The Information Flow Policy - comment thread

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • The Information Flow Policy - comment thread

    Hi, all T9A fans!

    I just posted the policy about the circulation of information, which covers both information flow within the project and from the project to the community.
    This has been discussed for months at Executive Board level, and the time has come!

    The announcement is here: How to improve information provided to the community
    the policy is here: THE INFORMATION FLOW POLICY
    and here below is your chance to comment it.

    Don't be shy, it will be read with great interest.

    Thank you.

    Social Media Team

    UN Coordinator, aka UNSG

    - druchii.net contribution: The 9th Age - Dread Elves
  • Calisson wrote:

    The army support team reply can be: "Discussions on medusa are still ongoing, and I’ve seen some ideas suggested by you guys to have been investigated with great interest, so keep discussing, it is read"
    It sound like a support line of a big IT company. "Thank you for calling our support line. At the moment all consultants are busy. Please hold the line". Even worse I have seen it a few times and seeing the same message instead of any real feedback from teams or engagement in discussion makes me angry. I feel like I've been patted.

    I would expect some proof teams are following the topic. Maybe a direct question or a request for more detailed description. Maybe even pointing out some problem with proposed design that is obvious to teams and not to community. They do not have to promise anything to community, declare any changes, share any information. But I would expect them to really participate. Because for me it is about participation not about sharing information.
    Homebrew: Hetmanate of Ukray_____________Report your battle results using mobile app: T9A Magic Flux!
  • Personally I'd love to get some updates on the stuck armies: WDG, Demons, DE (SE?). The ones that were originally supposed to have new rule books by now. I check the "newest news" regularly, but see nothing about this since the rules freeze and speculation that they might not be out until even a while after the freeze is lifted. (And if there are any plans to tone down some things in... say... BH or OK?)
    And I'd also personally appreciate it if the words "working really hard" were never mentioned again. It is a given that is the case, but doesn't need to be held out so much.
  • Yes, consider me schooled on that one. What I should have said is that I've been looking out for some of the proposed rules changes and haven't seen them. I'm not big on fluff and art, but am axious to see what might be coming rules-wise, especially for DE and DL.
  • Questions! :largegrin:

    JimMorr wrote:

    Calisson wrote:

    "...keep discussing..."
    It sound like a support line of a big IT company. ...I feel like I've been patted....But I would expect them to really participate. Because for me it is about participation not about sharing information.
    Noooo! We really hope that you will get more information than previously. We mean it!
    And if you do not get the replies you asked, you should get at least an explanation telling why we can't deliver (do not exclude some replies like "sorry guys this is planned to be in the next 9th Scroll, I can't spoil").

    Brad C wrote:

    Personally I'd love to get some updates on the stuck armies...
    The policy is clear: yes you can!
    Now, to make it happen, as we cannot guess everyone's desire, the best would be for you to open a thread and ask exactly that.
    If you want more information, ask, it is much better than regret silently it was not provided.

    Thanks @tiny for the information about the blogs, which I was not aware myself, not reading blogs either.

    Social Media Team

    UN Coordinator, aka UNSG

    - druchii.net contribution: The 9th Age - Dread Elves
  • Brad C wrote:

    Yes, consider me schooled on that one. What I should have said is that I've been looking out for some of the proposed rules changes and haven't seen them. I'm not big on fluff and art, but am axious to see what might be coming rules-wise, especially for DE and DL.
    The main reason why you haven't read much about that yet is because it's still much in flow and the WIP is not in a stage to be shared.

    Or in other words you can only share if there is something to share.
  • I think that what we, the community needs, is an official voice in all the unclear and muddy waters of the forums. There is a myriad of statements from red names, yellow names and green names, often contradictory, commonly posting personal opinions and suggestions. What I suggest is the following:
    • The colordname members should have an additional account, with the relevant color and preferably a bracket containing the abbreviation of their affiliation like “[PR]Blonde beer”
    • The colordname members should not use colored names when not posting as official spokesmen/women it is extremely annoying never to know if a post is a statement of a personal wish or the official policy of the T9A team.
    “This and that unit needs to be changed” posted with a red name, “This and that is perfect” posted with a red name. “OK book is over-powerd and needs to be reduced in power”.

