2025 TF2Maps Wishlist

[Katsu! :3]

Hi. These are just some things that I want to see out of TF2Maps this year. No real restrictions on what they are / how large or small they are, just ideas I think have some merit. Will or will not explain who for certain ones. Wanted to get this out a little earlier but I felt I really needed to focus and wait for a day where I am 100% certain I feel confident about what I write.

Events

• I think a more down-to-earth contest is what TF2Maps needs right now. I feel like Stack the Deck was too far of a direction where the team felt like they needed to be out there to be relevant, and I feel that it really created some significant problems that either ended up getting poorly addressed or never addressed. I do think too that it was a product of, well, not having done a major in three years as well, since microcontests had kinda taken over and ruled the contest scene for years. Something like "Make a CTF map" would be fine imho.
• I think a good way to make detailing contests is to have them be active parts in the mapmaking process. So for example, I think the Control Point Finale contest from 2017(?) was really good because it got people thinking about actual level design, whereas something like Globetrotter or Hot and Cold imo kind of missed the mark because yeah I see cool stuff but... well, I only see it when I'm looking at the actual contest and that's about it. I feel like a more gameplay-centric detail contest, like maybe making a 5CP mid or a Payload point, would be great.
• Something that's been significantly draining lately is seeing the same maps, over and over again, be played in comp. Even the "new" maps in comp are getting rather old, with what were once exciting, experimental maps like Divulgence, Entropy, and Govan just... not really ever gaining a presence competitively? I feel like a way to solve this would be to have maybe quarterly competitive events via TF2Maps, keeping the environment light and fun but still maintaining that competitive edge with proper whitelists and things, where we play some more unexplored maps (such as Explorer, Ancient, and Launch) and really just try and get them shown off to the wider competitive audience with some casters like fireside or something.
• This one is probably the furthest of a stretch, but I think it'd be cool to host a small, maybe 2-month Mann vs. Machine event where members on TF2Maps can really get into and explore MVM mapping in a more close-to-home way. I feel like mappers are kind of intimidated to go right away to potato since it's a very different community than TF2m (and we should respect them for it), but I think giving some more novice space for mappers and mission-makers to play around with would be appreciated.

Internal Stuff

• One thing I've felt really stressed to its breaking point in 2024 was the lack of proper communication from staff. Whether it was Stack the Deck, the hosts role just kind of quietly coming-and-going without much talk of that, the Tropic Crisis announcement which went poorly, I generally just feel like something was broken internally and it didn't really ever fix itself. I feel like one, maybe admittedly a little drastic way to solve this issue would be to be more public about what TF2Maps wants to do and where it wants to take itself. Whether that be through monthly write-ups, whether that be open letters, heck whether it be through polls just asking people what they want out of TF2Maps, I think it would be worth it to get TF2Maps on the right track again and being at its best.
• Something that I've wanted for a long time to really show how much I care about mapping and enjoy it being a thing in my life is that I've wanted to feel like mapping is a little bit closer to home. I feel like doing a bit of R&D into some merchandising opportunities, whether it be with Redbubble or Teespring or some other company imo would be worth it. Nerdy shirts with a picture of the hammer editor or the tf2maps logo on it or something, in my opinion, would be really cool. Maybe some art of community maps? That could be pretty rad. Let me spend my money on you guys, I want to wear cool stuff and help out the server financially!
• I have never felt more than now that my VIP doesn't really matter. The servers are buggy, the site goes down weirdly often, and it just doesn't feel like the money I spend on TF2Maps is really going towards anything worthwhile now that I've seen all this chaos. Sure, it feels good to support TF2Maps since I love mapping, but there's not really anything other than the want to be charitable that keeps me paying for this. Something I've advocated for is giving people a reason to buy VIP other than, well, just wanting to be charitable. Something cosmetic like having your own join message would be awesome to have!!! Like "Raaaa run it's Katsu" or something would make me happy to have whenever I connect to the server, it's a silly little thing but it really makes me feel like I'm part of the place instead of just, a player.
• This kinda has some overreach from the last point in that I really think this new host system needs to be worked on and finished asap. Right now, we have people who want to host and get maps tested that can't because they can't afford the "host tax" that is getting VIP, or they're VIPs who are essentially empty hosters because they don't wanna do it. It's all fine and good if you don't want to host, but I think we should be providing better opportunities to our willing players to actually get tests going and have maps be played. This should be one of the top priorities on TF2Maps at the moment in my opinion.
• I really wish the bot / the site / the feedback site / the servers weren't so buggy. The feedback site is practically unusable as-is because search is broken on it. If I want feedback, I want to go to the feedback site, not go through multiple hoops to find what could be the right version of the map via google.

Social Stuff
Unsurprisingly these might turn some heads, idk.

• Something that I think any mapper should be reminded of is that it's not all about mapping for the official game. You don't have to stick to "in-universe" or "in-canon" mapping if you don't want to, and I think those maps should be encouraged a little more as long as they're fun. I think in tandem with that, maybe it would be a good idea to develop a better line of communication between servers and the TF2Maps world. Doesn't have to be super fancy, could easily be something like what I did in 2024 and just shouted out a whole bunch of maps that were being worked on and I felt would be cool without necessarily making them "featured" here. You don't always gotta go big to have something nice, y'know?
• Something I think TF2Maps really struggles with when looking at a map is saying "I don't think this is worth testing." It's for good reason, no mapper on this earth ever wants to hear that phrase uttered towards their map, but in my opinion sometimes you need to hear that kind of thing to really grow as a mapper and understand that there are just some things that you can eyeball and say "It needs more time." From what I've personally observed, if a map has obvious flaws, people either refuse to feedback it or come off as kind of dismissive simply because they, well, aren't really allowed to say this? It's heavily looked down upon and sometimes will get you in trouble even when staff members say it themselves! I think that needs to change, because why should I spend my time on Little Timmy's first koth a1 that is a flat plane with no cover? Little Timmy isn't entitled to my time, and could easily be told that his map has problems before it even goes on the queue.
• Adoption is one of the best things that TF2Maps allows, and to me it's a shame that more people don't really take advantage of it. Just because you yourself can't think of a way to improve your map, doesn't mean someone else can't! And the best part of adoption? You get to dictate the rules. You, the original mapper, have all the power in the world to pick and choose who you think is right to take the reigns from you if you so choose. And you know what's great about adopting maps? Well shoot man, you just got yourself a free mid-alpha map at the cost of simply saying "May I take a crack at it?" I think adoption should be a much more widespread alternative to simply leaving maps to die, because the reality of mapping is that most maps could find an audience if they were ever finished! They just simply need some love, and encouraging mappers to spread that love would be awesome.
• Sort of in tandem with a previous point, I think it'd be important to invest some time into making resources that help newer mappers understand feedback. Like looking into the mentality of a player, where they are, what's the gamestate where they said a thing, watching demos and taking notes of certain power players and where they go, that sort of thing. There's a lot of second-hand influences that can be part of a player's outlook on a test, whether it be positive (getting an awesome 10-kill streak) or negative (getting spawncamped even when the map took measures against it). Even a simple (and easily accessible) glossary on common TF2Maps lingo would be appropriate I feel, like what the heck does "flank" mean as a new mapper?
• I was very much an advocate for making map reviews when the star system of reviews was made private. I still believe this was a mistake, as a reminder that TF2Maps is about... well, maps. I understand that there are emotions behind the maps, I really and truly do, but I don't think they are as important as providing a relevant and truthful outlook on a map. I don't think reviewers are infallible or always, well, the best at their job, but I do think most reviews are made in good faith in wanting to get a person's honest thoughts out there. I understand that a review that doesn't like a map may leave a mapper unhappy, but... you don't control your audience? I don't think it's a good thing to just outright silence criticism, especially on maps that have long been finished. The only thing I think that should be encouraged is waiting for maps to reach that "proper stage" (ex: late beta, release candidate, final) before reviews are even considered an option. I think one way to make reviews better would be a box that requires you to state how many times you've played a map, so you can get a better feel on whether or not a reviewer is credible or not. I understand there could be liars, but lying is ultimately out of TF2Maps' control.
• Ultimately, I wish the forums were used more. There's a whole bunch of resources available here that aren't really know about because they are simply buried under a pile of rubble. That pile of rubble is how you get things like me making my Article Index or something, simply because without a tool like that, it's more difficult to find good resources than it should be.

