Proposed amendment to Map Maker's Medallion distribution regulations

[grazr]

Does the "time/effort" arguement really hold up when some people have medals for making a couple textures/models for custom content packs? I'm not a modeller so someone confirm whether those work loads could be compared; between a set of models and a minor contest winning entry. That might clear the air a bit in how we scale these things.

Besides, medals havn't been awarded just for content. TF2maps admins were awarded them too for community contributions in "other" ways. I suppose when it comes down to it we can award them for what ever we felt like, we just have to hand over the S-ID's IIRC.

If it comes to it, we can just do it case be case. Some minor events really vary in work loads. If an event seems big enough, it can always be requested as a reward.

EDIT:

On the showcase consideration, how happy is everyone with things that show up there? Is there anything people believe shouldn't be there, or should be but isn't? Glancing over the showcase now, I recognize the names of all but a few as being "active" members. Are there newer or less active authors overlooked somewhere in the workshop that really should be in the showcase? Opening it up to less concrete definitions (winners) brings the possibility of drama and necessary precautions and guidelines should be made. Or perhaps a better way to put it is that an audit of procedures should be done before the medal is opened up, so as to reduce potential problems if any are found to exist.

All showcase entries are voted in by the community. Showcases are maps that appeared in tests and received a fanbase strong enough to be voted "best of the best". The showcase was developed to reward maps developed outside of contests and to better advertise our communities (better) content. When suggested there was support from server administrators outside of TF2maps because it meant they had a good base from which to jump start custom servers and was one of the primary motivations for the feature. I don't mind if we hand out medals for them. Not sure how other people feel about it, should probably make a poll on it specifically.

But there's nothing stopping these contest maps from getting showcased either, many showcases are also contest winners. So that could be a way to quality control even winners. A map might win, but it then has to get community approval afterwards to be showcased. That way we don't have to reward a bad map based on a contest promise because there might have been a load of only bad entries.

 

[Fruity Snacks]

Actually, myself and harribo just need the Steam ID of the user and we can hand out the medals ourselves. Completely independent from Valve.

 

[Pocket]

As I stated once before, one of the reasons I continued to pursue with the medal, and when the form of guidelines that was being put together the second time (as in, post-post-artpass), I tried to keep in mind that this was going to be visible on players, so naturally people were going to be like "whats that" and then boom, people mention TF2Maps.net Artpass, and you get some publicity for the site. Everyone likes attention too, so when people are like "Oh! What did you get that for? Thats so cool!" you get some attention and people like attention

In my experience, the question is almost always "What map did you make?" because they assume it's for making a community map that went official. And then I had to sheepishly admit that it's essentially a participation ribbon. Hence why I don't wear it on public servers anymore, and why I think people who actually made maps people have heard of ought to get one.

 

[UKCS-Alias]

In my experience, the question is almost always "What map did you make?" because they assume it's for making a community map that went official.

Just to note. the polycount pin was also given to people who didnt get anything in the game aswel as long as they made a good creation. And originaly i thought it also was given to people who got an item in the game.

Youll keep that confusion hence i came up with that "i created" in its description idea. It would at least show what he created and im sure that most people know what maps are in the game itself.

 

[Egan]

So us staff had a meeting about some things, medals were a topic, and we came to some conclusions about some things discussed here:

• Medals are TF2maps.net medals, not 'TF2 maps' medals. Edit: By this I mean the current maps medals will remain as they are, but they aren't for the showcase related maps.
• For new website, add new subforum for map showcase for the 'non-traditional' gametypes (Jump, Surf).
• For the non-traditional maps, if it further develops tf2 gameplay specifically and can stand on par with already showcased maps, then it is worth of a medal. (ie: hardly any, but some do exist!)
• Try to get valve to add our showcase maps into the quickplay? (we haven't had luck talking to them about this).
• Will not repass maps in showcase.
• Define what goes into the showcase better because it seems every map that reaches RC gets added into showcase. (Should be along the lines of an overwhelmingly positive review).
• Possibly re-evaluate the 5-map-showcase each month, but we will talk about this in another meeting.
• Add a minimum map entry requirement for minor contests to get a tf2maps medal prize.
• Get valve to make medals renameable/descriptable.
• Different quality map medals? Temp conclusion was add another map medal for 'people who have made maps of significant quality', will give out current type of map medal for contests/minor contests. Will discuss this in another meeting.

