Is this true?

[grey_zealot]

In several threads, various members make the claim that WizKids DOES NOT playtest mixed Marvel and DC clix.

Is this true?!

It doesn't make sense to me that WK wouldn't playtest using both Marvel and DC "brands" on the same team and against each other.

I understand the marketing purposes of Marquee and Sealed Starter/Booster events to encourage sales of the individual brands.

But, every fanboy's dream is to face off a Batman team against a Captain America team, or team up Supes and the Fantastic Four or something.

I can't believe -- what with the care and ingenuity that goes into the design of the clix -- that WK aren't such fanboys.

WK may have to liscense and market the brands individually, but not playtest them together? Come on!:eek:

[krusticlese]

I don't know for certian, because I'm not a play tester, but of the testers I've spoken to I didn't get the impression that DC and Marvel were tested together.

[Jason Blood]

They are seperate games but they are compatible

DC and Marvel figs have different styles of play

[Ro-gan]

I am guessing they were play-tested together at one point. Otherwise how can they make the claim that they are compatible games.

I am sure the play testers did the combo but maybe not in an "official game tester" capacity.

[StormKnight]

Does this mean they actually DO playtest one universe combinations of figures? :grin:

[grey_zealot]

Do not know.

How much playtesting is done "in house" by WK design team, and how do they run playtesting using "outside help"??

[tidge]

They are "compatible" in the following ways:

The powers on the dials are the same/same colors

The maps are interchangeable

The "formula" for point cost is the "same" <--- This is speculation on my part. We know that some characters got personal tweaks from IC.

[grey_zealot]

Originally posted by tidge
The "formula" for point cost is the "same" <--- This is speculation on my part. We know that some characters got personal tweaks from IC.

O.K., we all know HeroClix is one system. Wizkids has staed as much on their web-site.

My question was about play-testing. I just find it hard to believe that the design group designing the dials -- all drawing from the same "toolbox" of rules, wouldn't playtest DC vs. Marvel.

This is the first time I've heard that WK tweaked point costs for characters. Does anyone have solid proof that this was done? I mean if it was done intentionally, or sort of happened as they continued to develop the HC system and the product line of the two brands, Marvel and DC?

[Spinebreaker]

It's the first I've heard of it either. Especially considering a few months back one of the designers went on record and said there was NO fudging and NO tweaking whatsoever. They do have a formula, and the points it says are what goes on the dial.

I'll find the word for word quote if anyone cares enough.

[grey_zealot]

Originally posted by Spinebreaker
It's the first I've heard of it either. Especially considering a few months back one of the designers went on record and said there was NO fudging and NO tweaking whatsoever. They do have a formula, and the points it says are what goes on the dial.

I'll find the word for word quote if anyone cares enough.

Spinebreaker---

Thanks!

I'm going to go dig around in the press release forum again.

[bakija]

Gray Zealot wrote:
>>My question was about play-testing. I just find it hard to believe that the design group designing the dials -- all drawing from the same "toolbox" of rules, wouldn't playtest DC vs. Marvel.>>

I don't think that they playtest that much, now that the rules are done, and I certainly don't think that they playtest individual figures for the sake of seeing if individual figures are in line.

We were told up front, a few months ago, that figures are designed simply by putting stats into a spread sheet that figures out their cost, and very little, if any, monkeying is done. As point costs are generated by formula, and the designers aren't willing to arbitrarily increase/reduce costs based on play balance, then playtesting individual figures isn't really necessary.

In terms of Marvel vs DC, it is very clear that the original DC set was designed in direct response to the noticable problems with the original Marvel set--lower stats, less effective ranged combat, plentiful Outwit. It seems likely that the DC set was playtested as a set, and limited effort was put into combining the sets--as they are built, essentially, on different average scales, combining them isn't necessarily a good idea. As this is the case, there is limited incentive to playtest them together.

-Peter

[Ignatz_Mouse]

I'm sure they playtest individual figures to see if there's some combinations which are really out of line. ANd they may not tweak points, but they probably do adjust what they decide to put where on the dials.

[bakija]

Ignatz Mouse wrote:
>>I'm sure they playtest individual figures to see if there's some combinations which are really out of line.>>

Certainly possible. But I suspect that this is few and far between. I mean, if they are making another Charge/Super Strength/Toughness brick character, all they are probably going to do is push around the stats and put them in the spread sheet, and see what cost comes out--there really isn't a need to playtest such a figure assuming that the point cost formula is roughly accurate. From what I understand, Power Man is coming out in the next set. In all likelyhood, he'll be similar to Hercules/She Hulk/Doc Samson/Whomever. They know how that works, they'll just make him and see what he costs--no need to see if he works or not. Yeah, if they are putting together somone kooky, like, say, Silver Surfer, and want to see what he does, he'll get thrown around in some games I'm sure. But another Brick or another Speedster or another Stealth/BCF figure isn't going to require any pre-emptive testing.

