Map Complexity List

[cairnswk]

I'm gonna trample back in here and say once again that the simple, moderate, complex three rating system is going to be the best for any new. I agree with edbeard, Dim, Incandenza.

I told Chipv the other day that this topic would never work...
a) Because no-one can ever decide.
b) Because Mapmakers always complain that their maps aren't complex and are just simple.

C.

this will work C...but one should apply that KISS principle instead of trying to show how great one is with programming skills and over-categorizations of maps.
And i do acknowledge that some of my maps are the hardest on the site and should be in the complex list.

...The goal is to present a rough order of complexity from the point of view of a novice not an expert....

...and (no insult meant but) you are an expert at your skill level at rank of captain and a computer programmer putting his slant on this list for the purposes of programming some wonderful add-on for the site.. Give me a break Chip, i didn't come down in the last shower. If a novice (or noob as Dim calls) is looking at this for the first time, you think he is going to want to see 42 categories to tell him how complex the maps are. i doubt it.

The premise was that, with chipv's new script, you can sort maps on the game finder list alphabetically or by number of territories. Wouldn't it be great if you could sort by some sort of complexity rating too?

Yes, but once you already have two simple sorting filters in 1. alphabet and 2. number of territories, why complicate it by adding a third filter that categorizes into 42 sections? Wouldn't it be better to have that 1 extra filter as saying "simple"...."moderate"...."complex" That would surely be more appealing to the new player and other players on the site for that matter. Let the players then decided how they rate the map after they have played it several times.

[TaCktiX]

In this case, wouldn't a star rating system make perfect sense? I suppose I'll need to produce a full data set to prove it fully, but according to a "5-star" rating system based on the categories I've mentioned twice, Classic rates a 0.5 complexity, which I think is more than in accordance for the map that everyone who's ever played Risk knows. Africa, a more difficult map if only for its harder-to-hold bonuses and less-than-friendly approach to game settings (atrocious for Assassin anything, and 8p No Cards/Flat Rate, in my opinion), rates a .86 (keep in mind that for both, they are weighted by having a 0 in the moderate and complex gameplay categories).

[barterer2002]

An interesting discussion. I have to say that I'm interested in the viewpoints of the mapmakers that simpler is better. I've seen at least three different mapmakers complaining that their own maps were simpler than Map X. Is there a perception that complex is bad? One of the things that I personally love about CC is the wide variety of maps and gameplay available. I've played and won on every one of them (well I haven't gotten my Rome win yet but it'll be soon as I'm up in a 1v1 game) and I certainly have my own favorites but I don't think complex is bad and I really don't think that you all do either. If you did then you wouldn't constantly add in the cool new features. Think of all the new ideas that have come out of the foundry in the past year. Bombardments (September 9, 2007 Pearl Harbor), Inset portions of the map (not sure what you're calling them in here but I'm talking about things like the Railroads in Bamboo Jack, the Alps in Rome), territories that you can't attack to (Western Front Nov 13, 2007), Single starting point maps (AOR1 November 13, 2007), depreciating territories (Dust Bowl Jan 15, 2008), Objective-only play maps (Das Schloss May 3, 2008), auto deploy to specific territories and so many other cool ideas.
These things DO make a map more complex and that's not a bad thing. Stop trying to claim that everything is simple and accept the accolades for the complexities that you have designed.
If anyone is interested, I'd be happy to put together my own list and post it (actually, since the idea is here I'll likely put it together anyway but won't post unless you want an outsider's opinion.

[max is gr8]

That's why this thread has got some much controversy, he doesn't want other views, he even says in the first post "These are my opinions", this isn't a difinative list, nor is it wrong, just that I would say that doodle is harder to be good at than classic, because doodle is a small map with a few continents, is it worth playing to get a continent, or should you just build. I think that these lists will never work because they cannot, as the above proves I think doodle is hard according to his list doodle is the easiest.

[chipv]

sorry but i can't be constructive on an idea that has started from the wrong premises.
perhaps a categorization on 3-4 categories is the best because it offers a rough indication of complexity and at the same time it doesn't have the intention of a flawless categorisation. anything beyond that goes into subjective speculation and doesn't even scratch the surface of what complexity is and fails miserably just because the set goal is impossible to be achieved.
there are a LOT of factors that need to be taken into account and no formula can do that.
for example doodle can be called as a simple map. few terits, no gimicks, clear borders, easy to understand legend, but have 7 colonels and a new player try an assassin game.
how complex do you think the new recruit will think the map is? well my bet is that he's gonna think it's too damn complex because he'll never win cause he won't know shit about the strategy in such a game.
doodle is an easy to understand map but due to it's size the strategies are more complex than classic and paired with a more difficult gametype (assassin) this map can be damn hard.
tell me what formula explains this to a noob?
and doodle is not the only case, many maps play totally different and have huge complexity gaps between various game types.
for example a 1v1 sunny game on AoR1 is dead simple but a fog 6player assassin on the same map can be a huge burden on the strategy skills of a noob.

I think you may well be right, DiM, that is a very convincing example so I tend to agree with you. Just FYI, the 4 category system has already been adopted (as has the sorting by complexity in a script but the site version may well be different). I thought this was an idea worth pursuing, that's all, didn't actually mean to upset anyone as I obviously have managed to do from other posts in this thread. Cheers, DiM.

[barterer2002]

That's why this thread has got some much controversy, he doesn't want other views, he even says in the first post "These are my opinions", this isn't a difinative list, nor is it wrong, just that I would say that doodle is harder to be good at than classic, because doodle is a small map with a few continents, is it worth playing to get a continent, or should you just build. I think that these lists will never work because they cannot, as the above proves I think doodle is hard according to his list doodle is the easiest.

I think you're confusing Ease of Play with Ease of Mastering. Doodle is clearly easy to play. You've got standard movements, limited terts and limited bonuses. There are no special features to throw someone off the first time they play it, its just small. You may be correct that its harder to master but its simplistic to play

[edbeard]

if you guys are looking for a good list with three categories, I know a guy who made one

[ZeakCytho]

No one seems to have read this

This isn't instead of the 3-category system.

The premise was that, with chipv's new script, you can sort maps on the game finder list alphabetically or by number of territories. Wouldn't it be great if you could sort by some sort of complexity rating too?

The 3-category system is being used for default tags in that script. The list in this thread is to sort any tag - default or user made - by complexity.

The list we have is not perfect, but it's a very useful feature for the script.

[yeti_c]

If a novice (or noob as Dim calls) is looking at this for the first time, you think he is going to want to see 42 categories to tell him how complex the maps are. i doubt it.

Not sure if you realise this... but a "noob" wouldn't be seeing this - it's simply a way to SORT the list... the "Grouping" function is done by the "Simple, Moderate, Complex" ruling...

So - we have both methods used...

So the user will not be seeing 42 different levels - they will simply be seeing an ordered list - possibly cut into 3 groups - depending on how they use the script...

I suggest you install the script and take a look.

C.

PS - also - why are you attacking Chip - he simply applied a list that others made?

[MOBAJOBG]

Wow! I've been unbeatable in the 3 most complex maps in CC.

Why don't you try to ask BENJIKAT IS DEAD for a truly correct list since he has played all of those maps with at least 5 unique opponents win!?

[BENJIKAT IS DEAD]

Wow! I've been unbeatable in the 3 most complex maps in CC.

Why don't you try to ask BENJIKAT IS DEAD for a truly correct list since he has played all of those maps with at least 5 unique opponents win!?

No way could I do that - I think most maps are rather simple, and at the same time, I haven't played all the maps in a wide variety of settings (noone has).


btw Fancy a series on those maps???? - I reckon I can give that "unbeatable" a go!!!