 

[Fruity Snacks]

• Medals are TF2maps.net medals, not 'TF2 maps' medals.

Could you elaborate on this one?

 

[Sergis]

Could you elaborate on this one?

"TF2maps.net'ers Medallion"

 

[Crash]

Could you elaborate on this one?

We were discussing whether or not to expand medal distribution to people of other communities who have made significant mapping contributions, but decided to stick within the TF2Maps.net community itself, as the medal is the our equivalent of the Wiki Cap.

 

[Fruity Snacks]

We were discussing whether or not to expand medal distribution to people of other communities who have made significant mapping contributions, but decided to stick within the TF2Maps.net community itself, as the medal is the our equivalent of the Wiki Cap.

No, it isn't and never was meant to be like that. By changing this, the medal has fundamentally changed at it's core.

Edit: this is in regards to it being like the wiki cap, then to the change itself.

 

[A Boojum Snark]

Wait. What? Why do you mean by "significant mapping contributions"? Aren't 98% of the recipients going to receive it for a map? Maps are not our thing. This site is most definitely not like a wiki where contributions are directly related to, and part of, the website/community.
How are you even going to define this? Which of the following qualifies as part of the community and can receive a medal?
Joe: Joins us for a major contest, makes about 8 posts over the course of the thread, wins the contest.
Bob: Joins us for a major contest, makes about 8 posts over the course of the thread, does not win the contest but made something good enough to get into the showcase.
Phil: Spent most of his development time in another mapping community but joins us to share his finished (showcased) work and then isn't heard from much.
Sam: Spent most of his development time in another mapping community but joins us to share his finished (showcased) work and becomes an active member.

Joe would get one. Would Bob? I'm guessing Phil wouldn't under this new ideal. What about Sam, even with his map in the showcase would he have to wait until he passes some arbitrary community participation level before he is awarded a medal?
What about the return of an old member? What if say... Shmitz showed up and posted another awesome finished map but then faded away again because he is busy elsewhere, what about that? (lets ignore the fact he, specifically, probably doesn't play TF2 and wouldn't care)

Whether or not medals would be of any use in growing the community or creating awareness/outreach, if we're going to give them out for maps of quality, then give them out regardless of the author's community involvement. Otherwise keep them as major contest rewards only or tell valve to delete them all. I'm completely against the idea of having it be a TF2M Clubhouse Award.

 

[Fruity Snacks]

Based on current, unofficial rules:

Joe would get one.
Bob wouldn't, nor would sam.
Phil would not either.

Based on the proposed rules: (that is, showcase = medal)
Joe would still get one.
Bob would get one.
Phil would not get one.
Sam, should get one. But if the new "TF2Maps.net Medal" is the new rules, that would be iffy, since he didn't develop it here. This is where I disagree with the proposal that the medal is the TF2M equivalent of the wiki cap.

The medal applied to all of the TF2 community. It just happened to be that of the people who go it this time around, they were all most TF2M people.

 

[Egan]

We were discussing whether or not to expand medal distribution to people of other communities who have made significant mapping contributions, but decided to stick within the TF2Maps.net community itself, as the medal is the our equivalent of the Wiki Cap.

No, it isn't and never was meant to be like that. By changing this, the medal has fundamentally changed at it's core.
Edit: this is in regards to it being like the wiki cap, then to the change itself.

The bottom bullet point in the list of conclusions goes over that our temporary conclusion was to have two different medallion versions, one for TF2maps.net's major/minor contests, and then to have one another for 'people who have made maps of significant quality' - which can be anywhere, not just in TF2maps.net.

Which of the following qualifies as part of the community and can receive a medal?
Joe: Joins us for a major contest, makes about 8 posts over the course of the thread, wins the contest.
Bob: Joins us for a major contest, makes about 8 posts over the course of the thread, does not win the contest but made something good enough to get into the showcase.
Phil: Spent most of his development time in another mapping community but joins us to share his finished (showcased) work and then isn't heard from much.
Sam: Spent most of his development time in another mapping community but joins us to share his finished (showcased) work and becomes an active member.

Joe receives one of the current medals because he won a major TF2maps.net contest.
Bob receives one of the new medals because he made a map of significant quality.
Phil receives one of the new medals because he made a map of significant quality.
Sam receives one of the new medals because he made a map of significant quality.

if we're going to give them out for maps of quality, then give them out regardless of the author's community involvement.