Mmkay, that's it. If you have any thoughts, feel free to add to this. If you have any criticism, feel free to respond. Dunno how often I'll reply myself.

 

[Sonoma]

Events​

• For the next contest we plan on doing something simpler, I can't give details though for obvious reasons, but it will not be as complicated as Stack the Deck was
• Detailing is typically always taken into account when judging entries in any Major Contest. Detailing Contests are good for learning how to artpass and is specifically focused on the Art rather than having to juggle gameplay and art at the same time as you have to do on regular Majors, which lowers the barrier of entry for a lot of people as it is much lower stakes.
• There were attempts made in the past to have a competitive playtesting or collaboration with competitive orgs but most of them fizzled out due to lack of interest from players or organizers
• I do agree more MvM Contests would be nice, though I would advise not hosting one any time soon as we are still off the back of Stack the Deck and other unofficial contests

Internal Stuff​

• Communication is always going to be hard in a public server like this, not every staff member is online when decisions are made so there will be some variance on how certain things are handled, staff isn't a monolith. We are working on a survey for the public to take that will show us where our weak points are so we can better tackle them
• Merchandise has been something we have been interested in, as evidence by the Stack the Deck physical card decks
• A lot of the issues are beyond our control, lately the game servers have been pretty stable, and the site sometimes has issues, but they are usually unrelated to anything that we are doing on our end, we have been looking at ways to make VIP more worthwhile
• The VIP and Host spilt is something that will be rolled out, but sometimes life stuff gets in the way of our technical staff being able to get the hours necessary to push it out. They are working on it but this being a volunteer position, we can't really control how people spend their time. We will let everyone know when it's getting implemented asap
• A reworked feedback site is in the pipeline, the original developer of the feedback site isn't active anymore, so we have to work around that code, I personally haven't had any issues with finding map versions

Social Stuff​

• More people should do more silly things I do agree
• This is probably a host/playtester issue, if a map has glaring issues or is getting the same feedback it might be worth giving it 1 round, additionally RTV is a thing.
• Adoptions are difficult to work when as you have to work around someone else's brushwork which might be extremely different than how you design and build your maps. Additionally, maps are usually abandoned for a reason, which the adopter usually finds out pretty quickly
• I agree, a guide for interpreting feedback and game theory is something that I think should be made
• We removed the public map ratings due to people rating unfinished WIP maps, which we felt was unfair to the mapper who's map rating can at any point be determined while it's in development rather than the actual finished product. You don't see game reviewers reviewing a game while it's still being made. We wish there was a better alternative though, I wish there was a way for mappers to turn on reviews for downloads once they feel the map is ready to be fairly judged by the public, though this implantation is not possible due to limitations with the forum software unfortunately, as is any other solution at this moment. The actual written reviews are still available just not the funny stars
• This is just an internet issue unfortunately, these forums are a relic from an age long past where most internet traffic was on forums and other sites, instead of the same 3 websites as is today

 

[nesman]

The feedback site is practically unusable as-is because search is broken on it.

Works for me. Not sure what's broken for you about it.

I really wish the bot / the site / the feedback site / the servers weren't so buggy.

Without having a list of issues, this is unactionable. The issue yesterday was as simple as us just needing to renew the certs. We can't do that automatically due to the wildcard cert and the reminder was a few days off. The temp directory file error is also "fixed", we don't know if it truly is until it happens again since it wasn't really reproducible.

TF2Maps wants to do and where it wants to take itself

We have a survey in the coming days, we're doing a final check today for it. There's a list of projects where people will rank the important of them.

merchandising

This is hard to do after we found out valve will stop you from printing anything that has their IP on it. See Stack the Deck.

MVM mapping

We do not have the infrastructure in place to support MvM, hence why it's mostly been left to potatoes. The idea of Ad-Hoc servers has been mentioned before, that would be a solution, but I'm not involved with that so I cannot speak on the progress/timeline for it.

I think it'd be important to invest some time into making resources that help newer mappers understand feedback

Honestly, this is something people in the community can do. We're too stretched thin, you'll see this with how many projects are on that survey, so we can't really do everything.

map reviews

Unfortunately, people like to review maps are in early alpha and not update it once the map reaches beta or rc. This is a problem as those ratings would stay well after the mapper had addressed those issues. Think of it from a server owner perspective, they're looking for maps and see a 2-star rating and don't even bother clicking on the map because of that. Well, now that mapper just lost a chance to have their map played because of a review from someone for a1 when the map is now rc1.

 

[Brokkhouse]

Oh boy. Thanks for the essay, lemme go through it. This reflects only my own views, not those of the whole team, yadda yadda. I suspect my answers might be more optimistic than the mean average.

• I think a more down-to-earth contest is what TF2Maps needs right now. I feel like Stack the Deck was too far of a direction where the team felt like they needed to be out there to be relevant, and I feel that it really created some significant problems that either ended up getting poorly addressed or never addressed. I do think too that it was a product of, well, not having done a major in three years as well, since microcontests had kinda taken over and ruled the contest scene for years. Something like "Make a CTF map" would be fine imho.

I'm inclined to agree with you. I've made my thoughts on the STD Contest public before, but what I mean is that balancing a contest to both have a dedicated challenge and be general enough to be interesting to many people is not super easy. 2024 has been, imho, a very clear signal that the way we plan contests needs to be reinvented, a process which is already underway. I am heavily pushing for more user participation and feedback gathering prior to the contest being announced. That said, I think "Make a CTF map" would not be interesting enough for me, so maybe the balance lies elsewhere. We'll see.

• I think a good way to make detailing contests is to have them be active parts in the mapmaking process. So for example, I think the Control Point Finale contest from 2017(?) was really good because it got people thinking about actual level design, whereas something like Globetrotter or Hot and Cold imo kind of missed the mark because yeah I see cool stuff but... well, I only see it when I'm looking at the actual contest and that's about it. I feel like a more gameplay-centric detail contest, like maybe making a 5CP mid or a Payload point, would be great.

100% agreed. I'd love another control point design contest (coldfront my beloved) or something analogue to that would be amazing.

• Something that's been significantly draining lately is seeing the same maps, over and over again, be played in comp. Even the "new" maps in comp are getting rather old, with what were once exciting, experimental maps like Divulgence, Entropy, and Govan just... not really ever gaining a presence competitively? I feel like a way to solve this would be to have maybe quarterly competitive events via TF2Maps, keeping the environment light and fun but still maintaining that competitive edge with proper whitelists and things, where we play some more unexplored maps (such as Explorer, Ancient, and Launch) and really just try and get them shown off to the wider competitive audience with some casters like fireside or something.

I'll be real with you, that one is not on us. Both as a mapper and as a TF2M admin, I found the competitive scene hard to work with. Occasionally we reach out, occasionally they reach out, it usually fails due to a misunderstanding of what either side wants, and in my heavily biased opinion, it's obviously the comp players who are wrong about it.

• This one is probably the furthest of a stretch, but I think it'd be cool to host a small, maybe 2-month Mann vs. Machine event where members on TF2Maps can really get into and explore MVM mapping in a more close-to-home way. I feel like mappers are kind of intimidated to go right away to potato since it's a very different community than TF2m (and we should respect them for it), but I think giving some more novice space for mappers and mission-makers to play around with would be appreciated.

I'd say MvM requires different infrastructure and testing rhythms compared to what we do. I don't think it's technically impossible to do it here, but considering how rarely used our MvM server was when we had it, I'll likely keep referring people to Potato.TF when they ask for MvM feedback or testing possibilities. Maybe this will change, although likely not any time soon.