    Actual examples: just randomly picked and not a bashing on the posters in anyway. I am just highlighting my points.

    “I don't see elves dominating anything, so I really can't see the issues everyone is having with LR.

    They still shoot more than they fight. “ - Head of rules support!

    “There are units (warmachines mostly) that make infantry elves (core or elite, doesn't matter) hit the shelf as well.” - Army Design Team!


    “for the record, I agree that GW ASF and T9A LR are but bandaids for a flawed core system, it is just that until the core system is changed, removing LR from elves would be suicidal at best in terms of their relevant power level.” - Army Design Team!!!!!!!!!!!
  • I applaud any initiative to tackle, address, clarify the information flow between community and :insert-3letter-T9A-abbreviation-here:.

    I think most if not everyone realizes the immense scope of this volunteer project, especially when looking at the quality level that T9A strives for. This process however well managed will have its bottlenecks (e.g. artists, writers, play testers whatever) and that's understandable too.
    A lot of to-dos and to-comes have been hinted at or announced by :red-tags:, some even with a tentative release date (e.g. background compendium, starter set,...) and are eagerly awaited, great!

    {...}

    That being said, I feel that the bread and butter for many, especially the forum-dwellers -which very well could represent the more engaged T9A supporters-, is still the(ir) army book(s) because it's so central to their enjoyment of, and emotional connection to, this game. Possibly more so than even the core game rules.
    For AB specific issues a lot of/all the times it's mentioned that in due time those will get looked at when that respective book is up for redesign, because of this I might not be the only one who would really welcome a line up for all future army book releases. Even without a deadline or even year of release, just the (arbitrary -or not?-) order they will be worked on. And yes even with the caveat that the order could change for :reason provided:, but it would at least provide a more satisfying handle hold than currently for those other than the 5(?) ABs mentioned after WotDG.
    ✧✧✧ Make Greenskins great again ✧✧✧
  • Calisson wrote:

    This said, it should be easy to understand that it is not possible to disclose absolutely everything.
    I don't think everything needs to be disclosed however I do wonder why a short summary of what is discussed in the Skype chats isn't shared in general. As the project is a non-profit project I don't really see what is gained by keeping a lot of information hidden from general public. Players will be upset by changes regardless. I don't know why but the miniature community in general seems very allergic to change, however without this allergic reaction the T9A project wouldn't be here either. ;)

    From my perspective the game is allready in a good state ruleswise and if the creative teams will announce that T9A will truely be a game of and initself the general responcse as to "why isn't this like WFB?" will graduatly dissapear. Videos on the Youtube page that still reference to Warhammer Fantasy in my opinion arn't the best way to promote T9A. Instead share the succes the project has by itself, mention that it is used by the ETC, mention the artists and creators working on it.
    As someone who gave my view before on the size and dimension of the current team I'm still lacking the clear overview of a game-development team. Because as mentioned before this solves a lot of issues and drastically speeds up the process in creating a clear and concize game. The rules can be deep and the lore can be logical and 'hard fantasy' but what you are working towards is a game, which needs a bit of both but doesn't require both to be done in perfection or be 'finished'.

    What I believe is the most effective part of a community driven game is that the balance will eventually never be perfect or finished and accept that. Simply because newly created content keeps the game interesting but also requires you to look at (and possibly re-balance) every other choice that was allready available. To me a yearly variant of T9A 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 etc wouldn't only retain my interest but also is capable of being produced quicker and balance according to meta preforances.

    Cheers,
  • Overall, I haven't been too miffed at all by the communications pipeline... until recently.

    I'm a content-team guy, so I don't get much re: behind-the-scenes info - just to make that clear to anyone reading and who are unaware of the information relay in the background.

