sunoftzu
Senior Member
Is there to be a Journal 8 this year?
Have heard almost nothing in regard to this.
Have heard almost nothing in regard to this.
Journal 8?
- Thread starter sunoftzu
- Start date
Journal 8
"We will be releasing revised versions of these scenarios in an upcoming Journal, so I don't see the point of compiling details about them now.
....Perry"
I had asked for information on the official scenarios played at WBC DonCon for the Master ASL Scenario Listing. For reasons I can't agree with, both Perry and Brian refused to provide any information.
Of course, I do know the titles (as do a lot of other prople), so when these scenarios do appear they will be entered first as WBC DonCon scenarios, and then again as Journal 8 scenarios. The secrecy and delay is pointless, but if Journal 8 does not come out by December the WBC DonCon scenarios will not be documented until the 2008 revision of the MASLSL, instead of the upcoming 2007 revision where they belong.
Up to this point, MMP is the only provider of official tournament scenarios who has not willingly helped maintain the MASLSL by providing scenario info. Some folks unfortunately appear to have little appreciation for historical documentation. :cheeky:
This reply from Perry indicates they are at least working on it!
"We will be releasing revised versions of these scenarios in an upcoming Journal, so I don't see the point of compiling details about them now.
....Perry"
I had asked for information on the official scenarios played at WBC DonCon for the Master ASL Scenario Listing. For reasons I can't agree with, both Perry and Brian refused to provide any information.
Of course, I do know the titles (as do a lot of other prople), so when these scenarios do appear they will be entered first as WBC DonCon scenarios, and then again as Journal 8 scenarios. The secrecy and delay is pointless, but if Journal 8 does not come out by December the WBC DonCon scenarios will not be documented until the 2008 revision of the MASLSL, instead of the upcoming 2007 revision where they belong.
Up to this point, MMP is the only provider of official tournament scenarios who has not willingly helped maintain the MASLSL by providing scenario info. Some folks unfortunately appear to have little appreciation for historical documentation. :cheeky:
Chas Argent
Play to the end.
And some people seem to take their pet projects a bit too seriously.
Surprised
Am I surprised that MMP is the exception? Not really, I guess; of all the game design companies I deal with personally, I find MMP the least thorough with providing release updates and timelines. And I understand that there are some reasons for that; but, nevertheless, it is an unfortunate fact.
Actually, when I started the MASLSL I wasn't sure how much cooperation I would get from tournament directors; that could have been the major stumbling block to making this listing complete and keeping it updated. So I have been pleasantly surprised at the cooperation I've received from almost everyone.
Am I surprised that MMP is the exception? Not really, I guess; of all the game design companies I deal with personally, I find MMP the least thorough with providing release updates and timelines. And I understand that there are some reasons for that; but, nevertheless, it is an unfortunate fact.
My "pet project" has been downloaded by over 350 people worldwide, far more than any other ASL scenario listing. So, I hope it is providing a valuable resource. Of course, you are free to denigrate it if you find it of little value. But I'd argue that, in providing information on all scenarios designed, it increases the likelihood of scenario use and demand for everyone's products -- including yours, my friend.
>The secrecy and delay is pointless
I don't think so. When I was part owner of CH I was walking around ASLOK and watched Jim Turpin and Brian Youse playtesting a cool looking scenario about Marines withdrawing/retreating by boat from a botched attacked on Guadacanal for an upcoming issue of BackBlast. I watched for a little while and mentioned that it looked cool.
Imagine my surprise when the next issue of CH magazine had a scenario depicting the same thing. Brian was not happy and mentioned it to me. I knew nothing about it.
Coincidence? Who knows, but after that I can see why Brian is very cautious about letting upcoming/playtest scenario information out to the public.
>but if Journal 8 does not come out by December the WBC DonCon scenarios will not be documented until the 2008 revision of the MASLSL, instead of the upcoming 2007 revision where they belong.
What if MMP discovers that during WBC play that they need to make changes to the scenarios, because of balance or some under go a major change? They would now have results published concerning these scenarios that are not accurate.
>Are you really all that surprised?
Another stupid comment from HWSNBN #2 due from lack of information and not being altogether that bright. Nothing ever changes.
I don't think so. When I was part owner of CH I was walking around ASLOK and watched Jim Turpin and Brian Youse playtesting a cool looking scenario about Marines withdrawing/retreating by boat from a botched attacked on Guadacanal for an upcoming issue of BackBlast. I watched for a little while and mentioned that it looked cool.
Imagine my surprise when the next issue of CH magazine had a scenario depicting the same thing. Brian was not happy and mentioned it to me. I knew nothing about it.
Coincidence? Who knows, but after that I can see why Brian is very cautious about letting upcoming/playtest scenario information out to the public.
>but if Journal 8 does not come out by December the WBC DonCon scenarios will not be documented until the 2008 revision of the MASLSL, instead of the upcoming 2007 revision where they belong.