We are doing that, the new medals will be given out for maps of quality regardless of the author's community involvement here.

 

[A Boojum Snark]

Ok, I guess, if that's what was meant by different quality of medals. Your first point sounded all-inclusive, especially being the first point. Multiple medals still depends on Valve going along though.

 

[LeSwordfish]

Waitwaitwait, there are maps in the game who's creators haven't got a medal yet?

Dude that SUCKS. Regardless of how we change the rules we need to send them medals, ASAP>

 

[Fruity Snacks]

Waitwaitwait, there are maps in the game who's creators haven't got a medal yet?

Dude that SUCKS. Regardless of how we change the rules we need to send them medals, ASAP>

It was originally set out, that people who had maps in the game weren't going to get medals, because they were getting community weapons.

But, should be known that a lot of those people who have official maps, already have medals for other reasons.
In hindsight, this was a bad idea to exclude them.

 

[UKCS-Alias]

It was originally set out, that people who had maps in the game weren't going to get medals, because they were getting community weapons.

For a reason i understand that 1 item is enough. But even then, you also have other people that gain community weapons aswel and by that a community weapon still doesnt equal a mapping specific item.

To me they should deserve both the weapon and medal.

Remember that there are less maps in the game than custom weapons and hats. So on that part it looks as if mapping is a much harder achievement.

What i also would like to suggest is that mappers that made a map of significant popularity should be counted. They might not be the best maps but they still have a major influence on the game. This for example would be for the creator of cp_orange. I dont like the map, but i cant think of any other custom map that isnt in the game that exceeds the playcount of that one.
Achievement_idle however doesnt count since that map isnt focussed arround gameplay.

 

[Ælement]

This for example would be for the creator of cp_orange. I dont like the map, but i cant think of any other custom map that isnt in the game that exceeds the playcount of that one.

Lets keep it at quality.

Seeing orange get a medal would make me a very sad hippopotamus.

 

[Acadium]

Yeah.

Winning a mini-contest (a serious one at least) may only focus on one area, but a bunch of little areas add up to one great map. If you win a detailing contest, then your map will likely look really good, as you've shown that you're capable of making a map look good.

I think winning a mini-contest and receiving this should be a reward saying "We like this, do more. Incorporate this into a real map". That medal should be an incentive so you can say "I have a rare item." (That may not be incentive for many, but please remember the game we are playing, a war-themed hat simulator)

 

[Egan]

What i also would like to suggest is that mappers that made a map of significant popularity should be counted. They might not be the best maps but they still have a major influence on the game. This for example would be for the creator of cp_orange. I dont like the map, but i cant think of any other custom map that isnt in the game that exceeds the playcount of that one.
Achievement_idle however doesnt count since that map isnt focussed arround gameplay.

As Dr Element said, it will stay at quality. In the list of conclusions that I posted about on page 3 of this thread I mentioned that the requirement for non-traditional maps (jump/surf/etc) to be showcased was:

• For the non-traditional maps, if it further develops tf2 gameplay specifically and can stand on par with already showcased maps, then it is worthy of a medal. (ie: hardly any, but some do exist!)

This rule can generally be applied to other types of maps around the community as well. For instance, how do the details of cp_orange stand against the details of maps already in the showcase? (Not very well at all). Does the gameplay in cp_orange expand on or revolutionize TF2's gameplay in some way? (Lots would argue no). These two points are just the basic points for recommendation in the showcase, however.

• Define what goes into the showcase better because it seems every map that reaches RC gets added into showcase. (Should be along the lines of an overwhelmingly positive review).

This point from the conclusions list mentions how a map will need an overwhelmingly positive review from the community and/or the admins in charge of that sort of thing, and not just the two basic points mentioned above.

 

[UKCS-Alias]

As Dr Element said, it will stay at quality. In the list of conclusions that I posted about on page 3 of this thread I mentioned that the requirement for non-traditional maps (jump/surf/etc) to be showcased was:

Thats fine with me. it was just an idea after all and i do agree at the points you mentioned. I just tried to search the most extreme example of a map that isnt very well made but has a popularity many would like their map to have. I would argue the same about mario kart (unsuitable due to its looks and gameplay - pure dm isnt worthy to me).
I dont know about any map that would be this popular, but lack at a few spots (in looks for example) while still being excellent on the other parts.