Discussion in 'Contests' started by Fr0Z3nR, Jun 20, 2012.
Nice job Hanz
I don't know if i'm officially allowed to announce my scores/reviews yet, but here we go anyway: https://docs.google.com/document/d/...61rPEWW7mG08LX_Q4/edit#heading=h.kztneg5r4nnw
Each map has a few paragraphs about aesthetics, multiple bullet-points about score, and a min.us album of glitches and minor issues. If anyone has any issues with how their map was presented or wants further details on my logic please feel free to ask, via PM or steam.
In addition, should anyone who failed to qualify want to get the aesthetics of their map reviewed, let me know. No, i wont do technical: technical reviews are even duller to do than to read.
Congratulations to all of the winners!
And to everyone, great results and great job. I'm really happy about the turn-out and how things went.
here, have some values. I'll have a proper post up soon(ish)
Congratulations to all the winners, I feel pretty happy with my results since this is my first contest.
If I'm reading Idolon's chart correctly, 5th place is pretty good, and thanks LeSwordfish for those pointers. Probably going to hammer out beta 4 sometime soon.
Was Sword the only judge on our side?
No, Swordfish, Ravidge and TheKieranator were our judges.
Will there be a breakdown of STAR and Hein's gameplay scoring?
I find it a little disconcerting that I was getting generally very positive feedback on skyward's gameplay from here, only to have it rank dead last on gameplay from STAR, not even beating the map with exploitable perches.
Unless STAR has them hidden somewhere and didn't tell me, there will not be any backing for maps who are not in the top 3 (and the backing then is stated in the video's). It was intended for write ups to happen; but for multiple reasons, it didn't. Sorry!
I guess the one thing I can say about testing here and what might've happened in the judging is that there was a lot of testing occuring with full, 24 man servers or there was 9v9, but multiple of classes. Remember that this contest was about gameplay, and the specifics of it for highlander. So, what might work for a Pub group, might not really work out well for HL/6v6.
Right, I get all that.
But most of my positive feedback and testing was from 6v6 play (thanks to ScorpioUprising), and while 6v6 comp is very different from 9v9 comp, they're both worlds apart from pub play. Since the 6v6 testing had been so promising, I was hoping to continue developing it for that. However "gameplay 30/20" doesn't tell me what's so badly broken, and doesn't really give me any clues on what to fix.
Moot until I figure out the cubemaps problem anyway, so I'll stop cluttering the thread about it.
+1 for disappointed in the lack of any explanation behind the gameplay scores, and also perplexed by some of them.
In the future if we do something like this again, we can't just outsource our judges and not have any control over how they judge.
I kinda agree with EArkham. If they can be prodded in some way to post some very basic stuff, that'd be pretty beneficial. I'm in the same boat where all the HL testing I did led me to believe I did very well. I'm not complaining, 4th is pretty respectable, but I wouldn't mind reading something a bit more in depth on each of the maps. Even the ones with videos. I don't want anything changed, I just want to understand the mindset more. Even the third place map--the main drawback is that it's trivially easy to spawn camp. I'm surprised it won over other maps despite that, frankly.
Trying really hard to not sound like a bitter asshole, probably not succeeding.
Bing Kier and Rav: post em if you got em, please.
I'll be making a formal post with everything in it soon. Giving Kier a day to send me his write up. (if he doesn't I'll post what I have and update as I get it).
As I said before, it was our plan to have write-ups but for multiple reasons it didn't happen.
If it's any consilation we (the site staff) struggled in compromising with the judging format as we're very used to our ways of scoring contests and scoring them in such a way that provides quality feedback to our level designers.
Unfortunately STAR is not a mapper, nor has he held any mapping contests and wanted a different format for the contest in general. In essence it was a KoTH promotion campaign and many of the KoTH maps were expected to be in late beta and not need significant further development. It was very much on his terms as it was largely about his audience and we were largely the facilitators with a few lucky winners. IE the contest here could be considered only half of what the event was about.