    Recently I've had a few ...well... issues with what has happened:
    • New paths of magic. Though there was an okay sneak-peak into this, the massive change and overall drop in power of the phase and magic selection really did rock my lists. I hadn't thought magic all that powerful prior to this path overhaul, and hadn't seen much from the team or other members regarding this perceived issue. I feel like we were all kind of left out in the cold on this one
    • The bait-and-switch (though, I don't believe it was on purpose) of the rules-changes to come and the rules freeze.
    • Sorry, have to bring it up: the Daemon Legions book. We were often told that the community was being listened to... and none of the pages and pages of issues that the DL community brought up were dealt with...for some time now. To make it worse, the freeze and decision to overhaul the DL book all at once really destroyed our little Daemon community. Our book is awful; little synergy, several barely-usable choices, some completely unusable choices and simply makes no sense in the context of the new BRB and paths. I feel as though this kind of came out of nowhere
    • A lot of promises were made to the DL community, and none have been realized. Now, we're in a freeze and getting no real information. I understand that there's a great deal of work going into the book at this time, but we're going to have to wait until...what... August? December? This year? None of us know. A final hotfix (as suggested) would have been fine as a "get us by" carrot... but we are left with an awful book, no real information, no timelines and a dead subcommunity.
    I really appreciate the efforts put into the game, as a whole. Many of the books are outstanding and I love the BRB. That said, DL players are few and far between, these days, and we have really been left out in the cold as well as given little to no information on what's to come.

    I contrast this with almost any other army I play, and the support and information flow is so much better elsewhere. DL is a major issue, and I really feel like the 9th Age team needs to inform often and act soon...

    Just my two cent.
    Goblin, Daemon Legions and Empire of Sonnstahl Player and 9th Age Staffer
    Follow my journey through the world of 9th Age HERE
  • I mostly would like to hear a reasoning for the changes made in very specific details.
    Why was the ghouls musician removed for example, and none of that: for fluff reasons .... Without giving a fluff.

    The way to deal with the constant frustration of a changing system is explaining the reasons. I would also like to see some more transparency to who made those decisions ( not as in persons , but as in team).

    The general feeling is the game is pushed along the vision of a view actors that does not necessarily align with the broad base. Clearly showing the diversity of opinions and the agenda of the sub teams could help understand the process better and help getting rid of such fears.
    I will not switch army again, I will not switch army again, I will not switch army again... Oh look Daemons!
  • The thing I still don't understand in general is what is gained by not having an open acces to discussions.
    I personally would love to follow the team discussions without being able to influence anything but to read it to understand the final goals better.

    Issues I saw the most before was how much T9A departes from WFB, which isn't an issue at all for a good game but becomes a bit of a shocker if your new here and assumed it would be something akin to WFB the Ninth Edition.

    In general I believe that a lot of the rules from WFB could be kept, renamed, sometimes remolded and recoloured but following these steps instead of only seeing the final outcome makes the fan understand it better.

    Creating something and sharing all the WIP on that content is generally very popular. It works out well for painting miniatures, drawing and making up games. Embracing this usually leads to a more positive welcome to changes. Showing your finshed golden daemon model is wonderful but players usually connect more to the guys who share all the steps required to create something as great. It's probably because of this that painters like Ben Komets and projects like Massive Voodoo have brought back such a positive vibe for the wonderful miniatures hobbies.
  • This is good news! Communication needs to be better than it has been to help the project progress. :) I hope the policy works.

    JDAntoine wrote:

    Issues I saw the most before was how much T9A departes from WFB, which isn't an issue at all for a good game but becomes a bit of a shocker if your new here and assumed it would be something akin to WFB the Ninth Edition.

    In general I believe that a lot of the rules from WFB could be kept, renamed, sometimes remolded and recoloured but following these steps instead of only seeing the final outcome makes the fan understand it better.
    I agree that this has miffed a few (read: a lot of) people. Unfortunately there isn't much the team can do about this. T9A's lawyers have advised and there isn't much point in having lawyers if you aren't going to follow their advice.

    I was disappointed that this isn't more like WFB but I have found that the general feel of the game (prior to the castration of wizards) was the same and it still feels like WFB - just without magic. The team have proven they can make a better and more balanced game than WFB with 1.1. I have confidence that they can do it again.

    Klexe wrote:

    I have somewhat the feeling the forum is quite empty since some weeks now.

