Conquer Club

DiM wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:Flap you are right on man.
You are.

That cannot happen though or it would have already. And for years I have given people links to here to comment- so I agree and I have and will try.
------------------------------------------


You guys know what I thought about today when I started up a chinese checkers game....
I was like " I cannot be a hipocrit because I might be the onlyone left on CC that still loves this map"

Then I was like, that is the solution! Listen... lack can run numbers. Let the players decide.

The lowest played map gets tossed into probation each month. If it is the lowest played map or in the bottom 5 two months in a row.. put it back in the foundry for revision or death.


Let the players decide... how fair is that?

i already suggested the least played maps be withdrawn from live play. nobody agreed

I'll agree. I think that's a great suggestion. If a map is in the bottom 5 out of over 200 maps, it should be put on probation and stored somewhere dark.

chapcrap wrote:

DiM wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:Flap you are right on man.
You are.

That cannot happen though or it would have already. And for years I have given people links to here to comment- so I agree and I have and will try.
------------------------------------------


You guys know what I thought about today when I started up a chinese checkers game....
I was like " I cannot be a hipocrit because I might be the onlyone left on CC that still loves this map"

Then I was like, that is the solution! Listen... lack can run numbers. Let the players decide.

The lowest played map gets tossed into probation each month. If it is the lowest played map or in the bottom 5 two months in a row.. put it back in the foundry for revision or death.


Let the players decide... how fair is that?

i already suggested the least played maps be withdrawn from live play. nobody agreed

I'll agree. I think that's a great suggestion. If a map is in the bottom 5 out of over 200 maps, it should be put on probation and stored somewhere dark.

In the future something like that would be necessary, what will be the limit CC can take ? 400 - 500 or more ?
Anohter solution could be make categories for the maps, and store those who dont get played much but still available for gamers who are nostalgic

Nola_Lifer wrote:Don't fix, what isn't broken.

Don't break, what isn't fixed.

-Sully

Victor Sullivan wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:Don't fix, what isn't broken.

Don't break, what isn't fixed.

-Sully

don't eat what is pooed

DiM wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:Flap you are right on man.
You are.

That cannot happen though or it would have already. And for years I have given people links to here to comment- so I agree and I have and will try.
------------------------------------------


You guys know what I thought about today when I started up a chinese checkers game....
I was like " I cannot be a hipocrit because I might be the onlyone left on CC that still loves this map"

Then I was like, that is the solution! Listen... lack can run numbers. Let the players decide.

The lowest played map gets tossed into probation each month. If it is the lowest played map or in the bottom 5 two months in a row.. put it back in the foundry for revision or death.


Let the players decide... how fair is that?

i already suggested the least played maps be withdrawn from live play. nobody agreed

I really only read the forums once in a while now-a-days man.

But yeah I think this may be the way to go.

Think about it guys, if a map is not being played, it needs to come back into the system here for improvement. And if noone cares enough to improve it and noone cares enough to play it, then why do we have it?

army of nobunaga wrote:Think about it guys, if a map is not being played, it needs to come back into the system here for improvement. And if noone cares enough to improve it and noone cares enough to play it, then why do we have it?

Well said.

should I submit this to "sugestions"? I do not think I can get enough people riled up about this... many people in cc play 50 maps or less and that is it.. is this something worth me campaigning for?

and lets be frank.. I am not well loved here by the leaders... would it be better if one of you did it and I raised a storm?

I don't think removing maps will be much of a help. Having a map browser that organizes the maps into categories and lists statistics like number of games played and <<new idea, for me, anyway>> map ratings (like player ratings, details to be determined) would help users find maps they might enjoy without taking away maps that may be the favourites of just a few players.

Removing maps is a terrible idea. Crappy maps with clan support would remain (beef anyone?) and good, but quirky maps would be punished.

It also rewards the older maps that people are already familiar with and makes it difficult for new maps to get enough exposure to stick.

lostatlimbo wrote:Removing maps is a terrible idea. Crappy maps with clan support would remain (beef anyone?) and good, but quirky maps would be punished.

It also rewards the older maps that people are already familiar with and makes it difficult for new maps to get enough exposure to stick.

Well, there could always be a grace period for new maps. Problem solved, next question.

Clan support for bad maps: who cares? If they like it enough to play even if it is a stupid map, then it should stay. Problem solved, next question.

army of nobunaga wrote:and lets be frank.. I am not well loved here by the leaders... would it be better if one of you did it and I raised a storm?

I don't think that really matters. The leaders don't really care who submit something. Just if it has support/merit. And, let's be honest, this will only happen with a lot of support or if lack steps in. So, either way, it probably won't happen, but you could make the suggestion either way. Problem not really solved.

What good does it do exactly to remove maps from play?

To have less choice of maps? I just don't get it... what would you get out of it?

natty dread wrote:What good does it do exactly to remove maps from play?

To have less choice of maps? I just don't get it... what would you get out of it?

