koontz1973 wrote:Brucewar, so if you take out Arms race as you suggest from the stats, it goes even worse for mid sized games. That is one less in the top 10.
Medal hunting is just that, and I would dispute that it is a foundry problem. People would medal hunt on 10 maps or 10 thousand maps.
koontz1973 wrote:So is that a map problem or a settings problem? I agree that now we have a lot of settings and more are sure to come over time. Like trench and nukes when they came out, lots of games got made with those settings, on certain maps. We have medal hunters and always will whilst we have medals, but how does that go for or against mid range maps?
greenoaks wrote:just because we can add a new setting/map/etc doesn't mean we should. the Suggestions forum develops many great ideas but they don't get automatically added to the site. the Foundry needs to exercise the same restraint/quality control.
RjBeals wrote:The foundry can (and should be) a critical place
thenobodies80 wrote:In theory you have my full support here. It's a life that I think that someone should be in charge to restrict the map that can be done.
But it is a problem, because not everyone is happy to have someone who can tell him/her that his idea can't become a map, at least on CC.
A simple solution could be say: hey you're the foreman...it's up to you! Take your responsabilities!
But If you come out with a such idea, some will call you tyrant, oppressor, etc etc...
It doesn't matter if you act or speak for teh love of the foundry, when it comes that you don't allow someone else map, you appear to his eyes like the worst asshole on earth.
The point is that people should come here and post things like: "your map sucks" or "no one cares about your city, draw your map, print it and play it with your friends, but not here on CC"
It also seems like there's a trend here with the second bolded section, so perhaps things are more delicate than I realize. Some other pieces I found from the guides forum:3. You need thick skin. Virtually all mapmakers, at some time or another, come off as harsh. Part of the foundry rules state that mapmakers have to answer every piece of feedback, either accepting the idea presented, or refuting it logically. This means either implementing the ideas or giving valid reasons as to why the idea is not a good one for the map. The most common reason they'll come off as harsh is when someone airs an idea that doesn't fit with the mapmaker's plan for the map at all. This often gets blown out of proportion, as the person giving feedback gets very offended and says that the foundry is exactly like they heard it was ("a bunch of insensitive jerks") and never comes back. Mapmakers tend to attack the idea like they're attacking the person, but they're not. Often, the very shooting down of an idea is seen as harsh no matter how it comes out. Just remember it's part of the process.
1. A map should be ‘inherently unique either in gameplay, location, or theme’.
2. Gameplay features must be compatible with the game engine's currently usable XML.
3. A map's content must be the original work of the cartographer unless consent to use copyrighted works is gained. This is your responsibility.
4. All sound advice must be followed unless a logical rebuttal by the mapmaker or another member of the community is provided.
5. To proceed through the foundry the community must show a reasonable amount of interest towards a map.
Good Foundry Conduct
We know everyone has their own way of doing things. Below is our advice to you on good foundry conduct when it comes to posting map updates or posting feedback for a map you have interest in.
Good Conduct When Posting Feedback on a Map
If you have a map you're interested in and you intend to give it feedback, probably the best way to help the map maker when you post each piece of feedback is to remember the following three points:
1. State what your concerns are.
2. State why these are your concerns.
3. Most importantly, state what you believe is a good or possible solution to your concerns.
The closer to these three basic points you are, the better received your feedback will generally be, and the better the map will be as a result.
A comprehensive guide to giving and receiving feedback is contained within the Foundry Feedback Guidelines.
Nobodies wrote:RjBeals wrote:The foundry can (and should be) a critical place
Everyone will say (as usually) that's up to the CAs to stop the bad maps...but I say that people should have the balls to speak, have a sharper tongue, say what you said in the columbia district map thread. Obviously this must be done not just for the sake of being unfriendly but to obtain better maps and moreover don't made those who are absolutely shitty ideas.
If we continue to think and speak like every idea could have its own niche to fit...then nothinig will change. Imo people and CAs should start to post only into maps that are worth or that have potential behind them and also mapmakers should wait and post maps which can really add something new to the site, even if it means do not post a new map idea for months.
But again, this is really hard to do if no one cares about what we do here.
Many appreciate what we do, but too few takes some mins to go here and post.
I have always said that it's not necessary to post a full gameplay analysis to give an input to a mapmaker.
The foundry, by its nature must work under the big law of "only the strongest/best will survive".
Useless maps should be left in a corner and die.
It's sad but true.
Nobodies wrote:Said that (and to not make a totally off topic post), let me say that size doesn't matter for the quality of a map.
A map is a good map when size, theme and gameplay mesh together to create something unique and special.
If they do this, then imo we can also have 200 mid size maps!
Shape wrote:1. A map should be ‘inherently unique either in gameplay, location, or theme’.
Shape wrote:But you blue guys/gals do have more responsibility around these parts than the common user, as you (and correct me if I'm wrong) volunteered for a position, so I feel like you guys do have a higher calling, and if no one is willing to say that a map is bad, it should fall to the ones in charge around here. And, too, like the D.C. map, the map should be nipped in the bud before too much is invested in it.
District Of Columbia. really, who gives a shit. some players from there might but the rest of the world doesn't. Washington DC sure.
thecycle23 wrote:District Of Columbia. really, who gives a shit. some players from there might but the rest of the world doesn't. Washington DC sure.
...The District of Columbia IS Washington, D.C. That's what the D.C. stands for. It's the capital of the U.S. I'd wager more players than those that live in D.C. (like me) would care to play it.
thecycle23 wrote:I agree with you that the name should reflect mass appeal.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest