In comments to individual authors, I'm going to go in random order, though I'm not going to necessarily offer comments on all the AARs. If I have something useful to contribute, I will do so.
I should also say that my theory of feedback is that the most useful feedback is constructively critical. Tell the author what they did right, but don't shy away from telling the author what they did wrong, because THAT is what teaches the author how to improve. Some of my feedback may rub you the wrong way, but please trust that I mean it to be helpful.
I've said enough already to probably let those who are really interested know I was Judge #3 -- I think I'm the only judge who ranked both
Brandenburg III and
Surume in the top 10. They both chose really challenging scenarios, and proved themselves successful through good knowledge of game mechanics and strategy. As a Strategy Guide author, I can definitely appreciate that!
Brandenburg III's Bukkhara was very entertaining to me. I have previous experience playing Afghanistan, so I know Central Asia is just NOT the place you want to be if you want an easy game! You've got to be worried about the UK, China and Russia all around you, and there's no one in that region who looks like they can survive more than a few years if any one of these 3 behemoths looks hard in their direction! So I was excited to see Brandenburg play a very clever game of survival and expansion, using a realistic assessment of vulnerabilities, including his own. You don't often see a minor power go up against China 3 times (it was 3, wasn't it? -- wow!) and survive. He did so by using his own terrain to maximum advantage, sucking Chinese blood into the valleys between the mountains, and then ultimately making the tough but realistic choice to give up territory for peace once he'd bled them dry. I remember to myself thinking, more than once, "Really?! No way!" Final comments explain why I didn't rank it higher -- "somewhat inconsistent, economics not great, and storytelling uninspired." Still, a remarkable achievement which I ranked 5th overall.
Surume's NowhAAR of Iceland I also ranked high (6th) for similar reasons. When I first saw the setup -- a one-province minor with NO advantages -- I thought there was no way to succeed, but he might be able to prove himself in some way. I was surprised -- no,
shocked! -- to see him actually succeed. Surume displayed a technician's appreciation for the mechanics of the game -- I wouldn't call his gameplay "gamey", because he did set realistic limits on himself at times, but he definitely squeezed what he could out of the game by knowing the system. While Slan (above) graded him down for this, I actually rated it higher because Surume never presented it as a "realistic" AAR. We knew he was going to make the best out of a bad situation, and he did remarkably well! I wrote the V2 Strategy Guide, and even -I- learned some things from him!
I also noted he made good use of humor at points.
Polar Mongoose (Argentina), I would encourage you to continue writing -- I think you're enjoying it, and others are too. My notes simply say, "Good solid gameplay AAR" which means I was impressed, I found no faults with it -- it was good! -- but it did not really stand out to me. Obviously it did to others, who ranked you higher. But with practice, your AARs will stand out even better! My first AAR for ANY Paradox game was playing Argentina -- a fun country to play. It was in HOI 1 and I quickly found myself at war with Britain and France! lol I would have given more points if the competition hadn't been so stiff, even in the middle ranks.
Jafloresl (Mexico), I would also encourage you to keep it up! Your AAR was also good, though I noted what I considered unrealistic conversation which hurt my enjoyment of it. You included an admirable level of detail, but often concentrated on granular things most people won't care about (like relatively insignificant events, etc.) -- deal with what's important, and leave the rest. Also suffered from something seemingly superficial, but important -- the lines and spacing ran into itself so the blocks of text were hard for me to read.
Ricox (2 Sicilies - Unification of Italy), your AAR was good. But right from the start (perhaps because of the nature of the contest, and the need to finish quickly?) you indicated you had stacked the cards in your favor so that it would be easier to achieve your goal in less time. Especially by removing the Badboy obstacle, I think most players would have been able to repeat your success, and so I didn't consider it a particularly challenging goal, especially for a mid-grade power like Two Sicilies (try it as Tuscany or Modena, and I'll be more impressed!
).
TekcoR (Benelux - Beer, Chocolate, Waffles), I really expected to give you more points!
For those of you not familiar with TekcoR's work (many, many AARs), he's one of the most accomplished writers on the Forum, and I've enjoyed many, many of his AARs. He even has one or two (or three???) running right now which I consider of high quality. But to be honest I didn't enjoy this one at all. I know you put alot of time and consideration into it -- alot of "craft" -- but because you were trying something very different, it didn't work for me. Obviously it did for others, which means it's not a bad format -- just won't reach those with my preferences. In my notes I mention "too much effort to be funny" and also I note that your use of screenshots wasn't particularly informative, so that I was relying on this crazy guy -- an irritatingly idiotic idiot savant -- to tell me what was going on, which quickly tried my patience.
All of it.
Planck (Brazil), well done! My notes say: "Attempts at humor understated (i.e. legitimately funny at points but used only as a counterpoint to the more serious telling of the AAR), good inventive backstory, interesting aggressive strategy in Europe. When used, dialogue is effective and not allowed to get in the way of the story." I appreciated the irony of invading Portugal, and I thought you did a good job of coming up with ways to explain the otherwise implausible things going on. Very good job! I ranked you 9th, which is pretty good considering the level of competition.
Twichy Boy (Venice), not a bad job at all. My notes say, "Good gameplay, well chosen screenshots and plan of expansion. A little haphazard. Got exciting during Ottoman war, but mainly because of oversight - twice!" Basically, I found it an entertaining AAR, but again not one that stood out. You demonstrate good talent, though, so keep it up!
Poh (A Pope's Tale), I have a mix of praise and criticism, which I hope you will take in the spirit it is meant. I did not feel that your gameplay or storytelling was particularly informative. Humor is hard for me to appreciate unless it's understated, and yours was more flippant and mocking, which I don't like (others do). Largely what made yours stand out (and why I ranked you 10th -- which I think is how you ended up in the ratings, yes?) is your beautifully detailed and impressive combat maps. I was very impressed. They honestly took me from being ho-hum about the AAR to seeing it in a new light.
Scholar (Portugal's Second Coming), I really enjoyed your historical introduction. Your Historybook style is excellent! However, here's really my one criticism, without which you would have scored more points -- for all its excellence as a Historybook style, you lacked all but a very few dates with which to frame the history that was happening!
That drove me ABSOLUTELY nuts! I notice another reviewer noted the same thing. My notes say: "Good example of how an AAR can cover lots of ground ably, but concisely. Cannily played. Spectacular finale!" Ranked 7th.
Forgiven (Legacy of Metternich). Ranked 8th, within 2 points of both Scholar's Portugal and Planck's Brazil (remember, stiff competition in the middle ranks! -- these guys were all really good, and I couldn't clearly decide between them). This was another solid AAR, and it had good length and depth of coverage. I was kind of surprised you jumped into war with Prussia without being better prepared, checking out the alliances, etc. But this was a good solid performance, and I enjoyed it!
All right... I'd love to go on, but I'm out of time for tonight, and it seems fitting to reserve the more extensive comments I've written for my four top-ranked AARs for another post, since this one is getting awfully long!
Thanks, to all the authors I've mentioned here, and to those who I didn't -- judging really was a true joy!
Rensslaer