Better maps. People would be forced to make maps that will be played on. If a map is in the bottom 2 percentile, how great can it be?

chapcrap wrote:

natty dread wrote:What good does it do exactly to remove maps from play?

To have less choice of maps? I just don't get it... what would you get out of it?

Better maps. People would be forced to make maps that will be played on. If a map is in the bottom 2 percentile, how great can it be?

What could be interesting is to make a pucblic vote round, where the ordinary CC gamer put hes vote on whats importend for a map, we alredy had a pull for you favorite map, this result dident gave the prettiest or newest one any advantages, its some times what people also feels comfort of, If I frequently play the same map and almost win every time, I will get a relationship with this map even if it is but ugly, you know like a dog, hes ugly as hell but you love him.
So starting to sort out which go or stay will devine people in CC.
Thers no guarantee for the most fantastic, prettiest map ever will played most.

Flapcake wrote:What could be interesting is to make a pucblic vote round, where the ordinary CC gamer put hes vote on whats importend for a map,

What is important for the players is gameplay. Graphics do not come into the equation at all apart from in the foundry. If the GP is shit, it will not get played on no matter how great the graphics are. Gameplay has to be the first, second and last thing dealt with in the foundry. Not saying pretty graphics have to be discarded, but GP must have more thought into it.

chapcrap wrote:

natty dread wrote:What good does it do exactly to remove maps from play?

To have less choice of maps? I just don't get it... what would you get out of it?

Better maps. People would be forced to make maps that will be played on. If a map is in the bottom 2 percentile, how great can it be?

Or, people won't bother to even try to make good maps, since they know the maps can be removed from play anyway.

What's with this "people would be forced to make better maps" thing anyway? Do you think people make purposefully bad maps right now?

People make as good maps as they are capable of. It's up to the CA:s to monitor and guide the mapmaking process and make sure inferior maps won't get through until they're developed into good maps.

Sadly, the site admin does not really give a shit about the foundry, or the quality of maps, as long as some maps are produced. People who really care about the foundry and are invested in it are driven away because of the admins' moronic policies. So mapmakers do what they can, but until you can get lackattack to really pay attention to the problems of the foundry I don't think you're going to see any real progress.

A feature for classifying maps & giving site users directions in which to choose. It would be a great tech fix to the problems that have been mentioned, add real value for members. I think team cc cartographers should spemak to night strike & ask his advice on the tournament section overhaul - was that lack' s plan or did it come from the cc tourney team?
Makes a good precedent.

laughingcavalier wrote:A feature for classifying maps & giving site users directions in which to choose.

Has been asked for years, just search the suggestions forum.

@natty

I don't have a problem with most maps. As I said in the OP, it has been said by some that the maps are not as great as they should be. I think there are plenty of great maps that I love to play. I know you disagree, but I think there should be a limit on the number of maps that the site has. So, my thought was that limiting the output in order to get a better product would be a good thing.

You say that the problem is lack, but that the Foundry CAs are in charge of making sure that maps are good, then is it him or the CAs who might be settling for less? It seems to me like you're really saying it's the Foundry CAs, but trying to pin it on lack instead.

chapcrap wrote:I think there should be a limit on the number of maps that the site has.

Why?

chapcrap wrote:So, my thought was that limiting the output in order to get a better product would be a good thing.

Yeah, that's not going to work. It would just force the mapmakers to fight & compete with each other, instead of working together to produce the best maps. No one would comment on anyone else's map threads because no one would want to help anyone else finish their map, it would be a killing blow to the foundry.

chapcrap wrote:You say that the problem is lack, but that the Foundry CAs are in charge of making sure that maps are good, then is it him or the CAs who might be settling for less? It seems to me like you're really saying it's the Foundry CAs, but trying to pin it on lack instead.

Oh wow, you know what I'm saying better than I do. Good for you!

The CA:s can only do so much, and it's ultimately up to the site admin who is allowed to be a CA and help the foundry. I could go in more detail about this, but why bother, it's not like it matters anymore... the foundry is pretty much dead anyway, or at least dying. It's been seen time and again that lack doesn't care no matter how many people who really contribute to the site and drive it forward quit in frustration because of lack of support from the admin, so I'm not holding my breath for any changes in the future either.

natty dread wrote:

chapcrap wrote:I think there should be a limit on the number of maps that the site has.

Why?

Because.

natty dread wrote:

chapcrap wrote:So, my thought was that limiting the output in order to get a better product would be a good thing.

Yeah, that's not going to work. It would just force the mapmakers to fight & compete with each other, instead of working together to produce the best maps. No one would comment on anyone else's map threads because no one would want to help anyone else finish their map, it would be a killing blow to the foundry.

I see what you're saying there and you may be right about them not helping each other. Usually competition makes things better, but when there aren't enough people helping out, the competition won't matter. I can see that argument.

natty dread wrote:

chapcrap wrote:You say that the problem is lack, but that the Foundry CAs are in charge of making sure that maps are good, then is it him or the CAs who might be settling for less? It seems to me like you're really saying it's the Foundry CAs, but trying to pin it on lack instead.

