Brace Yourself...Mapmakers.

[Army of GOD]

michealjacksoneatingpopcorn.gif

[natty dread]

michealjacksoneatingpopcorn.gif

You forgot to put img tags.

[Qwert]

hmm,i still think that these all thing look like some form of sugestion.

[Mr Changsha]

hmm,i still think that these all thing look like some form of sugestion.

By God! He's right! The riddle has been solved!!!!!

[sonicsteve]

A CC maps as TV channels analogy

Speaking as a boring old fart, I can remember a time growing up when we only had 3 TV Channels in the UK. Channel 4 came along when I was about 14 I think.

As time passes more and more channels are added at an ever increasing rate. Nowadays I can browse through several hundred niche channels including those dedicated 24 hours per day to cartoons; music; history; news; politics; religion; yak butter production in tibet, and so on.

I can access all those channels if I want to, but the thing is that most of the time - I choose not to.

90% of the time i stick to the regular programmes on BBC1 and BBC2 which I like: Match of the Day; Top Gear; The Sky at Night; University Challenge; QI; Have I got News for You; Doctor Who (told you I was a boring old fart). Nearly all those were available when I was a kid - these are your core maps in TV form.

10% of the time I'll have a browse around the channels and find something different to watch - maybe the comedy channel or a movie, or maybe watch the news channel belonging to a different country and get a different perspective.

I personally wouldn't miss those several hundred channels, many of which are pretty derivative in my view, but I accept that they can be fun and I accept that some people would be really upset if they suddenly lost their favourite channel. To drag this analogy firmly back to maps, it is inconsiderate to propose a motion for the removal of other people's choice when one can simply elect not to participate on those maps which are not of interest.

CC is a website for fun (for most players). Players like woodruff and myself enjoy choosing the random option for the fun of exploring and learning a new map. I've played risk for 30-odd years, so I know the 'Classic' map already - nowadays I'd rather have fun on different settings and try to win a few tourneys, rather than play Classic every time.

There is no 'correct' path to follow - if you wish to specialise on Classic, or a few maps, fine by me, but don't tell the rest of us we can't have fun larking about on different maps in our spare time. All 170+ of them.

Cheers.

[Master Fenrir]

Clan wars are no longer about depth of knowledge but about breadth.

I wasn't here for the early clan days, so I'm not sure what you mean here, FC. Do you mean smaller challenges using mostly specialist maps vs. now with larger challenges with few specialist maps, or do you mean something different?

[Woodruff]

Seriously my man...I know you are annoyed with me now because I gave you a good whipping, though I'd be surprised if you thought I would do anything else. But why you were pissed off in the first place is a matter of some genuine confusion for me.

That you believe I am either annoyed or pissed off shows only the depths of your self-delusion. I am neither. I find you comical, actually, with all of your twisting and spinning.

[Commander62890]

There is a lot that I want to comment on, but I'll try to keep it short. I'll start with this, Mr C:



You said on page 5 that one should play on maps that everyone knows, because if you win, you know that you won solely with gametype-specific strategy, rather than a superior knowledge of the map.

I just don't understand why you think that beating people on obscure maps isn't as impressive as beating them on basic ones like Classic and 2.1. When I beat people on Classic, all luck issues aside, I know that I beat them solely with my "gametype-specific strategy," rather than knowing the map better, and I suppose this is why you and Fruitcake think highly of it.

But when I beat people on an obscure map, I have to assume that it was some combination of "gametype-specific strategy" and "knowledge of the map" that helped me beat them. Why is this not impressive? I have specialized and practiced on this map, and because I put in the time and effort, I know it better than my opponent does. And, for the record, my opponent willingly started or joined the game, so why is my superior knowledge of the map not impressive?

And, anyway, aren't you a fan of specialization? You appear to contradict yourself on this issue.



Now, as you may or may not know, I take pride in being great at team games on a wide variety of maps and settings, and even if I do not consider myself a "master" of a few of them, I do consider myself a "master" of most, because most of CC's maps are basic and easy to understand. That goes back to your original assertion that we should scrap maps.

Yet, on many maps, I need to practice on them to become great. I therefore take pride in becoming great at many maps.
Do you think that I should ignore most maps and play only those that I already know very well OVER and OVER and OVER?

I don't see what is so wrong with becoming a great team gamer on every single map. After a certain number of games (or hours) on a certain map, which differs from person to person, there can be very little improvement.
It just seems to me like a waste of time and energy to keep playing things that I'm already great at.

