It's clear that more than a month has passed so I'm not going to spend time on it, I need only to quote isaiah40:
isaiah40 wrote: Koontz did the right thing as you did not provide an update between Feb 18th and March 18th.
SO if you want this map to proceed, then you will have to do another update to get moved mack into the Drafting Room.
Now, what I'm really sad to see is a such level of bitterness into the discussion. For this reason I want to clarify a thing:
Oneyed wrote:you are blue guy, so your job is follow all maps. when you would be "only" normal member of foundry you can follow only what you like.
The drafting room CA must follow all maps. It's exactly his duty. But while he does his job he needs to understand which ideas could become a CC map or stay just an idea.
The fact that a CA, who is there exactly for that reasons, is not supporting your map deoasn't mean he is not following it. A map can proceed through the foundry even if CAs don't support it. CAs are there to help the foundry process and guide the mapmaker to the right way, but we always consider the community support while judging a situation.
If a CA is not supporting your map, simply he is keeping track of the activity in your thread, he reads the posts...but he has decided to not post directly in your map thread if not for technical reasons. While doing this, the CA is not ignoring the map but simply since he thinks the idea is not totally worth a map he decides to test the community support.
If there's no support the CA has a real proof of his doubts about a map.
This is what koontz has done and it's exactly what I would have done. If you have doubts, see what the people thinks. For me he has acted in the right way.
If I look at the number he has posted, maybe you should consider that he could be not totally wrong. For this reason, maybe you should not reply to everyone in such way. I don't know if it's because the different languages or if it's because the web can easily cause some misunderstanding, but I can assure to you that no one here is trying to offend you in any way. CAs critiques are always referred to the map and not to the mapmaker. In addition if you reply to critiques in that way you will get only less people posting on your map thread.
Now, I think you (oneyed) are a good mapmaker and you're trying to explore new fields, I'm happy to have you here around and I really like your tanks map.
But it's not easy to deal with you, you take everything really personal, specially when you don't agree. Sure, there should be discussion and reasons must be given from both parts but your words sounds always so grumpy when you don't agree.
I don't want to start another duel so please consider that I'm talking objectively: I can easily count the real posts in this thread with my hands.
We can debate about the value of your idea for days and do not find an agreement. i want to speak frankly: my suggestion for you is forget this project and instead focus on the tank map and also on the great war map.
Since, the biggest issue is support, I have a proposal. Test the community support yourself, maybe with a simple poll.
If you don't know how to start a poll, just send me a PM.
So, please everyone chill down, it's possible to have a discussion without being rude.
koontz has moved to gameplay, i will follow the DR so I will follow your map. (btw I don't want to see the same thing happen there
My very first suggestion for your map and you is what I said here above, test community support.
When it's done we have several things to discuss.
About the update you can work again with the legend. The legend must be clear and easy to read, your legend background+the current font make everything more hard to read.
If you want to discuss more about the recent diatribe I kindly ask to you to use pms, in this way we can keep the discussion in the topic focused on the map development only.