One of the other issues we fenced with was map testing. STAR was willing to promote the contest and judge it, but in terms of getting together players to help test our alpha maps (and we all know how hard alpha maps are to test competitively), this was not a part of the process he wanted to be involved in, despite supposed cooperation with/from the UGC. As you also noticed there are no significant write ups, STAR made it clear he and his judges would not be reviewing the maps in detail.
This was frustrating because the idea was to make maps for the competitive leagues yet without support of competitive testing. We could have argued more on the fundementals so we had more control, but we saw that it was just as important to breathe life into the community with an out sourced contest at the expense of a couple judgement procedure nuances. This was why we had some in house judges as well to offset the unreliable out sourced judges.
The contest was under strict time constraints so we had to run with certain compromises, although admittedly we did most of the compromising. We had hoped people would just enjoy the contest for what it was and worry less about the details we'd normally cover in our standard contest format. So hopefully you can rest assured the issues some people may have had with the contest at least will not be repeated. We are very well aware of them.
Fr0z3n must have been short of decent judge applicants if he accepted me as one of the three
Jokes aside, I am glad that I was chosen because I probably wouldn't have looked any further at these maps than glancing at the screenshots in their development threads. A lot of really good looking maps came out of this contest and I thoroughly enjoyed looking at and learning from them. I've not had much experience with judging maps at this level before, so hopefully my marks aren't too far off. I may have not gotten a map past a3 (yet; I'm working on the a4 of my 72hr map at the moment), but I'd like to think I know what I'm talking about when looking at the visuals. My technical scores might be a bit off the mark though, since the extent of my optimization history is clipping stuff, nodrawing, func_detailing and chucking some hints around.
Anyway, down to business:
I will be posting my judgement write ups over the course of the next day. For each write up I'll post a brief summary of my main points, accompanied by an imgur album as a visual aid with additional notes. I'm going to use this post as a hub of sorts, providing links to the write ups that will be posted in the development threads for their respective maps. Since the results have already been released publicly, I've decided to post all my write ups in placing order, starting with Arctic. Why am I staggering them out? Stupid real life is getting in the way of awesome TF2 life, so I've been rather busy as of late.
Without further ado, TheKieranator's List of Judgements:
Arctic by Hanz
Railbridge by Eyce
Flake by Arnold
Anthem by yyler
Montane by PDT
Occult by fubarFX
Skyward by EArkham
Aquifer by Crash
Quarry by Idolon
Drinkwater by J4CK8
Crystal by evicted
And the award for 'Most Used Poster' goes to:
(I found the extra one you hid in Quarry too, Idolon.)
This is taking longer than I had hoped. Please bear with me
See, I was right.
methinks next time we have a contest judged like this one we could just have two separate judgings, two rankings and two winners - one by tf2m standart judging with tons of feedback and public judgement as usual and one by the outside judges whatever way they please
This is not really a problem with the contest, but with making competitive maps in general I think.
In my experience, here's what happens: you make a map, you post about it on a comp forum, you hear "looks great, let's get a pub on it" and then that's the last you ever hear of it. Even if you bump the thread with updates, it's to the sound of crickets.
And sometimes if you're really unlucky, you'll hear a comp player say "why don't mappers understand what comp players want."
So getting semi-regular 6v6 feedback has been a really excellent, but rare experience for me personally. Speaking of comp desires, I watch not only STAR but Sal, eXtine, and ETF2L channels on youtube pretty heavily, and I'm still mostly clueless on what comp players are actually looking for in a map.
Two ranks and two winners = double the work for the organizer(s) and double the prizes needed. Judging like this worked out fine for the first time out. Yes, there can be improvements, but things for this one went smoothly and turned out well.
It's true though. Too many players still don't understand how maps are made so if they see dev textures they think "wow that's shit" and never bother looking again
Separate names with a comma.