What if MMP discovers that during WBC play that they need to make changes to the scenarios, because of balance or some under go a major change? They would now have results published concerning these scenarios that are not accurate.
>Are you really all that surprised?
Another stupid comment from HWSNBN #2 due from lack of information and not being altogether that bright. Nothing ever changes.
Bill Cirillo
Elder Member
Nothing Better Than Positive Affirmation
Much like a large number of other ASL players, Paul provides a valuable resource to the larger ASL community, free of charge. Given the large, complex nature of the ASL "system" any resource that helps catalogue information for other players would seem to me to be beneficial not only to players, but the producers of the system.
As a somewhat infrequent producer of ASL material maybe MMP doesn't benefit as much as others, but still it should benefit somewhat:laugh:
Bill
Much like a large number of other ASL players, Paul provides a valuable resource to the larger ASL community, free of charge. Given the large, complex nature of the ASL "system" any resource that helps catalogue information for other players would seem to me to be beneficial not only to players, but the producers of the system.
As a somewhat infrequent producer of ASL material maybe MMP doesn't benefit as much as others, but still it should benefit somewhat:laugh:
Bill
Portal
The Eminem of ASL
Here goes Wolkey getting excited about an issue he didn't take the time (or perhaps unable) to understand fully.
Wolkey,
Paul was expressing a little bit of frustration that MMP wouldn't provide him information about scenarios which MMP has ALREADY released to a semi-public audience (i.e. a tournament any ASL player could have entered if they were in town). He was not asking for details of newly revised designs in playtest which will be released in the future.
A very reasonable request to Perry, and yet unsurprising that MMP wouldn't help him in any meaningful way. Nothing new there as of late.
Wolkey,
Paul was expressing a little bit of frustration that MMP wouldn't provide him information about scenarios which MMP has ALREADY released to a semi-public audience (i.e. a tournament any ASL player could have entered if they were in town). He was not asking for details of newly revised designs in playtest which will be released in the future.
A very reasonable request to Perry, and yet unsurprising that MMP wouldn't help him in any meaningful way. Nothing new there as of late.
Whoa Robert! The MASLSL only lists the title, source (both of which I already know), the nationalities, location, and date of engagement....hardly things that are likely to change during the design solidification.
The thing I have a problem with is when scenarios are submitted to tournaments for official play (not pickup game playtesting), but information about them is excluded from documenting the tournament because they were "playtest scenarios". :hush: Sounds like a case of having your cake and eating it too IMHO.
As I've said before, one of the most amazing things I've found out while engaged in this effort is the lack of concern for historical documentation of the ASL system by some people. Some folks, like Mark P., do a wonderful job of documenting modules and publications, but complete and accurate information on tournaments, individual scenarios, scenario designers, etc. is much harder to come by.
Even if that type of information is unimportant to someone personally, that shouldn't be a reason for withholding information you have from everyone else who might be interested, should it? :hmmm:
>The MASLSL only lists the title, source (both of which I already know), the nationalities, location, and date of engagement....hardly things that are likely to change during the design solidification.
Which is enough information for another scenario designer to look up that data and create a scenario of the same action. Correct? If I was MMP I would ask that no information was published until they were released, so they are allowing you something.
I stand by my words. MMP is gun shy and I can understand why thay don't want to have that information published before they are officially released.
>A very reasonable request to Perry, and yet unsurprising that MMP wouldn't help him in any meaningful way. Nothing new there as of late.
And again you show your IGNORANCE and STUPIDTY. He made a request and Perry denied it for their own reasons. Nothing more, nothing less.
Every chance you get you take a cheap shot at MMP to statisfy your own agenda. It gets old. HWSNBN #2 strikes again.
Which is enough information for another scenario designer to look up that data and create a scenario of the same action. Correct? If I was MMP I would ask that no information was published until they were released, so they are allowing you something.
I stand by my words. MMP is gun shy and I can understand why thay don't want to have that information published before they are officially released.
>A very reasonable request to Perry, and yet unsurprising that MMP wouldn't help him in any meaningful way. Nothing new there as of late.
And again you show your IGNORANCE and STUPIDTY. He made a request and Perry denied it for their own reasons. Nothing more, nothing less.
Every chance you get you take a cheap shot at MMP to statisfy your own agenda. It gets old. HWSNBN #2 strikes again.
Portal
The Eminem of ASL
Wolkey,
Sorry for the minor stoop to your level, but I'm amazed you appear to be this dense.
If MMP, or any other publisher, wants a particular scenario design to remain in playtest secrecy, why in all heck are they releasing it for play in a public tournament to which any ASL player can register?
A document is either public or it's not. If the creator makes the information available to a public audience, it's reasonable to ask for metadata about that document. Sure, Perry & Co. can refuse to answer (like they did), but it certainly doesn't mean they don't deserve any grief for choosing to decline a reasonable ASL customer request.