Internal Stuff

• One thing I've felt really stressed to its breaking point in 2024 was the lack of proper communication from staff. Whether it was Stack the Deck, the hosts role just kind of quietly coming-and-going without much talk of that, the Tropic Crisis announcement which went poorly, I generally just feel like something was broken internally and it didn't really ever fix itself. I feel like one, maybe admittedly a little drastic way to solve this issue would be to be more public about what TF2Maps wants to do and where it wants to take itself. Whether that be through monthly write-ups, whether that be open letters, heck whether it be through polls just asking people what they want out of TF2Maps, I think it would be worth it to get TF2Maps on the right track again and being at its best.

This won't make you feel any better, but I feel the same way. At least we're soon-ish going to launch a new User Survey, like the one from a couple years ago, which will address some of this - both regarding communication from us and communication to us.
I'm not too happy with the phrasing of "getting TF2Maps on the right track again".

• Something that I've wanted for a long time to really show how much I care about mapping and enjoy it being a thing in my life is that I've wanted to feel like mapping is a little bit closer to home. I feel like doing a bit of R&D into some merchandising opportunities, whether it be with Redbubble or Teespring or some other company imo would be worth it. Nerdy shirts with a picture of the hammer editor or the tf2maps logo on it or something, in my opinion, would be really cool. Maybe some art of community maps? That could be pretty rad. Let me spend my money on you guys, I want to wear cool stuff and help out the server financially!

We've discussed this a couple of times, and it's definitely something we can imagine doing eventually. The card decks, even if that didn't work as well as hoped, was a first attempt. There are a lot more legal questions still to be settled than we are currently comfortable with, but still. I'd like to be optimistic and imagine that this is something we could tackle this year.

• I have never felt more than now that my VIP doesn't really matter. The servers are buggy, the site goes down weirdly often, and it just doesn't feel like the money I spend on TF2Maps is really going towards anything worthwhile now that I've seen all this chaos. Sure, it feels good to support TF2Maps since I love mapping, but there's not really anything other than the want to be charitable that keeps me paying for this. Something I've advocated for is giving people a reason to buy VIP other than, well, just wanting to be charitable. Something cosmetic like having your own join message would be awesome to have!!! Like "Raaaa run it's Katsu" or something would make me happy to have whenever I connect to the server, it's a silly little thing but it really makes me feel like I'm part of the place instead of just, a player.

We don't want VIP too powerful. TF2M is supposed to be for everyone, not just for people willing to pay for the exclusive members' club or who managed to get a map into the game. We have been brainstorming VIP perks, and there is more to be said on this, but don't expect a total overhaul. In fact, one major VIP perk is going to be made accessible to everyone (see below).
Regarding server stability, this has been addressed. EU has been moved to different hardware and has since been stable, as far as we can tell. Let us know if that is not the case. By the way, our Grafana dashboard is accessible by everyone.

• This kinda has some overreach from the last point in that I really think this new host system needs to be worked on and finished asap. Right now, we have people who want to host and get maps tested that can't because they can't afford the "host tax" that is getting VIP, or they're VIPs who are essentially empty hosters because they don't wanna do it. It's all fine and good if you don't want to host, but I think we should be providing better opportunities to our willing players to actually get tests going and have maps be played. This should be one of the top priorities on TF2Maps at the moment in my opinion.

The host system requires technical people to put in hours of work to get it to work. Our team consists of two tech people, who are volunteers working on it in their spare time, and we do not have the budget to hire a contractor. Be patient, please.

• I really wish the bot / the site / the feedback site / the servers weren't so buggy. The feedback site is practically unusable as-is because search is broken on it. If I want feedback, I want to go to the feedback site, not go through multiple hoops to find what could be the right version of the map via google.

I'll be honest, I have no idea what you mean. It works fine for me, and this is the first time I'm seeing this being reported.

Social Stuff
Unsurprisingly these might turn some heads, idk.

• Something that I think any mapper should be reminded of is that it's not all about mapping for the official game. You don't have to stick to "in-universe" or "in-canon" mapping if you don't want to, and I think those maps should be encouraged a little more as long as they're fun. I think in tandem with that, maybe it would be a good idea to develop a better line of communication between servers and the TF2Maps world. Doesn't have to be super fancy, could easily be something like what I did in 2024 and just shouted out a whole bunch of maps that were being worked on and I felt would be cool without necessarily making them "featured" here. You don't always gotta go big to have something nice, y'know?

I'd say this is something we could encourage with a contest, maybe? Other than that, as an admin, I don't think it's our responsibility to "direct" where or how or what mappers work on. It's a simple fact that most mappers, even if they're not mapping with the 100% intention to get into the game, will map with that possibility left open, meaning they will try to not do themes that completely rule out that their map becomes official. Let's just be glad we're not as cynical about it as the Emporium.

• Something I think TF2Maps really struggles with when looking at a map is saying "I don't think this is worth testing." It's for good reason, no mapper on this earth ever wants to hear that phrase uttered towards their map, but in my opinion sometimes you need to hear that kind of thing to really grow as a mapper and understand that there are just some things that you can eyeball and say "It needs more time." From what I've personally observed, if a map has obvious flaws, people either refuse to feedback it or come off as kind of dismissive simply because they, well, aren't really allowed to say this? It's heavily looked down upon and sometimes will get you in trouble even when staff members say it themselves! I think that needs to change, because why should I spend my time on Little Timmy's first koth a1 that is a flat plane with no cover? Little Timmy isn't entitled to my time, and could easily be told that his map has problems before it even goes on the queue.

When I became Server Mod, I heavily pushed for the RTV system to be made more visible, and I think map tests have benefitted from it. We've also added more filters and automatic checks to the upload bot, which has reduced the amount of maps with broken logic or missing HDR controllers. I also have no problem encouraging trainee Imp Hosts to skip maps that will clearly not benefit from further testing data. This is a policy hard to put into writing as a generalized rule, because a lot of it is subjective and will vary from map to map. We would rather step carefully than be accused of throwing out perfectly testable maps, which should be in line with your previous point of encouraging the creation of more out-there maps in terms of theme, gamemode, or layout.

• Adoption is one of the best things that TF2Maps allows, and to me it's a shame that more people don't really take advantage of it. Just because you yourself can't think of a way to improve your map, doesn't mean someone else can't! And the best part of adoption? You get to dictate the rules. You, the original mapper, have all the power in the world to pick and choose who you think is right to take the reigns from you if you so choose. And you know what's great about adopting maps? Well shoot man, you just got yourself a free mid-alpha map at the cost of simply saying "May I take a crack at it?" I think adoption should be a much more widespread alternative to simply leaving maps to die, because the reality of mapping is that most maps could find an audience if they were ever finished! They just simply need some love, and encouraging mappers to spread that love would be awesome.

Hmm. Nothing I thought about before, but what if we had some kind of Adoption Database... There's this map librarian I know, I should ask her about that...
Certainly a project I'd love to help out on, and encourage to be supported by us officially.

• Sort of in tandem with a previous point, I think it'd be important to invest some time into making resources that help newer mappers understand feedback. Like looking into the mentality of a player, where they are, what's the gamestate where they said a thing, watching demos and taking notes of certain power players and where they go, that sort of thing. There's a lot of second-hand influences that can be part of a player's outlook on a test, whether it be positive (getting an awesome 10-kill streak) or negative (getting spawncamped even when the map took measures against it). Even a simple (and easily accessible) glossary on common TF2Maps lingo would be appropriate I feel, like what the heck does "flank" mean as a new mapper?

I've been tinkering with my "how to give/receive feedback" guide for a year now, and I really do think I just need one good motivated weekend to get it done. Oh well, maybe after this semester.
A glossary seems like a good idea. Remind me about this one.

• I was very much an advocate for making map reviews when the star system of reviews was made private. I still believe this was a mistake, as a reminder that TF2Maps is about... well, maps. I understand that there are emotions behind the maps, I really and truly do, but I don't think they are as important as providing a relevant and truthful outlook on a map. I don't think reviewers are infallible or always, well, the best at their job, but I do think most reviews are made in good faith in wanting to get a person's honest thoughts out there. I understand that a review that doesn't like a map may leave a mapper unhappy, but... you don't control your audience? I don't think it's a good thing to just outright silence criticism, especially on maps that have long been finished. The only thing I think that should be encouraged is waiting for maps to reach that "proper stage" (ex: late beta, release candidate, final) before reviews are even considered an option. I think one way to make reviews better would be a box that requires you to state how many times you've played a map, so you can get a better feel on whether or not a reviewer is credible or not. I understand there could be liars, but lying is ultimately out of TF2Maps' control.