    Almost no responses here
    I agree. And I worry.
    Never argue with Idiots. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
  • There are just a few things I would like to see made public:
    • Project schedule timeline.
    • Weekly updated log, detailing all the changes made so far to armies currently undergoing a redesign process.
    • A list with all the narcotics used by whoever designed ironfists.
    The staff became a lot more communicative as of late, but a great deal of that effort is being spent on convincing people to keep waiting a little longer while they work their magic unmolested, away from inquisitive eyes.
  • Sir_Sully wrote:

    I agree that this has miffed a few (read: a lot of) people. Unfortunately there isn't much the team can do about this. T9A's lawyers have advised and there isn't much point in having lawyers if you aren't going to follow their advice.
    Lawyers point out risks. Some risk being as remote as being hit by a meteorite while being mauled by a shark. It is up to the client to pursue the best course when the lawyer is trying to avoid all the meteorites.

    But this is something else I'd like to see from the committee: What has GW said about the T9A project? Have they sent a cease letter? What has the lawyer actually said? It is really easy to throw a blanket over all changes and reply "because of legal reasons" even if there aren't actually legitimate legal reasons.
  • Sir_Sully wrote:



    JDAntoine wrote:

    Issues I saw the most before was how much T9A departes from WFB, which isn't an issue at all for a good game but becomes a bit of a shocker if your new here and assumed it would be something akin to WFB the Ninth Edition.

    In general I believe that a lot of the rules from WFB could be kept, renamed, sometimes remolded and recoloured but following these steps instead of only seeing the final outcome makes the fan understand it better.
    I agree that this has miffed a few (read: a lot of) people. Unfortunately there isn't much the team can do about this. T9A's lawyers have advised and there isn't much point in having lawyers if you aren't going to follow their advice.
    I was disappointed that this isn't more like WFB but I have found that the general feel of the game (prior to the castration of wizards) was the same and it still feels like WFB - just without magic. The team have proven they can make a better and more balanced game than WFB with 1.1. I have confidence that they can do it again.
    I agree with the legal team, what I dislike is how in certain cases T9A still is promoted as the WFB spiritual succesor. If you cannot be that, don't shout it or use it as your marketing tool ;).
    I'm not dissapointed anymore but was initially because T9A is sometimes sold as the next step for WFB fans, while in reality this might not be the case.

    What I hope is that T9A will be a succesful project by itself but I feel this can only be done if every step of the process is shaired. Shairing information doesn't mean that a larger part of the community should be able to influence it (as with painting models for example) but it does mean that if you show the steps it usually leads to a larger understand as to why the end result is different :).

    The principle of not giving a man a fish but show him how you fished usually leads to less shocking responces. With Warriors of the Dark Gods as a latest example, you could say, Hey we're going from 4 to 7 gods! While it's usually much more interesting to say why you went from 4 to 7 gods and avoid the simple reason "because IP" because I don't believe the creative team is so out of ideas that they cannot come up with something that is functionally more interesting as GW's content.

    In addition I think that the team should also be hinting a standard setting for specific armies. With Warriors of the Dark Gods as the same example, they are Indo-European influenced, have 7 Gods and a more logical culture, stating that they are not Dark Romans goes against that. Don't feel ashamed to call them Dark Romans, I'm open to the idea if that's what they will become, however certain feedback only states they are specifically not Dark Romans without stating what they are going to be...

    TLDR: there is no issue to change if you own up to what you are changing, open communication is not only easier for the team but also for fans in this case. There is no hidden agenda that seems to aim for a profitable game, I don't really see how the secrecy is rewarded.
  • IHDarklord wrote:

    I think you guys are somewhat overreacting with the magic part of the game.

    I perceive magic as a little weaker than before, but I'm very happy to keep on using it with great success.
    Depends on the army.

    It's still fine with my EoS and OK... but it lost most of the uses by DL. Sure, you get a few tricks like Scrying and 3-dice Comet Bird... but losing the synergy with Path of Disease and Path of Lust was brutal.

    Also, nerfed blue fire...gr.
    Goblin, Daemon Legions and Empire of Sonnstahl Player and 9th Age Staffer
    Follow my journey through the world of 9th Age HERE