(01-06-2014, 11:18 AM)stear Wrote: (01-06-2014, 08:46 AM)campsawyer Wrote: Well, regarding quality and delivery, if Horn of Africa is an indication, APL might finally be on track. Just received it the other day, maps and pieces look great. I have not finished the SSR's or all the scenarios but so far they look solid. No simple typo's, SSR's look good so far although I have not played it yet.
My question to Jim is how long did this take to go from concept to the December delivery?
I can't speak to the date of concept, but I became involved in mid-Nov. By that time, Mike had settled on the map areas and counter mix, leaving little room for me to make changes. Design, development and testing of the scenarios was completed in about three weeks, benefiting from Mike sketching out 8 of the 15 operational, and the fact that (1) I had TG week and Dec 14+ off, and (2) I keep hours like Samara from The Ring. If I had been able to provide input early on, I would have pushed for the map to be larger / align with EF map, and to increase the counter mix to 70/140.
This pace is less than idea; feels like we are publishing under newspaper deadlines (which I believe Mike is used to). The 2.0 versions of Crimson and Red were accomplished under the same conditions, albeit without the vacation on my part. The downside is, this pace doesn't allow for help / testing by the wider review / development team (Holzer / Wheeler). I would have liked a larger counter mix for Crimson 2.0, and for Red 2.0.
But that said, I am always looking for perfection (I was going to recycle Maine and RJW again, if given the chance). In these three, despite the tight deadlines, errors were small. If folks are happy with these games, and having much fun with them, then... "Mission Accomplished!" 
-Jim
In terms of QA, Horn is the best, Red iis good, I have a couple items that I will email and you have the stuff from RTM. I believe from your end the GWAS/SWWAS is looking better.
Also, I would agree on the the maps for Horn. But this is for another forum.