Note that the TF2Maps Downloads system is a xenforo plugin that we only have limited access to. We cannot fully change it without writing it from scratch, which.. See above about the tech people. I will make a note to add feedback about this system to our user survey though, so we can get a more clear picture on what people want from it.

• Ultimately, I wish the forums were used more. There's a whole bunch of resources available here that aren't really know about because they are simply buried under a pile of rubble. That pile of rubble is how you get things like me making my Article Index or something, simply because without a tool like that, it's more difficult to find good resources than it should be.

I grew up in the Forum Era of the internet. The fact Discord is a Walled Garden is by far my biggest issue with it, but we also have to face thre reality that this community would be vastly less active without it. I have my Useful Resources which is essentially just a big list of stuff I lifted from Discord so that they don't get buried forever. Oh well.

 

[Brokkhouse]

Oh, and about Sono's post:

• For the next contest we plan on doing something simpler, I can't give details though for obvious reasons, but it will not be as complicated as Stack the Deck was
• Detailing is typically always taken into account when judging entries in any Major Contest. Detailing Contests are good for learning how to artpass and is specifically focused on the Art rather than having to juggle gameplay and art at the same time as you have to do on regular Majors, which lowers the barrier of entry for a lot of people as it is much lower stakes.

I think we should generally be more open about impending contests. I don't think the reasons we're not giving out more details are that obvious, honestly. Regarding detailing judgement, I don't think the last Major Contest did particularly well, and I really hope this is something that is discussed before the next one.
Honestly, I don't think lower stakes are needed all that much. The last Major had 20 entries, by mappers both new and old, and the last Detailing Contest had 18 entries, by mappers both new and old. Looking at the numbers, and by that logic, we should raise the stakes for detailing contests (which is why I think a control point contest or similar would rule!) People seem to appreciate a challenge.

• We removed the public map ratings due to people rating unfinished WIP maps, which we felt was unfair to the mapper who's map rating can at any point be determined while it's in development rather than the actual finished product. You don't see game reviewers reviewing a game while it's still being made. We wish there was a better alternative though, I wish there was a way for mappers to turn on reviews for downloads once they feel the map is ready to be fairly judged by the public, though this implantation is not possible due to limitations with the forum software unfortunately, as is any other solution at this moment. The actual written reviews are still available just not the funny stars
• This is just an internet issue unfortunately, these forums are a relic from an age long past where most internet traffic was on forums and other sites, instead of the same 3 websites as is today

I'd add that using the attached forum post to issue your review is probably better than using the half-defunct review system. Makes it a conversation, allows to mapper to respond in turn (like we do in this thread), clearly anchors the review to a specific map version, and just generally makes it more of a discussion of a map's progress than the final verdict on something that may very well still change.

 

[spruce]

Good post, thanks.

Events

1. I don't usually participate, N/A (this means I have no applicable opinion)
2. Cool idea.
3. I don't play comp, N/A
4. Cool idea, MvM is fun and underrated.

IS

1. No experience, didn't participate, N/A
2. Cool idea, map shirts/merch should only be ones that have been added to the game or have extremely significant importance however.
3. N/A
4. No experience, N/A
5. It could be improved but it works, N/A

SS
This might turn some heads

It did for me.
1. Agreed, even though personally I like making my stuff justice and I try to reach a "valve" standard of quality (my mistake I know), which in turn explains why I have not released anything since joining.

2. This one is a very interesting one and it lets me put some of my gripes with the "site"/"""community"""(???) out there, by far the MOST important point in your post;

Firstly, I will apply "be the change you want to see" to this; the first problem, as you described, is that no one wants to hear that but I agree more should do it, so, if you wish, start mentioning maps that you find have this problem.

ALTHOUGH another far more notorious issue arises IF you want to set a standard/wish to know at what point should you complain about it OR point it out, how do you figure that out? what's the line? flat koth a1 with map long sightlines? cp_orange_redux? a boring plr map? - or the most important question, by far:
How is a mapper supposed to know what's wrong with the map without testing it?

Not even necessarily new mappers, too! It could be an experimental map and it gets shunned because "It's not like my VALVe-ys" or "I'd rather play Powerhouse" (I say this (in my mind))

I consistently find myself not knowing what's wrong with my maps even after looking at them for hours only for things I deemed as issues to end up not even existing and things I thought were perfectly fine turning out to be the map's disaster child and the only source of agony and everything in between.

It ends up being very subjective and that's why literally no one says anything about it, no globally agreed upon set of standards, or hell, ANY STANDARD AT ALL? Maybe I'm crazy, but there's very few posts on the site that tackle this and they're all very obvious stuff like "no enormous areas" or "no tight corridors" and nothing more (EDIT: Hyperbole, please understand), How would I know? I just took an official VALVe map as inspiration and didn't copy it 1:1 and thus didn't include a solution to a problem it originally had and now that issue is on my map, which in turn greatly reduces the quality of it and now it's full of what others deem "baffling" or "obvious" issues.

TL;DR, getting from lvl 1 hammer dweller to lvl 100 mapfia boss takes too long, pls buff xp gain.

3. (I GOT SO INTO WRITING ALL THAT I FORGOT THERE WAS AN EXTRA POINT, PLACEHOLDER)
I feel identified here so I will respond to this entirely from my perspective, personally I do not put anything to get adopted because I believe I'll do or finish it eventually.
The perceived downside of this is if I continue with this modus operandi I will die with unfinished projects, this sounds unfortunate, but ultimately I do not care, and another thing, don't let me being a bitter controlling gremlin stop you (the reader) or others from doing your thing or giving it up for adoption if you wish, I will not stop you or wish you harm.

4. This would be helpful but just like the previous point, ""subjective"", who is to say what's fun and isn't? personally I don't like door gameplay but I don't find it to be that annoying and sometimes it's even good! but what I've really grown to absolutely DESPISE is payload maps where you have to hold the cart in the final position for over 15-20 seconds, yet seemingly everyone loves them?? Unfortunately that spite has expanded to me disliking payload in its entirety, overexposure bias, perhaps? who knows, whatever.

5. I do not really care about the star system but a toggle would be nice (I read sonoma's reply do not point it out), N/A.

6. I blame discord.

That is my two cents, I enjoyed typing this out.

EDIT 3: In any case, I wrote this before Brokk made his post(s).

 

[Idolon]

I think we should generally be more open about impending contests. I don't think the reasons we're not giving out more details are that obvious, honestly. Regarding detailing judgement, I don't think the last Major Contest did particularly well, and I really hope this is something that is discussed before the next one.

Staff have been historically secretive about contest details because of previous accusations of favoritism and insider knowledge. As an advisor I still have access to staff chat, but contest organizing chat was specifically moved elsewhere so that people not interested in organizing contests could still make maps for them.

I would definitely like to see staff develop a schedule for the entirety of 2025 so that everyone knows when events are going to happen, even if the finer details about those events are kept hidden. There's been a lot of issues in the past with contest schedules ending on top of common vacation or school exam times, and figuring out a schedule well in advance would help rectify these issues, and would also help protect mappers from the unfortunate situation of starting a new project mere weeks before a contest starts.

Honestly, I don't think lower stakes are needed all that much. The last Major had 20 entries, by mappers both new and old, and the last Detailing Contest had 18 entries, by mappers both new and old. Looking at the numbers, and by that logic, we should raise the stakes for detailing contests (which is why I think a control point contest or similar would rule!) People seem to appreciate a challenge.

Personally I think that the number of entries to a contest is a good metric for how much people want to participate in a contest, but not necessarily a good metric for how "successful" the contest was. Contest success is usually measured by how many successful maps it produced, however you want to measure that.

