rhinobones wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 4:17 pm
Curtis Lemay wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:45 am
I decided to move this out of the Hierarchy thread, since it will get buried in there.
Edit: Sound-off when you use the site, so we'll know what's going on.
Bobby
Now that you have a team forming, have you created a test plan and check list for the testers to follow? You’ll want to make sure the bugs you’ve fixed are actually fixed, new features operate correctly, PBM and solo games are not broken, playing existing scenarios without updating works, updating with commanders gives the intended display and so many more elements to verify thru test.
Back on 4/6 I posted this:
"Note that the needs will be diverse: Not just PBEM, but play against the PO, play with either updated or non-updated scenarios, and designers to make upgrades. Plenty of slots to fit into."
That still holds. I intend to allow testers to choose what they want to do. That way they are focused on what most interests them, making the test more like fun and less like drudgery.
You might even have the team update a small scenario (such as Arracourt 44) with commanders to ensure the instructions and mechanics of updating both work. In essences you want the testers to touch, observe and verify all of your labor of love.
So far, only Telumar has scenario design experience. But Arracourt 44 would be easy for non-designers to try, if they're interested.
Does the beta test include changes to the manual?
There will be/are separate documentation for the update instructions. I doubt the manual will be updated short of a TOAW-V.
I think the beta testers would benefit by having a defined structure so their efforts to produce a conclusive result.
Regards
Defined structure, yes. Marching orders, no.