjoyable, and your putting them down because your angry.
« Previous Page  1 ··· 6 7 8 9 10 ··· 20 ··· 27  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Kings Heaven | HeavenGames