soundoff wrote:Seems like there is enough interest out there for another GC attempt. BUT the 64,000 dollar question is.......is there anyone willing and able to bring it together?
Rafiki wrote:Based on prior experience, I'd say it'll take a short while to get up and running, and it'll last a whole lot longer than just a few weeks; success = months of play
People who are stepping up to bat need to know that if they want to take part, they need to be able to do so in the long run. In any case, there needs to be agreed upon SOP's for how to handle absences and when people no longer are able to participate.
A personal hope of mine is to see a whole lot more AAR'ing; there has been some great AAR'ing in the past Grand Campaigns, but some of the AARs were a bit intermittent and others rarely even got updated.
There are, of course ways to address these things, though
soundoff wrote:I totally echo your sentiments Rafiki, that if there is going to be another GC there needs to be a whole heap of AARing and a method of covering absences to ensure that the whole thing rolls along without too many delays. (I'd have thought a turn a week should be achievable but then I've no experience of ever having played in a GC)
soundoff wrote:I know players should get as much 'fun' as they can from participating but my take on the concept is that it should not simply be for the gratification of the players. It should hopefully be for the enjoyment of of ALL of the AGEOD Community, the love of the game and to help continue to promote it.
Rafiki wrote:One change compared to previous iterations that I think would be good to do is to have a player on each team with the role of "deputy-at-large", who would step in any of the other roles (president, theater commander) on short notice.
Additionally, I think it could be good to have two coordinators (provided there are enough people interested in the project), since then there'll be a failover there too.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests