Map-checking Function and Rating system

I think that the featured listing is unfair to all the newer maps that rely on people finding them out or self-promotion.

Instead I propose this for ALL maps:
1) A map-maker ticks a box to say that his map is ready to be tested. (Mods will be notified of this through report function etc)
2) Then a group of players and at least 1 mod will test the game.
3) Maybe those testers can get double sp as reward.
4) Those testers will then vote out of 10 to pass the map.
5) That vote will then be the rating of the map temporarily.
6) There will even be a list of boxes as improvement suggestions in the rating and shown public.
7) If it fails a certain score then it will have a Pending Improvement tag on it or something similar.
8) The score will tell people which maps are worth playing and waiting for their improvements.
9) A checking system will ensure all games will be played so good maps won't be stacked at the bottom.
10) Should anyone be wasting time and calling direct clones of the World Map, then they will be punished by the participating mod(s)

Those Rated, Pending Test, Pending Improvements classification could also be filters as well.

NB: World map will not need to be tested of course and it will not have a score, but still auto-positioned first.

More like 2 maps a day... supposing current trends (211 maps) which not all are distinct maps that should be published (75%) then that is about 160 maps over 70+ days since alpha release. Equalling it to be a easy job. Besides, we could also allow the elites to check the maps alongside the mods, whoever are more available at a time.

Escrito por Meester, 30.12.2012 at 01:26

Agree but wouldn't this double the work of the mods as at least 10 new maps show up each day.

it would not increase the current work much.

you must also keep in mind that you dont have to play each map, because in most maps you just need to see the preview or you can let play other people and just spectate and ask the people who played how it was

i like this

Sure. why not?

Map-testing task-force. I volunteer!
Would be good to have "objective" criteria to evaluate, so the results do not depend that much of the people evaluating the maps/scenarios.
Cheers,
CD

Escrito por ezzatam, 30.12.2012 at 01:33

snip

I actually think all maps should have a 25% sp deficit until it has been through a system like you have presented, quality control and sp control is important.

FOr example UN game needs a permanent 25% (or more) sp decrease IMO, it regular that you see people who are noobs pick up massive amounts of sp, which i can't see as fair seeing as i do a lot more work playing on my own and walk away with less sp and such.

in summary quality control will assure that it rewards people who are tactically cunnning, and not just someone who joins a deliberate sp fest.

Escrito por nonames, 01.03.2013 at 21:01

Escrito por ezzatam, 30.12.2012 at 01:33

snip

I actually think all maps should have a 25% sp deficit until it has been through a system like you have presented, quality control and sp control is important.

FOr example UN game needs a permanent 25% (or more) sp decrease IMO, it regular that you see people who are noobs pick up massive amounts of sp, which i can't see as fair seeing as i do a lot more work playing on my own and walk away with less sp and such.

in summary quality control will assure that it rewards people who are tactically cunnning, and not just someone who joins a deliberate sp fest.

How i agree with this. This should be added it ain't hard getting 10k sp from 2 hours of playing a un game.

Maybe we could rep maps like players get repped

Rapping... ehh, I mean REPping maps; I think the popularity is the ultimate indicator... but, that does NOT say if the map is a piece of art and hard work... but rather that the map is an ideal basis for players fun. I would insist in a map-task-force for testing maps and writing reports on the quality of the maps. This task force should not be considered as a validation crew, but as a map-testing and commenting crew (giving points for specific issues, themes, aspects, etc.) and recomending certain maps and scenarios... hopefully publishing som small reports in ATN (Maps/Scenarios Column)...

Escrito por Guest, 24.03.2013 at 08:58

Escrito por Columna Durruti, 24.03.2013 at 08:08

Rapping... ehh, I mean REPping maps; I think the popularity is the ultimate indicator... but, that does NOT say if the map is a piece of art and hard work... but rather that the map is an ideal basis for players fun. I would insist in a map-task-force for testing maps and writing reports on the quality of the maps. This task force should not be considered as a validation crew, but as a map-testing and commenting crew (giving points for specific issues, themes, aspects, etc.) and recomending certain maps and scenarios... hopefully publishing som small reports in ATN (Maps/Scenarios Column)...

well for map recommending the mods do feature some maps, and it isn't base don popularity but rather if the mods like the map. For instance Terminal's world has over 150 plays but it hasn't been featured

It seams to be good this way: one thing is the popularity and another the "quality" of maps (aesthetics, details, creativity, usability, congruence, etc.). Popularity is based on the acceptance of the player community (motivated by good maps and ideal scenarios for SP gains: ¡fun and funds!)... on the other hand, (sistematic) map evaluation should be based on "objective criteria" (in the sense of having elements to analyse (every time a map is analysed) and NOT that an opinion cannot be inclined to like more Sci-Fi or Medieval than WWII or Modern Maps).
Some of these criterias (dimensions) have been used during the map-competence and should be used as a basis for the work of a map-task-force (of systematic map analysis and recomendation).

Cheers,
CD