Looking back at the major contests I hosted, I think the more challenging / complicated ones (Connect 5, Payload Checklist) have generally resulted in a less successful pool of maps than the simple ones (Back to Basics, Rule of Threes). Less experienced mappers can make something safe and use it as a valuable learning experience, and more experienced mappers can use their skills to try and push the envelope however much they feel comfortable. This is also part of why we started doing Minor and Micro contests, as the short format better suits more challenging contest ideas. The less time spent on a risky failure, the better.

 

[Brokkhouse]

Personally I think that the number of entries to a contest is a good metric for how much people want to participate in a contest, but not necessarily a good metric for how "successful" the contest was. Contest success is usually measured by how many successful maps it produced, however you want to measure that.

How would you measure a successful Detail Contest, gameplay objective included or not?

 

[Idolon]

How would you measure a successful Detail Contest, gameplay objective included or not?

I think detail contests are a good opportunity for inexperienced mappers to gain some experience with artpassing that they might not get otherwise, and for experienced mappers to experiment outside the normal format of a map. If the contest allows both groups to do that, then I think it would be a success.

 

[Tiftid]

How would you measure a successful Detail Contest, gameplay objective included or not?

I think ideally it's going to teach mappers something hidden about artpassing that they might not have realised otherwise.
For instance, what about a detail contest that is judged solely on how a scene is framed?
That would get mapmakers who might never have otherwise thought about how they frame a scene (the importance of which cannot be understated) to think about it, because they'll be rewarded for doing so.
And, my favourite part about it is that it would encourage mappers who already know how to frame a scene to innovate, and find new and more gorgeous ways to do it in order to get ahead, thereby creating a point of research and advancing the medium as a whole.

This stems from a gripe I have with how the existing detail contests are set up - they're often based around offering you a choice between one of two theming elements that still lets you pick whatever overall theme you want (High and Low, Hot and Cold), but in the end these are just superficial theming elements, so a mapmaker who doesn't already know the finer points of framing, lighting, where to put what amount of detail, how to use engine features to create a beautiful custom asset, etc... won't learn anything and is doomed to place low.

Of course judging for contests of this new style would feel pretty bullshit, so they'd need to be pretty low-stakes and would be a good fit for a more "minor contest" or "microcontest" format.

 

[Katsu! :3]

I do agree more MvM Contests would be nice, though I would advise not hosting one any time soon as we are still off the back of Stack the Deck and other unofficial contests

For sure. I was thinking something like more of a mission-making contest rather than a mapping contest, since I think it'd be ideal to get people into making fun missions prior to trying to get people to really sink their teeth into mapping for the mode. A map is only fun if the mission is fun, y'know?

Without having a list of issues, this is unactionable.

Things like this, where the bot just outright refuses to work and has to be used multiple times for it to actually work. I understand it is a "minor inconvenience," but this makes getting a map on the server really frustrating at times and it doesn't leave a very good impression. Other examples of what I mean are literally just the site taking forever to load (like 20 seconds at times) for seemingly no reason, like when I'm searching the forums and end up getting only two results.

people like to review maps are in early alpha

This is why I say to encourage reviews when it's appropriate? I don't see how it'd be impossible to just delete reviews on alpha maps, let alone encourage players to only review when a map is pretty finalized.

2-star rating

You disabled the star ratings, which I don't think was a good solution at all. It just made it less viable to actually select maps in the first place imo, since now a server owner can't see at a glance "Yes, this map is high-quality.

valve will stop you from printing anything that has their IP

Okay, so what is stopping y'all from doing art commissions of community maps? I'm pretty sure that was the solution that you guys went for with Stack the Deck, and I think it'd be a fantastic way to really bring the community together in a way.

I found the competitive scene hard to work with

I honestly don't even disagree. What I feel is important though is to provide an avenue to opening up more maps to the scene. Exposure does a lot in its own right! Think about it, if RGL doesn't even know about a map like, say, Keylog or something. While I don't believe it's good practice in the slightest, they are likely immediately going to dismiss it because of some inexplicable problem the mapper didn't see. I don't really think that's fair to the map, as the issue could be fixed, or even more we could see how large of an issue said problem actually is via actually playing it competitively! I'm not suggesting testing so much as I am suggesting some experimental cups, where we play cool maps with an accessible format (like 4s, 6s, or HL), and give the comp world a glimpse into what playing newer maps competitively would be like.

We don't want VIP too powerful. TF2M is supposed

I don't think you need to make VIP overly powerful to make it appealing. Giving cool, cosmetic things like a join message, or heck maybe even a system that allows a VIP to put a target on their back and say "Betcha can't kill me!" would be interesting ways to help make VIP feel more worth it. Something I also wanted to talk about, and this will probably be a bit of a nuclear take, but I don't think ex-staff should get VIP by default anymore. Something like that, imo, should be a role labelled as "ex-staff" or something, where it offers being able to still host and still have a looking glass into official matters, but not really give you the bonuses that come from actually investing in the server. There's a lot of what I call "empty" VIP members who don't even really contribute to the server anymore, and I think making the change would give TF2Maps a better perspective on what is actually keeping the site running.

do not have the budget

There's a couple of things I have to say to this; The first, and more likely solution, would just be to open up tech worker positions and actually invest in their help by getting them trained to work with TF2Maps rather than just being a proverbial "suggestion board." I don't doubt people are willing to help or learn, it just takes giving those people opportunities to, well, contribute. The second, and more unlikely solution, would be to utilize the funds made from stuff like merch or something to reinvest in TF2Maps and get people actually working on the site semi-regularly. I don't think it's impossible to expand like that.

develop a schedule for the entirety of 2025 so that everyone knows when events are going to happen

This is something I was trying to help develop last year, when I was running Ye Olde Conteste. I feel schedules are incredibly important in maintaining cohesion between staff members, and it hasn't really felt like there's been any since I get different responses to issues from staff members about things. It's also just nice as a regular user, as I can plan my own schedule around what's going on in a community I'm incredibly passionate for.

 

[nesman]

Things like this, where the bot just outright refuses to work and has to be used multiple times for it to actually work. I understand it is a "minor inconvenience," but this makes getting a map on the server really frustrating at times and it doesn't leave a very good impression. Other examples of what I mean are literally just the site taking forever to load (like 20 seconds at times) for seemingly no reason, like when I'm searching the forums and end up getting only two results.

This is result from the site taking too long to load during a step of the bot and discord dumping the connection. It's been a lot less these few days, but it's hard to do anything about it.

I do agree the slow site loading times suck, but there's only so much we can do on a budget. AWS is NOT AT ALL cheap to host content there which is why we went with vultr.

 

[LizardOfOz]

When it comes to VIP perks, if a community is full of VIP members with prominent perks, it might feel intimidating to be around as a free member. If the perk presence is not calibrated well, it might nudge you to either donate or leave.

 

[Seacat08]

Jesus, just went to comment on how it was a good write up and a good read... why was there this much written in the comments lol

 

[Brokkhouse]

This is why I say to encourage reviews when it's appropriate? I don't see how it'd be impossible to just delete reviews on alpha maps, let alone encourage players to only review when a map is pretty finalized.

You disabled the star ratings, which I don't think was a good solution at all. It just made it less viable to actually select maps in the first place imo, since now a server owner can't see at a glance "Yes, this map is high-quality.

Every single download has a forum thread attached. If you feel you can summarize your feelings about a map into a star rating, you'll also be able to convey it in a post in that thread.

Okay, so what is stopping y'all from doing art commissions of community maps? I'm pretty sure that was the solution that you guys went for with Stack the Deck, and I think it'd be a fantastic way to really bring the community together in a way.

This is indeed the solution that has been discussed. There's still a lot of questions here. Again, it's always easy to suggest "oh just do this", but the execution reveals a lot more things. The community has the tendency to expect very simple solutions to very complex problems. See also our contest rules or map testing guidelines. Off the top of my head:

• Do we need an official sales contract from the artist to TF2Maps? What does that look like? Does TF2Maps receive a license for sales or actual ownership of the work? What about multiple contributors? What about free use art? What about work indirectly based off TF2 properties, including the visual depiction of rendered TF2 assets?
• Will the artist be given part of the revenue?
• Will this revenue always be the same, either per artwork or per sale, or even differ per artist?
• Who is "TF2Maps" in this situation? The exact legal situation of this community is a whole different can of worms. More on that another time.
• How/where do we sell the merch? Partner site? Our own store? Either way, who maintains the store? Who collects payment? Taxes?
• If something goes wrong, like a payment problem or a piece of art that needs to be pulled, or a copyright situation, how do we respond to it?

I don't need you to answer these questions, I just want to illustrate that there's a lot more to do here than you might be imagining at first.

I honestly don't even disagree. What I feel is important though is to provide an avenue to opening up more maps to the scene. Exposure does a lot in its own right! Think about it, if RGL doesn't even know about a map like, say, Keylog or something. While I don't believe it's good practice in the slightest, they are likely immediately going to dismiss it because of some inexplicable problem the mapper didn't see. I don't really think that's fair to the map, as the issue could be fixed, or even more we could see how large of an issue said problem actually is via actually playing it competitively! I'm not suggesting testing so much as I am suggesting some experimental cups, where we play cool maps with an accessible format (like 4s, 6s, or HL), and give the comp world a glimpse into what playing newer maps competitively would be like.

For any of this to succeed, those cups would need to be played by at least vaguely knowledgeable competitive players, which is a minority on TF2Maps. We simply don't have the userbase to create the dozens of actual competitive matches this would require. I don't think it's enough to stuff a couple of casual players into a 6s or HL format. Comp is a lot more than just the class selection, and a lot of issues would require actual comp players to find. And that's the problem: Comp players hate inefficiency, and that includes learning new, potentially inefficient maps. Without major and consistent and enduring backing of a competitive league, TF2Maps will never become a place of competitive map creation. Sorry.

I don't think you need to make VIP overly powerful to make it appealing. Giving cool, cosmetic things like a join message, or heck maybe even a system that allows a VIP to put a target on their back and say "Betcha can't kill me!" would be interesting ways to help make VIP feel more worth it. Something I also wanted to talk about, and this will probably be a bit of a nuclear take, but I don't think ex-staff should get VIP by default anymore. Something like that, imo, should be a role labelled as "ex-staff" or something, where it offers being able to still host and still have a looking glass into official matters, but not really give you the bonuses that come from actually investing in the server. There's a lot of what I call "empty" VIP members who don't even really contribute to the server anymore, and I think making the change would give TF2Maps a better perspective on what is actually keeping the site running.

Regarding perks: Yes, we're working on it.
Regarding ditching "empty" VIPs: Uh no, we're not doing that. They are not taking anything away from you, and they are not using up any resources. The separate Host role is not dead, however, so expect more on that. Like above, there's still some things to be solved.

There's a couple of things I have to say to this; The first, and more likely solution, would just be to open up tech worker positions and actually invest in their help by getting them trained to work with TF2Maps rather than just being a proverbial "suggestion board." I don't doubt people are willing to help or learn, it just takes giving those people opportunities to, well, contribute. The second, and more unlikely solution, would be to utilize the funds made from stuff like merch or something to reinvest in TF2Maps and get people actually working on the site semi-regularly. I don't think it's impossible to expand like that.

Yeah I keep telling folks we need more people. I share this frustration.
Hell, we're actually thinking about hiring someone to work on our infrastructure, although the money question is still open.

This is something I was trying to help develop last year, when I was running Ye Olde Conteste. I feel schedules are incredibly important in maintaining cohesion between staff members, and it hasn't really felt like there's been any since I get different responses to issues from staff members about things. It's also just nice as a regular user, as I can plan my own schedule around what's going on in a community I'm incredibly passionate for.

Agreed. Now we just gotta convince all the other admins.

Jesus, just went to comment on how it was a good write up and a good read... why was there this much written in the comments lol

haha gottem

 

[sweglord227]

may as well talk comp stuff seeing as that's what im most qualified for and it's a common talking point here.

Something that's been significantly draining lately is seeing the same maps, over and over again, be played in comp.

this is something brokk almost got right

Comp players hate inefficiency, and that includes learning new, potentially inefficient maps.

comp players do not hate inefficiency. aside from the fact that they play comp, they are the same as everyone else. what comp players don't like is learning map theory. learning new maps and their theory feels a lot like homework (if done poorly); if you're not already interested in a map/mapping, you're not gonna like studying it. the same is true for any subject. the culture surrounding competitive play is very focused on individual skill, teamwork, and communication, not map theory.

if you want to get more comp maps into the pools, focus on getting comp players interested in mapping/maps rather than getting maps into the pool. you will get pushback from most players if you try to shove maps down their throats. the leagues follow the players; admins are volunteers, leagues get their required funding from league fees, etc. the players have all the control within the leagues. you want something to happen? convince the players first.

side note: please stop saying things like "XYZ group feels ZYX about ABC" if you don't understand the group or how they feel. assuptions. ass-u-me. you get it.

in my heavily biased opinion, it's obviously the comp players who are wrong about it.

i sincerely hope you are joking. even if you understand you're biased, pinning blame souly on one party is incredibly counterproductive.


one last thought: while yes of course the leagues have done a terrible job at helping to create new maps for comp, that much is not lost on me, i do believe tf2m, mappers in general, can do a little more to get comp players interested. but do whatever, idrc

 

[Midni]

Events

​

The biggest event I’d like to see in TF2Maps are new mapper workshops- essentially interactive tutorials hosted every once in a while for the older mappers to pass on their skills to the fresh generation. I think a lot of new mappers struggle with the concept of being thrown into the deep end before they can swim. Some mappers figure it out quickly but it can be a struggle and intimidating when you see more experienced mappers post something and you think “I want to make something like that” but lack the guidance on how to get to that point. Video tutorials (Rito’s new series has been good) are very helpful but being in what is essentially a classroom with a teacher directly is even better in my opinion. It’s a lot to ask for that I know, teaching is a difficult job believe me, but I think for long term health this is one of the best things that could be done for TF2Maps.

One would of course have to ask what this would look like- a curriculum so to speak. My idea personally would be weekly workshops where an experienced mapper makes a simple map on stream that anyone can watch and ask question. They would have to go over gameplay theory, explaining why they think certain decisions would be best in design, and going over the feedback they receive in the imp test. The most important aspect would be the interactiveness of the workshop however. Another way to look at it might be an experienced mapper collaborating with a bunch of new mappers but serving as the mentor role.

It’s a very large ask, but if that isn’t feasible then I think pushing tutorials more than they are already would also go a long way to actually help new mappers. This is of course is a Discord vs. Forum problem to which I don’t have a good answer for but I can explain why I dislike Discord. Discord has an issue of impermanence. You can essentially pin things and that’s about it for keeping track of really important things. The search feature is notoriously buggy. The Forum is built to be much more permanent than Discord but everyone is on Discord not the Forum and that’s the problem. Personally, I think moving the imp map upload off of Discord and giving it a dedicated Forum page could help a lot. This would allow you to keep the rules of map design in the user’s face every time they upload a map to be tested (these rules themselves could honestly be expanded upon in particular on packing and repacking. There’s space on the web page I don’t think it needs to be hyperlinked to another page where average users probably won’t try and jump to. Also some clarity that repacking a map with entirely stock assets still does a lot. Like a lot a lot: 1/3 the file size a lot).



Another event I had in mind which touches on reviews is simply directing people from Discord who played in the imp to leave detailed reviews appropriate to the map’s version string like once a week. A mapping in review event. There’s simply a limit to how much you can feedback during an imp both due to the fact you’re doing it in game and the fact that you have 2 Minutes to put down all your thoughts. I do stress the importance of the review being appropriate to the version string as well so you don’t end up with negative reviews complaining about detailing in early Alpha as an extreme example. Because I view more detailed feedback as vital I think offering some kind of incentive might help gamify it and promote more participation. What this incentive would be I could not tell you; it obviously wouldn’t be anything like VIP itself but perhaps limited access to some silly VIP perks. These rewards would have to be issued under moderation of the reviews themselves to ensure quality. Additionally, reviews need to be clearly marked by the version string they are reviewing.