Sorry for the minor stoop to your level, but I'm amazed you appear to be this dense.
If MMP, or any other publisher, wants a particular scenario design to remain in playtest secrecy, why in all heck are they releasing it for play in a public tournament to which any ASL player can register?
A document is either public or it's not. If the creator makes the information available to a public audience, it's reasonable to ask for metadata about that document. Sure, Perry & Co. can refuse to answer (like they did), but it certainly doesn't mean they don't deserve any grief for choosing to decline a reasonable ASL customer request.
Point taken. But I would be interested in how you balance MMP's paranoia with the interest many people have in documentation of a tournament?
These were, after all, official tournament scenarios!
If I thought I was giving anything away in that regard, I would reevaluate the fields I include in the MSLSL.
'Ol Fezziwig
Repressed Dissident
Both Broadway to Prohorovka and Line in the Sand were playtested at ASLOK, as are many other scenarios from many other sources; the fact that they are PT'ed publically bestows no entitlement to the masses until the owner releases them when they are satisfied with the final product.
IMHuO, of course.
>Both Broadway to Prohorovka and Line in the Sand were playtested at ASLOK, as are many other scenarios from many other sources; the fact that they are PT'ed publically bestows no entitlement to the masses until the owner releases them when they are satisfied with the final product.
Thank you. HWSNBN #2 is blinded by his hatred for MMP or either is too stupid to understand this point.
The best time to get a scenario playtested is during a major tournament, but this does not imply that a playtester or the general public can do with it what they may.
Thank you. HWSNBN #2 is blinded by his hatred for MMP or either is too stupid to understand this point.
The best time to get a scenario playtested is during a major tournament, but this does not imply that a playtester or the general public can do with it what they may.
Portal
The Eminem of ASL
Fez, I'd expect better from you. Inane garbage from you, in this circumstance, and Wolkey, as most usual when interacting with me.
Nobody said anything about access to the original scenario document in its full detail to be used in any particular public way. We are talking about metadata for information which was voluntarily exposed to a public audience, used in a competitive context, NOT playtesting.
Official ASL tournaments aren't private playtest environments. If anybody seriously thinks they can be, they need their head examined. Also, open gaming between private players in the ASLOK ballroom is not an official ASL tournament context, either.
Nobody said anything about access to the original scenario document in its full detail to be used in any particular public way. We are talking about metadata for information which was voluntarily exposed to a public audience, used in a competitive context, NOT playtesting.
Official ASL tournaments aren't private playtest environments. If anybody seriously thinks they can be, they need their head examined. Also, open gaming between private players in the ASLOK ballroom is not an official ASL tournament context, either.
Exactly!
Exactly again!
I would not include any scenario that was just playtested, not officially played, in a tournament (unless a designer approved of me doing so for reasons of his own). I do keep a separate rather extensive list of scenarios that are in playtest for future release (some have been in playtest for many years). I don't release that information.
But documenting a tournament from the angle of ASL scenario design requires documenting some basic info on the scenarios played -- much as a newsman documents basic facts about a news story. I don't see this as giving anything away.
'Ol Fezziwig
Repressed Dissident
Pete Shelling typically runs a PTathon mini at ASLOK, and Mark ran a few PTs of FR at several tourneys; both were conducted within the framework of the respective tourneys.
At any rate, the decision whether to release details of thier works-in-progress is wholly up to them. Disagree if you feel you must, but you must respect their wishes. Certainly, given past history, if "meta data" was released prior to publication and a scenario was released by another party in the meantime, using that data as a starting point for a scenario of their own, would they then have cause to be upset?
I sincerely doubt their personal reasons for denying the request are debatable as to "right" or "wrong".
Portal
The Eminem of ASL
As far as I'm concerned, if a scenario is played at a public, competitive event requiring some kind of entry fee (be it for space rental or to actually compete), it's information which has been released for view to the public.
This doesn't mean users have free reign over distribution and use of the content outside of the event, but it sure doesn't mean the project details are a secret and can't be shared with any potential competitor.
If you don't want people to know about your project, don't release it to a public audience. Enough said.
This doesn't mean users have free reign over distribution and use of the content outside of the event, but it sure doesn't mean the project details are a secret and can't be shared with any potential competitor.
If you don't want people to know about your project, don't release it to a public audience. Enough said.
As official scenarios that counted for W/L points?
I guess I can appreciate the paranoia if things are as bad as this. Still it unfortunately complicates my job of documenting ASL scenario development, which does include scenarios provided for and officially played at tournaments.
My only recourse would have to be someting like entering data lines with the tournament name as the source, but no scenario names or other data. The same would go for ROAR, WeASL, ASL Scenario Archive, and others. Pretty pathetic!
Agreed. I'm hoping for some acceptance, in the best interests of the hobby, that releasing the limited data I'm seeking to cover what was played at a tournament is OK.