Chas
Elder Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2004
- Messages
- 2,524
- Reaction score
- 1,868
- Country
Gents,
OK, it has now been 2 years since this product was released, so it seems like a good time to review and assess the product, both good and bad. I would like to use this feedback to ensure that BFP can learn from this and continue to improve.
Aside from the obvious, there were a couple of objectives with this project. One was to invigorate enthusiasm for the PTO, and the other was to demonstrate the depth and talent within BFP and set new standards in the ASL community. Just so everyone understands, BFP 3 had some significant inherent risk: most expensive product and not built on a theater that is the most popular.
I cannot quantify the first. However, I have received numerous messages the last couple of years of how B&J got someone into PTO, or they simply just started playing it more. I also think there has been a trend on Gamesquad since the product's release of increased interest in the PTO. This can be argued, but I am proud and confident that BFP was a driving factor in this. In the big picture I feel that BFP has had a positive impact on the ASL community in large in this regard.
The product itself. How is success measured….sales? classic scenarios? Use of boards? Low number of dogs? Value to players?
Scenarios:
At this time I feel that 15 scenarios are undoubtedly successes: Armored Samurai, Chapei Chopblock, Hush Docks, Melee Near the Coast, Chinese Alamo, Slaughter at Nanyaun, 100 Rgts Offensive, Mai Phu, Alligator Tanks, Kwaj Crush, Kachin Rangers, Typhoon of Steel, Frogs in the Pocket, both Fuchin scenarios, Police Action.
At this time I feel that 4 scenarios are failures: Marco Polo Bridge, Grant vs. Stuart, Used and Abused, San Manuel Melee.
The rest fall into the middle somewhere. Grant vs. Stuart is hard to put on this failure list because it is a great design and fun action, but it appears that it strongly favors the Japanese. I playtested San Manuel Melee at least twice and am very surprised this is so unbalanced, but at 6-0 on ROAR believe we had to have missed something.
Boards:
I believe we were successful here. Player comment seems to rate the boards high, and additionally we are able to use these in other projects. DW-1 was used in BFP 4, and I can tell you for a fact that the boards will make an appearance in PiF, Allied Minors, French, and East Front based on designs we have already moved forward with.
What does this come down to? Did players get their money’s worth for this project? I think the answer is yes, especially since you can count on the boards and counters to continue to get used in future products.
What are your thoughts?
Discuss………..
Thanks,
Chas
OK, it has now been 2 years since this product was released, so it seems like a good time to review and assess the product, both good and bad. I would like to use this feedback to ensure that BFP can learn from this and continue to improve.
Aside from the obvious, there were a couple of objectives with this project. One was to invigorate enthusiasm for the PTO, and the other was to demonstrate the depth and talent within BFP and set new standards in the ASL community. Just so everyone understands, BFP 3 had some significant inherent risk: most expensive product and not built on a theater that is the most popular.
I cannot quantify the first. However, I have received numerous messages the last couple of years of how B&J got someone into PTO, or they simply just started playing it more. I also think there has been a trend on Gamesquad since the product's release of increased interest in the PTO. This can be argued, but I am proud and confident that BFP was a driving factor in this. In the big picture I feel that BFP has had a positive impact on the ASL community in large in this regard.
The product itself. How is success measured….sales? classic scenarios? Use of boards? Low number of dogs? Value to players?
Scenarios:
At this time I feel that 15 scenarios are undoubtedly successes: Armored Samurai, Chapei Chopblock, Hush Docks, Melee Near the Coast, Chinese Alamo, Slaughter at Nanyaun, 100 Rgts Offensive, Mai Phu, Alligator Tanks, Kwaj Crush, Kachin Rangers, Typhoon of Steel, Frogs in the Pocket, both Fuchin scenarios, Police Action.
At this time I feel that 4 scenarios are failures: Marco Polo Bridge, Grant vs. Stuart, Used and Abused, San Manuel Melee.
The rest fall into the middle somewhere. Grant vs. Stuart is hard to put on this failure list because it is a great design and fun action, but it appears that it strongly favors the Japanese. I playtested San Manuel Melee at least twice and am very surprised this is so unbalanced, but at 6-0 on ROAR believe we had to have missed something.
Boards:
I believe we were successful here. Player comment seems to rate the boards high, and additionally we are able to use these in other projects. DW-1 was used in BFP 4, and I can tell you for a fact that the boards will make an appearance in PiF, Allied Minors, French, and East Front based on designs we have already moved forward with.
What does this come down to? Did players get their money’s worth for this project? I think the answer is yes, especially since you can count on the boards and counters to continue to get used in future products.
What are your thoughts?
Discuss………..
Thanks,
Chas