That would be a decent chunk of work I’m not going to deny that: work takes time, time is money, money is not infinite. But to get anything done will take work.

---

Regarding map testing

These are more my personal thoughts on map testing in general. Specifically when you come across a map that is “bad”. Bad in the way that it simply isn’t a playable map (such as being overscaled, underscaled, or two boxes connected by a single tunnel). There have been instances in the past where these types of maps come up in the imp and play testers are just left aghast at what to do, but when someone asks to skip the map they are shunned and told to leave more constructive feedback. Which, in my opinion there’s a massive difference between leaving feedback and teaching the fundamentals of how to make a map for TF2 (it’s not even feasible to really describe this process in the framework of an imp). This leaves playtesters feeling like their time is being wasted and if it kills the imp then the next map in line suffers by not getting tested that session. Which if the mapper is present in that imp can be very frustrating.

What I’d like, is some kind of standardization about what gets put on the bot. I’m not sure what the best way to do this but I think requiring mappers to upload a screenshot or two of their map when uploading to TF2M could help sort it out slightly if the Host can see the screenshots when looking at the map list. Now that means that some maps would just have to be skipped and that might seem mean, but honestly I think skipping the map in the list and sending the mapper a message containing the hard truth of the map not qualifying is better than what can sometimes come from a frustrated Imp. Is it feasible? I honestly don’t know. But if the imp upload had a fixed page on the forum it could also help filter out these “not quite there” maps with gentle reminders. A lot of these bumps in map testing I feel would be resolved with enhanced communication to new mappers.

 

[Katsu! :3]

If you feel you can summarize your feelings about a map into a star rating, you'll also be able to convey it in a post in that thread.

This completely misses the point of a review. Don't get me wrong, I think if you're going to look at an indev map, this is what you should do, but if you're reviewing a regular-ass map then no, that is not the right thing to do. A review at the end of the day is for a server owner to look at, and the removal of the star system actively hinders that because it takes more of their time to figure out if a map is actually quality or not.

I don't need you to answer these questions

I don't need to, but since I'm the one that brought it up I should be the one to provide some ways to go through said questions:
1. In my honest opinion, I think you should pine for ownership of said art, doing something like a commission system where you guys pay artists so you can host it. Once a commission is complete, doing a sales split between yourself and the artist would be a smart call (or if they allow you to not split revenue, then keeping all the revenue for TF2Maps with credit to the creator would be good), something like 50/50 is fair where something like 30(artist)/70(TF2Maps) is less fair but more profitable and directly beneficial for TF2m. I think a blanket statement "we will not allow collaborative art" would be fine, keep your system simple so it's not hard to pass down as staff members leave and whatnot.
2. Answered previously.
3. The revenue can be split into two parts. The first part is actually commissioning the art piece, where tf2maps commissions an artist to make a rendition of whatever. (Hell, even the TF2Maps logo would be good.) THAT is where price fluctuation can happen, as not all commissions are made equal. Then, after a sale for the merchandise, is where you get a split between TF2Maps and the artist. Like said previously, I personally think 30/70 would be the most opportune because you need to maintain your ability to break even.
4. I am not knowledgeable enough to answer this on my own but this does make me ask the question of "How does the money work when someone credits TF2Maps for a valve map?"
5. This is why I suggested sites like Redbubble or Teespring. They allow you to make designs with their products, and they show you what profit you can make with a sale.

Just as an example from Teespring. As for who collects payment, does site cashflow not already go through @drp?
6. Again, I do not know law well enough to answer this, but this also makes me ask if TF2Maps is not a legal entity in it of itself?

played by at least vaguely knowledgeable competitive players

I don't think this is as difficult as you think it will be, all it requires is doing a bit of searching. The easiest way to make this succeed would be to have these "vaguely knowledgeable competitive players" be the captains of teams, and have other players fill in for a roster on their teams. I do think it would be a smart idea to search outside of just TF2Maps for captains though, as you need more than just one way into competitive to really get a ball rolling there. Having real comp players as captains is good because, as a team captain, their job is already to manage the team both in-game and out of game, so having someone actually understanding what's going on is a must there.

a lot of issues would require actual comp players to find

I think you are trying to look too deep here; The point of a TF2Maps cup would be filling the role as a sort of "hype man" for maps. The thing about TF2Maps is that TF2Maps players are willing to play a lot more maps that competitive players, and that makes them more malleable is what is able to be baseline tested. If you want a good way to try this, I would suggest getting someone (cough cough myself or @sweglord227 cough cough) to find five maps for you in a given format, and then have the actual players agree on 3 of the five maps to be played per game. Finals can be best of five so they still get exposure there.

Comp players hate inefficiency, and that includes learning new, potentially inefficient maps.

Again, this is why you use TF2Maps as a hype man for maps. If comp watches players play an "inefficient map," then their job is already done without even needing to test. If they see a map that has potential though? Well congratulations, TF2Maps has done its job by successfully exposing the comp world to a new potential map to be played. The end goal is for TF2Maps comp to serve as the gateway for new maps, not the eliminator.

Without major and consistent and enduring backing of a competitive league

I don't necessarily disagree but this goes into what I was saying about getting communications between communities; You don't have to make something that runs super-duper deep, you just need to be able to contact community leaders (like, for example, @coreobs from OzFortress) and help get them in the know about things.

although the money question is still open

This is something that merch could help alleviate.

Now we just gotta convince all the other admins.

Okay. @nesman @14bit @Erk @adam2 @Sonoma @Zeus @Pdan4 @Alex.bsp @AlrexX [she/they] @DoctorDoomtrain64 @Kaia @MC_Labs15 @ProfHappycat @Tails8521 @Xbmann HEY I think having a schedule for staff would be helpful for the following reasons:

• Gives everyone on the team a better baseline on what's going on in the community and stronger understanding of the goals TF2Maps has.
• Serves as a preventative measure of "Well I didn't know about this" because it could and should be available to the entire team.
• Allows fellow team members to schedule their own things within what is already planned.
• Provides stronger target dates for events to happen, such as the 72hr jam and official contests.

There is no benefit imo to not having an internal schedule for your team to follow, you should give it a try for a year and see how your team works with it. If it doesn't work well? Change how you plan a year on TF2Maps. If it does? Fantastic, I'm glad it worked out! I think there's some further iteration internally once a schedule is established, but I'm not 100% confident on what I'd do after the fact so I'll keep workshopping that.

 

[Brokkhouse]

oh boy theres more

comp players do not hate inefficiency. aside from the fact that they play comp, they are the same as everyone else. what comp players don't like is learning map theory. learning new maps and their theory feels a lot like homework (if done poorly); if you're not already interested in a map/mapping, you're not gonna like studying it. the same is true for any subject. the culture surrounding competitive play is very focused on individual skill, teamwork, and communication, not map theory.

if you want to get more comp maps into the pools, focus on getting comp players interested in mapping/maps rather than getting maps into the pool. you will get pushback from most players if you try to shove maps down their throats. the leagues follow the players; admins are volunteers, leagues get their required funding from league fees, etc. the players have all the control within the leagues. you want something to happen? convince the players first.

That leads to the question how we get people interested in mapping. People usually find their way to us after getting interested in it, not the other way around.

side note: please stop saying things like "XYZ group feels ZYX about ABC" if you don't understand the group or how they feel. assuptions. ass-u-me. you get it.

i sincerely hope you are joking. even if you understand you're biased, pinning blame souly on one party is incredibly counterproductive.

Apologies if that joke did not get through very well. It was meant in jest.
I really am frustrated with the comp scene though, having interacted with them both as a member of TF2Maps.net and as a mapper trying to "sell" my map. There's a fundamental difference here how we think about maps and their creation. Hence my joke about our perspective obviously being the right one, since after all, we are never wrong about anything here at TF2m.

