Fritzinger wrote: ↑Sat Jul 30, 2022 3:58 am
@Enabran you sound hurt by the outcome for your dissident ideas, sorry to hear it. Would it help to share your original cards, here or in PM?
Richard already spoke on this, but as someone else on the team I'll chime in a bit now. I've read over his post and looked at our notes, and just to be clear here, his experience in practical terms seems to have been pretty much identical to everyone else's. He submitted a bunch of cards (more than anyone else did from the sound of it), and of those a few were chosen by us to be worked on and were fairly consulted on up until we went through the first round of playtesting and he cut off contact.
In terms of number of cards a person got in if they had their cards chosen, he's in the same ballpark as that average. If we picked up some of a player's cards that did not mean we were obligated us to pick up more of their cards; we didn't chose to work on and include his Garak submission for various reasons just like we didn't pick any number of other cards in the pile sent to us that someone presumably really wished would end up in print. We also didn't give him authority to have a commanding say or veto on how the subaffiliation his chosen cards belonged to were to be designed henceforth, because that was never going to be on the table and would have also meant he'd have a say in how Cardassians that others submitted would function (and yes, there were others who submitted cards in that category); that was likewise the same for everyone.
He's upset about how the set ended up, and he seems to really hate how the dissident cards in the set turned out as a whole, but this was how the Community Project was always going to work and we never gave any indication that it would be otherwise. Like Richard, I'm sincerely sorry he ended up having a bad time and regrets taking part, but I don't see how this could ever have gone another way if he went into this with those expectations.
Finally, yes a very small number of cards in this set were not submissions - but that's because sometimes a group of submitted cards we chose that we thought would be workable and interesting were found to not quite have the card support they'd need to be viable in competitive play once playtesters got them in their hands. If we didn't have a suitable submission we liked that could fill that role, rather then give up and scrap those submitted cards for lack of support, we either split/merged cards to address those issues or just made said support (often using cards from our pile of submissions as a base) for inclusion in the next round of playtesting. But again, this was a very small proportion of cards and I don't think they violated the spirit of what we set out to do here. ~90%+ of all of the cards in here are player submissions, and the rest were by and large designed solely to support and accommodate those submissions.