>>ANd they may not tweak points, but they probably do adjust what they decide to put where on the dials.>>

Oh, sure--but again, this probably doesn't require playtesting.

-Peter

[tyroclix]

I think they still play-test every character. I know a few people who've recently play-tested the next DC expansion - so its an on going thing.

Has anyone every play-tested any of the released sets? Just curious if there have been any changes - either in the chracters, powers or cost to what was the final release?

Of course looking at the new maps, I know no one play-tested those - lots of stairs trapped between blocking terrain, squares that could be both clear and hindering terrain, etc...

[tidge]

You could just email Monte Cook, he was one of the original playtesters. He even wrote a Line-of-Sight column on it:

Monte Cook's Column (http://www.montecook.com/arch_lineos48.html)

[Jmanrocks]

I think that WK does tweak certain figures point costs. Just look at all the E Fantastic Four pieces. You're telling me that they dont mess around with point costs to make them look better. Just come on. I mean seriously.

[megamania]

F Four was the one exception I could think of also. Especially since it was designed to play the four members as as a 200, 300, 400 pt teams and they "replacements" to fit within those points also.

Beyond that....I see no proof of tampering.

Please, it was asked already, any past playtesters- give a bit of info. I know you can't talk about upcoming releases but what of ones 20 months old?

[Braden]

Originally posted by tidge
They are "compatible" in the following ways:

The powers on the dials are the same/same colors

The maps are interchangeable

The "formula" for point cost is the "same" <--- This is speculation on my part. We know that some characters got personal tweaks from IC.

Retarddog has reported that he has been informed that the point formula was not tweeked.

[bakija]

>>I think that WK does tweak certain figures point costs. Just look at all the E Fantastic Four pieces. You're telling me that they dont mess around with point costs to make them look better.>>

I think that when they have reason to do so, they'll monkey with powers and stats such that figures will fit a certain point cost--given the FF example, they had a mission: make them work in 200/300/400 point incriments. I suspect that what they did in that case was they designed the figures in the spread sheet, and when they didn't add up to exactly the right number, they added and subtracted stats or powers till they were the right cost. I don't, however, think that they, say, made E Thing and then arbitrarily changed his point cost so that he fit, leaving his powers and stats where they were.

They seem to like their formula, even when it is in error. Thus, it seems likely that they stick with it.

>>Just come on. I mean seriously.>>

I am serious.

-Peter

[DTM]

Id think people would have to playtest the two sets together, since in my mind anyway, they are all part of the same game. Heroclix is a superhero figure dial game, compatable with DC and Marvel comics characters. Its THAT FACT that really got me into collecting and playing in the first place. If they were two totally seperate sets of rules and figures, Id not have started and youd all have been spared all of my horrible posts........God I gotta stop drinking so early in the day. :) Sure there are noticeable differences from set to set, but I think overall WK is getting DC and Marvel to look and play more compatable with one another, something I would be VERY much in favor of.

[grey_zealot]

Originally posted by tidge
You could just email Monte Cook, he was one of the original playtesters. He even wrote a Line-of-Sight column on it:

Monte Cook's Column (http://www.montecook.com/arch_lineos48.html)

Tidge,

Thanks! I've added the link to my favorites so I can read it again later. Thanks again.

[grey_zealot]

Originally posted by Braden
Retarddog has reported that he has been informed that the point formula was not tweeked.

There ya go. I was looking for info closer to first-hand.

As far as the FF, as bajika is saying, it doesn't look like point-cost "fudging" it looks like a legal (by the rules) design from concept to production.

I'm not a game industry insider. My whole point in asking these questions was from past experiences as a game player. Back in The Day (TM) when I was into AD&D/D&D, anticipation for 3rd Edition was huge, and reading the articles about all the playtesting really granted insights into how these guys go about designing the games.

I just find the human effort and creativity fascinating and inspiring.

Rumor and comments in other threads alledgeing that WK fudged stats and didn't playtest Marvel vs. DC,..... I just couldn't believe people as passionate about games would NOT playtest like that.

It's all about the Game, man. THE GAME!! :laugh:

[grey_zealot]

Originally posted by bakija
In terms of Marvel vs DC, it is very clear that the original DC set was designed in direct response to the noticable problems with the original Marvel set--lower stats, less effective ranged combat, plentiful Outwit. It seems likely that the DC set was playtested as a set, and limited effort was put into combining the sets--as they are built, essentially, on different average scales, combining them isn't necessarily a good idea. As this is the case, there is limited incentive to playtest them together.

-Peter

O.K., first other threads have hinted that the DC set was designed first and that for marketing reasons the Marvel IC set was pushed out first. Is this true?

Second, from a design stand point and drawing from the comics as source material, the DC characters have always seemed inherently more powerful than the Marvel heroes.

I don't know about the lower stats, but I assume the "more plentiful outwit" was to help counter those characters with Impervious better. (Before perplex and Probability Control became design favorites.)

It all seems to be the evolutionary cycles of the game machanics and the designers' manipulation of its potential.