The biggest event I’d like to see in TF2Maps are new mapper workshops- essentially interactive tutorials hosted every once in a while for the older mappers to pass on their skills to the fresh generation. I think a lot of new mappers struggle with the concept of being thrown into the deep end before they can swim. Some mappers figure it out quickly but it can be a struggle and intimidating when you see more experienced mappers post something and you think “I want to make something like that” but lack the guidance on how to get to that point. Video tutorials (Rito’s new series has been good) are very helpful but being in what is essentially a classroom with a teacher directly is even better in my opinion. It’s a lot to ask for that I know, teaching is a difficult job believe me, but I think for long term health this is one of the best things that could be done for TF2Maps.

If you can find the volunteers to teach those classes. I fear this might stay as a pipe dream.

It’s a very large ask, but if that isn’t feasible then I think pushing tutorials more than they are already would also go a long way to actually help new mappers. This is of course is a Discord vs. Forum problem to which I don’t have a good answer for but I can explain why I dislike Discord. Discord has an issue of impermanence. You can essentially pin things and that’s about it for keeping track of really important things. The search feature is notoriously buggy. The Forum is built to be much more permanent than Discord but everyone is on Discord not the Forum and that’s the problem. Personally, I think moving the imp map upload off of Discord and giving it a dedicated Forum page could help a lot. This would allow you to keep the rules of map design in the user’s face every time they upload a map to be tested (these rules themselves could honestly be expanded upon in particular on packing and repacking. There’s space on the web page I don’t think it needs to be hyperlinked to another page where average users probably won’t try and jump to. Also some clarity that repacking a map with entirely stock assets still does a lot. Like a lot a lot: 1/3 the file size a lot).

I do agree about Discord being suboptimal, but that is pretty much democracy in action. And regarding rules of map design and any information - the info is all there, in my places, it's just a lot, because that's what making a good map takes. We have revised the map testing page, accessible from the top menu, many times since I have joined, and we will keep doing so. Fact is that the people who really need the information in there won't read it anyway, or only to skim for the information on how to get the map tested, if at all.
The reason we're using Discord for map uploading is mostly technical: It's a lot easier to maintain a discord bot than some of our other infrastructure.

Another event I had in mind which touches on reviews is simply directing people from Discord who played in the imp to leave detailed reviews appropriate to the map’s version string like once a week. A mapping in review event. There’s simply a limit to how much you can feedback during an imp both due to the fact you’re doing it in game and the fact that you have 2 Minutes to put down all your thoughts. I do stress the importance of the review being appropriate to the version string as well so you don’t end up with negative reviews complaining about detailing in early Alpha as an extreme example. Because I view more detailed feedback as vital I think offering some kind of incentive might help gamify it and promote more participation. What this incentive would be I could not tell you; it obviously wouldn’t be anything like VIP itself but perhaps limited access to some silly VIP perks. These rewards would have to be issued under moderation of the reviews themselves to ensure quality. Additionally, reviews need to be clearly marked by the version string they are reviewing.

Interesting. I'll bring that up with the others.

---

These are more my personal thoughts on map testing in general. Specifically when you come across a map that is “bad”. Bad in the way that it simply isn’t a playable map (such as being overscaled, underscaled, or two boxes connected by a single tunnel). There have been instances in the past where these types of maps come up in the imp and play testers are just left aghast at what to do, but when someone asks to skip the map they are shunned and told to leave more constructive feedback. Which, in my opinion there’s a massive difference between leaving feedback and teaching the fundamentals of how to make a map for TF2 (it’s not even feasible to really describe this process in the framework of an imp). This leaves playtesters feeling like their time is being wasted and if it kills the imp then the next map in line suffers by not getting tested that session. Which if the mapper is present in that imp can be very frustrating.

Sadly, the way to address this is a lot harder than just banning bad maps from being played. We encourage hosts to skip maps when we feel there isn't more testing data to be produced, but we also maintain that even beginners have a right for faithful testing in this community. It is a common saying that everyone's first map sucks, and a lot of people get their mapping motivation from testing their maps every few days. I certainly wouldn't have stayed here if I hadn't had that to look forward to, and my first map's first test was skipped after three minutes or so.
In the end, I would rather inconvenience map testers occasionally than completely discourage beginners from even trying anything. We're already being accused of being elitists.

What I’d like, is some kind of standardization about what gets put on the bot. I’m not sure what the best way to do this but I think requiring mappers to upload a screenshot or two of their map when uploading to TF2M could help sort it out slightly if the Host can see the screenshots when looking at the map list. Now that means that some maps would just have to be skipped and that might seem mean, but honestly I think skipping the map in the list and sending the mapper a message containing the hard truth of the map not qualifying is better than what can sometimes come from a frustrated Imp. Is it feasible? I honestly don’t know. But if the imp upload had a fixed page on the forum it could also help filter out these “not quite there” maps with gentle reminders. A lot of these bumps in map testing I feel would be resolved with enhanced communication to new mappers.

We've talked about this a couple of times internally and our current stance is that we're not policing map uploading for subjective or taste matters. First, because subjectivity is hard to encase in rules, which it'd need to be without generating even more drama we'd have to deal with, and second, because we simply lack the manpower to do something like that. I scour the map list every day or two for maps that are missing prefixes/suffixes or have other clear flaws, but for everything else we need more volunteers.
And regarding communication.. I'll bring it up again. I agree we can try to make the map testing guidelines more clear, although it shouldn't go so far that it inconveniences people.

This completely misses the point of a review. Don't get me wrong, I think if you're going to look at an indev map, this is what you should do, but if you're reviewing a regular-ass map then no, that is not the right thing to do. A review at the end of the day is for a server owner to look at, and the removal of the star system actively hinders that because it takes more of their time to figure out if a map is actually quality or not.

So you're writing reviews for server owners, not for mappers? So why leave reviews or star ratings on in-dev maps at all?

I don't need to, but since I'm the one that brought it up I should be the one to provide some ways to go through said questions:

I thought I was clear on that, but that was just examples off the top of my head. There's more, and some of your solutions are also questionable. That said, I do want to look into it more.

I don't think this is as difficult as you think it will be, all it requires is doing a bit of searching. The easiest way to make this succeed would be to have these "vaguely knowledgeable competitive players" be the captains of teams, and have other players fill in for a roster on their teams. I do think it would be a smart idea to search outside of just TF2Maps for captains though, as you need more than just one way into competitive to really get a ball rolling there. Having real comp players as captains is good because, as a team captain, their job is already to manage the team both in-game and out of game, so having someone actually understanding what's going on is a must there.

But how would that help? In my experience, the battle has been about getting comp players to accept the maps in the first place. And call me crazy, but I think if we're going to have some kind of collaborative process where our community makes maps for them, then the least they can do is supply us with testing data.
And this is obviously my own take, but I don't find comp format particularly fun with people who don't know at least some comp meta basics.

I think you are trying to look too deep here; The point of a TF2Maps cup would be filling the role as a sort of "hype man" for maps. The thing about TF2Maps is that TF2Maps players are willing to play a lot more maps that competitive players, and that makes them more malleable is what is able to be baseline tested. If you want a good way to try this, I would suggest getting someone (cough cough myself or @sweglord227 cough cough) to find five maps for you in a given format, and then have the actual players agree on 3 of the five maps to be played per game. Finals can be best of five so they still get exposure there.

Again, this is why you use TF2Maps as a hype man for maps. If comp watches players play an "inefficient map," then their job is already done without even needing to test. If they see a map that has potential though? Well congratulations, TF2Maps has done its job by successfully exposing the comp world to a new potential map to be played. The end goal is for TF2Maps comp to serve as the gateway for new maps, not the eliminator.

I don't necessarily disagree but this goes into what I was saying about getting communications between communities; You don't have to make something that runs super-duper deep, you just need to be able to contact community leaders (like, for example, @coreobs from OzFortress) and help get them in the know about things.

This is something that merch could help alleviate.

Alright, I give up. Let me just say we have tried to do comp stuff many times in the past, and it's failed every time. We think our time is best used elsewhere. If anyone else wants to organize this, I am pretty sure we would support them, but we can't spearhead it.

 

[Plainz]

didn't you hear it? TF2MAPS IS GETTING CANCELED how could you not know!?!?!?!!??!?!???!?!!?