Oh wow, you know what I'm saying better than I do. Good for you!

I just said that's what it seems like. No need to be upset with me for trying to understand you better.

natty dread wrote:The CA:s can only do so much, and it's ultimately up to the site admin who is allowed to be a CA and help the foundry. I could go in more detail about this, but why bother, it's not like it matters anymore... the foundry is pretty much dead anyway, or at least dying. It's been seen time and again that lack doesn't care no matter how many people who really contribute to the site and drive it forward quit in frustration because of lack of support from the admin, so I'm not holding my breath for any changes in the future either.

Well, I don't know any back story to what this is about specifically, but I can't argue that people get frustrated here and quit. I would think that more effort overall should be put into the foundry, as the maps and games are what really drive the site. So, I get your frustration about it too. It seems like lately things have been getting better as far as updates on the site as a whole, but I'm not really sure about the foundry specifically. I haven't been around the foundry for nearly as long as most of the people in here, so I'll ask.

What support are you looking for from admin?

Natty, I think someone needs to be frank here... And I think you not only know what I am about to say but will agree if even if you argue against it...


There are maps that are absolutly fucking embarrassing that they are released on a pay game site on the web with as many people as CC has.
With the following here (could be much much more but thats another topic) we expert "Expert" "great" maps.

The current method for graduating maps lets any A-hole with a little ability push a map through with enough time on their hands.

Do I need to start a fire storm on this thread and mention the 30 utterly rubbish maps that have made it through... I love Cairns, and I think even he would agree that one of his maps should be sent back and revamped.

The point is, you mapmakers are awesome, I think 70% of you are doing great incredible work and 100% of you should be congratulated on the thankless work you do. CC will end someday and all of you work your asses off on your art that will not even last the decade. That I thank you guys for and love you for.


But there is crap... utter crap, crap that isnt played.. will NEVER be played... search for games.. I did the other day at the start of this thread... NOONE is playing certain maps.

The mapmakers should embrace a process that brings current maps back into the process for 1) probation 2) revamp.


And what I mean by this is simple
1) if a map is the lowest played for a month, it goes into a 3 month probation.
2) if a map in probation stays at the bottom 5 maps played 3 months in a row it goes back to the mappmakers forum.
3) if the creator of the map wants to change it and make it better, awesome, if they are gone maybe a volunteer can take it. If noone takes it, put it in a retaired maps bin.


We need the best product available... why natty?

Because I hope your works of art last more than a decade. This is to help keep cc alive.

more is not better guys. I can only imagine new people starting this game and trying certain maps... lol

You're right, more is not better, but that doesn't mean more is worse. Apart from cluttering the browse maps page, unplayed maps do no harm. Even if all the maps were brilliant, the map browser makes the process tedious. If I am unfamiliar with a map, squinting at a squashed/stretched thumbnail is of no help. I have to click it to really see it. Even a Windows Explorer filmstrip view would be an improvement. The real step forward will come with categorization and rankings.

ender516 wrote:You're right, more is not better, but that doesn't mean more is worse. Apart from cluttering the browse maps page, unplayed maps do no harm. Even if all the maps were brilliant, the map browser makes the process tedious. If I am unfamiliar with a map, squinting at a squashed/stretched thumbnail is of no help. I have to click it to really see it. Even a Windows Explorer filmstrip view would be an improvement. The real step forward will come with categorization and rankings.

incorrect, when the maps are worse.. then more are worse.

Ender do some map searches for games waiting and being played... hell do it at random.. You will see what I am talking about..

some maps make it through the process and they are crap, and trash.

more is not better.
more is not worse, unless the maps are worse.



edit- you guys pride you on a process... well there needs to be a process for maps already released and defunt or released and unplayed.
The process should be to always improve, not to gain a plateau and be left forever.
This does the guys that are active and good here a disservice.

Because atm, an artist could come on CC and take a 5% sample of the maps and say "amateurs" ... and we know we have some of the best here.

Ok, you keep asking for better maps... but how are mapmakers supposed to be able to keep growing and creating new and better things in this environment?

When was the last time we got any improvements in the game engine? When have we last gotten any new XML features?

Look at research & conquer. A map with truly innovative gameplay, yet it couldn't be put in play because the game engine couldn't support it. We were promised an update that would make the gameplay possible, which would also open possibilities for other new maps. We were told this update would "surely come in no more than 6 months". It's been over 18 months now and counting... no word of that update.

So don't blame the mapmakers for not coming up with anything new... they do, all the time, but the admin & the site doesn't support them, and so those ideas hang around in the foundry limbo, waiting for xml updates that never come.


Then we have this idiotic user interface for the game itself. Would it be so damn hard to get rid of the sidebar already. and give more room for wider maps? And what about other UI improvements? Pop-up legends & territory labels would give way more room for actual gameplay.