By the way, I seriously doubt Fruitcake would have much of an advantage over me in Classic Trips. All things being equal, including dice, drop, and teammates, I really can't imagine him winning more than 1 or 2 games out of every 1000. This is just a made-up number, but it reflects well my feelings on the matter. And I'm only giving him those 1 or 2 games because Mr C seems to think he's a god... if he takes every single turn absolutely perfectly, without fail, then sure, he'll take a few from me. But a few deployments on the player who goes before him, and I might be taking some games.
Just a joke, guys - this is all speculation, so let's move on without further ado...

After a while, I really don't think it's beneficial to play Classic trips over and over, because being good on it is not about knowing the map. You might as well be playing another map, and practicing your "team game skills" there.

Team game skills, once acquired, are very easily transferable from map to map.
Once you become great at it, you just need a little practice on maps you don't know well, and you will become nearly as great as you are on maps you already know very well.

In fact, I would argue that playing on many different types of maps can help you learn team games better, and when you go back to Classic after becoming a great team gamer, you will be able to play it perfectly.
It really is insanely easy, guys, and it's incredibly boring as a result.

Being good on Classic is not about knowing the map - it's about being a great team gamer, so why does it matter how much time you've spent playing on and thinking about Classic?
It's about how much time you've spent thinking about team games in general, in addition to innate skill level.

So why can't I have my fun and play different maps? Seriously, I don't think that playing a basic map over and over will get me very far. I can improve much more as a player by venturing onto different maps and showing off my skills there.
What is so wrong with my decision to play on many maps and settings?

I originally sought to become great on some of the hardest maps and settings. But once I had done that, what then?
What's next? Play on maps that I am incredibly good at over and over?
Why not play on every map and extend my great knowledge of team games onto those maps?

For me, public games and even most private games are simply a way for me to practice.
They are a way to improve myself.
And the best way to improve myself is to expose myself to new things, like new maps and settings.

The culmination of all this self-improvement is clan wars.

If I learn to play every map well, I will be able to play them in clan wars, where I will devote even more attention to them.

It's true - all things being equal, if I play 100 team games at one time, I will not have as good a win percentage as if I play 5 games at one time.

But this is my choice to make. Who are you to say otherwise? I play many games at one time for personal reasons - you should not act snobby and look down on me for it (unless it's to make fun of me for being a computer nerd, in which case - touche)! And, besides - I consider myself pretty goddamn brilliant even when I'm playing 100 games at a time - it's just that, if I was playing only 5, I would probably be just a bit better. Those mistakes that happen once every 100 games would not happen if I played 5, but like I said, it's my decision to make. And besides, it's just one mistake in one game... who cares?

If I have a specific game I need to win, such as a clan game, I can make sure I devote due time and thought to that one game.



Now, back to the main topic:

Yes, many maps are boring as hell.
Many of them deserve to be scrapped.
But I still do not think we should scrap them.
My elitist opinions should not be allowed to intrude on the well-being of the masses.
And the simple fact remains: In a practical sense, it would be impossible to carry this out.
Who would decide what is scrapped? How would the mapmakers feel? How would the general public feel?

The benefits of scrapping maps do not outweigh the cons. It's not even close.
I do not share your disgust with those who do not aspire to be the best. Leave them alone; let them have their "fun."
I guess the bottom line is that the current system does not impede our aspirations to be brilliant.
Sure, there are ways to make the system more geared towards specialization...
But it is not worth the cost of alienating most CCers.

And, besides - is not the current scoreboard a fair measure of specialization?
After all... you can't make it very far up there unless you commit to your best fields.

Anyhow, that's what I think... although most maps are shitty, we cannot scrap them.
And the reason for that is not only a logistical one - I also believe that we should not scrap them.

Let the masses do their thing, and let the elites do theirs. Each group should not be interfering with the well-being of the other.



Gee, this was a bit longer than I had intended...

You're welcome, GD!

The sad thing is most people will see this is so long and skip over it...

Although maybe that's for the best - I don't even know if what I have written is any good!

[Leehar]

There is a lot that I want to comment on, but I'll try to keep it short. I'll start with this, Mr C:

Gee, this was a bit longer than I had intended...

You're welcome, GD!

The sad thing is most people will see this is so long and skip over it...

Although maybe that's for the best - I don't even know if what I have written is any good!

+1
I'm sure we'll be able to analyze it more closely once we have time to go over it successfully

[natty dread]

Commander, I liked your post. I did read most of it. I skipped some boring words, like "is" and "or" but I did read most.

[Commander62890]

I did read most of it.

That's all I ask. I know it's no picnic!