Help me understand Independent vs. Unified in relation to the overall "board."  Would there be one Board called "Go" with "Geared" and "Diced" as two separate, Independent scenarios?  What would be the differences between Independent and Unified?

AttilaTheHun wrote:

Help me understand Independent vs. Unified in relation to the overall "board."  Would there be one Board called "Go" with "Geared" and "Diced" as two separate, Independent scenarios?  What would be the differences between Independent and Unified?

In the Boards tab -- there would be one Board -- like it is now -- "Go-Geared".

When you click on it and get to the "/boards/view page -- everything is still the same (except maybe the tabs for the different scenarios might be color coded according to group).

From there, (most) everything you click on is for the sub-group.   Rankings, Ranking History, Charts, Ratings, etc..

You realize you're forcing me to make this up as I go.. ;)

Unified is as is now -- All scenarios in WarGear are currently "unified" with their parent boards.

Independent would mean that a scenario or a group of scenarios is considered a separate board for all stats purposes..

An inverted way of thinking of it would be to consider that each sub-group is the same as a what we currently consider to be a single board with all of its scenarios and stats, ratings, etc.. so in a way, I'm simply proposing that you can take two (or more) different boards (with all of their scenarios) and give them the same "unified" name for the purpose of someone perusing all of the boards on the "Boards" page. 

Yeah I like that idea M57.  It seems like a good compromise and allows boards that are similar in some ways to be grouped together (which helps with navigating the board browser), but still allows them to be ranked separately if the designer thinks gameplay is different enough to warrant it.

I like that idea!  I nearly released 4-play again as just a simul-gear version just because I didnt want to mess up the player stats for wins etc on that board. 

So what would the criteria be for identifying whether a board is Unified or Independent? How different do the rules need to be? And who sets this, the designer or the review committee?

tom wrote:

So what would the criteria be for identifying whether a board is Unified or Independent? How different do the rules need to be? And who sets this, the designer or the review committee?

My off the cuff thought is that the designer would set it (it's easier this way), but that a review board would have to pass every independent group when it is first presented.  Here's one way it could work

Every current set of scenarios is set up as a single "sub-Board" for each existing Board.  The name of that sub-Board group should probably be the same as the Master Board.  As designers add - or migrate - scenarios to a new sub-Board, they must have a review game for each new sub-Board.

After a sub-Board has been approved, designers can freely migrate or create new scenarios in those sub-Boards, much in the way that they can currently create new scenarios without the need for a Review game.

In the case of Go-Geared, right now I would already have all four current scenarios under one sub-Board -- which I could rename "1-sided".  Remember, to get it the way I want it, two Review games would be necessary; one for 1-sided dice and one for 8-sided dice, but I've already passed one.  I could "rename" the current sub-Board "1-sided" and migrate the two 8-sided boards into another 'unReviewed' group named "8-sided" ..then put one game from that group up for Review.

+1 - Good compromise M57!