Board Thread:Off-Topic Posts/@comment-39067078-20190814024731/@comment-37322933-20190815021329

Alright, I see what you do, but, like, what's the point of doing a 'verdict' thing? I feel like when I review a role, I basically just point out things that don't work or should be changed, explain why they don't work or should be changed, and then summarise it all in the bottom.

I understand both the 'Scrap' and the 'Submit' concepts, I would do something similar and tell the user that either their concept isn't balanced or doesn't fit in the game, or tell them that it's excellent, original, and fun to play, and that's really that.

But when you tell someone to 'Tweak' a role, it's really the same as 'Submit', isn't it? It's like, 'Your role is great, but you should just change the fact that it does [whatever], and it'd be perfect for the game.' I'd regard that generally the same as the 'Submit' verdict, just with a tiny problem.

For example, I have a document which contains what I believe to be the mechanics of a balanced and fun Town of Salem. If I saw a role that I really liked (Your 'Submit' verdict), I'd add it right to the doc. If I saw a role that could use just a small change ('Tweak'), I'd just quickly fix that, and still add it just the same, or perhaps tell the user to 'submit' it to BMG.

Additionally, your 'Revamp' verdict is telling the creator to keep the idea and rework the role, right?

..

actually nevermind I understand that one too the only one I really have a problem with is Tweak tbh and it's really minor I just wasted 15 minutes of my life typing a bunch of mostly useless text yay