Leminnes
aa
- Jan 20, 2010
- 1,317
- 903
I'm aware of this, but I also believe it is unfair to give a map a lower grade because they decided to use original props and textures.
TF2Maps.net Mapping Contest #6: (A)Symmetry CP
- Thread starter Ravidge
- Start date
I'm aware of this, but I also believe it is unfair to give a map a lower grade because they decided to use original props and textures.
Icarus
aa
- Sep 10, 2008
- 2,245
- 1,210
I guess the best way to put it is efficiency. I wouldn't really deduct points from a map if they used original materials economically. There are several times, however, when you get a map that's loading with original materials without much care to compression and usage.
Still, file size is just another small component of anything perf could encompass.
Still, file size is just another small component of anything perf could encompass.
Last edited:
Moose
L6: Sharp Member
- Nov 4, 2009
- 312
- 616
I'd like to add that even though I agree with this, you also have to realize that team balance isn't something determined by the map alone. If you have 5 snipers on blu and can't attack a point, you should realize that it's probably because your team has 5 snipers. Also, things like losing streaks do happen, so you always have to be careful when assuming a map is too difficult for one particular team.
the win ratio alone doesn't determine balance, but it does provide good information on whether or not a round is being won, and it might go against what you've witnessed in the playtests you've been in.
You have to use your own judgement. Many people here could spot a unbalanced map even when rolling it on unbalanced teams.
True. 10 is 100%, and i havent yet seen perfect.
My examples were pretty exaggerated and I completely expect people to be not dumb. But yeah, use common sense people.
Also, as previously stated, if you find all of your ratings are high up there, try and alter them a little bit. Don't ensure that 1/10 of the maps have an average of each number or anything, but if all your maps have 7's and 8's, go back and deduct a couple from those that just don't compare to your other 7's and 8's. Especially if you do this over a multiple day period.
Also, as previously stated, if you find all of your ratings are high up there, try and alter them a little bit. Don't ensure that 1/10 of the maps have an average of each number or anything, but if all your maps have 7's and 8's, go back and deduct a couple from those that just don't compare to your other 7's and 8's. Especially if you do this over a multiple day period.
I've banged together a webpage. It was supposed to happen a long time ago, but my internet died and some other stuff got inbetween. Well, anyway, here it is.. enjoy
http://asymmetrycp.tf2maps.net/
http://asymmetrycp.tf2maps.net/
I've banged together a webpage. It was supposed to happen a long time ago, but my internet died and some other stuff got inbetween. Well, anyway, here it is.. enjoy
http://asymmetrycp.tf2maps.net/
(Thanks to Fr0z3n for helping out!)
http://asymmetrycp.tf2maps.net/
(Thanks to Fr0z3n for helping out!)
Last edited:
I also want to stress that the average quality of map submissions has also increased over the years so just because you do have a bunch of 7's or 8's that doesn't mean your voting is redundant. There are 17 maps, many of which have a very similar quality. Each map will have its own unique pros and cons but can still only be represented in value by a single number in the 4 categories.
I think it's just as valid to say that if your scoring is all over the place that this is not a better vote by default (where it might have been more valid in previous contests where the gap between experienced entrants and newbies was more apparent), though every individual is entitled to their opinion and may vote as such if they've had particularly bad or good experiences to justify extreme votes.
Last edited:
I was wondering, being that the German server is down at the moment, maybe you should link to the London server aswell at the bottom of http://asymmetrycp.tf2maps.net/.
Also because it's unnecessary to make anothor post about basically the same thing, someone should add the London server to our Game Servers page (and maybe update the map photos too)
That link is the London server... the new london server we have, not Geits. Dunno what happened with Geits.
Ezekel
L11: Posh Member
- Dec 16, 2008
- 818
- 246
is it just me or has anyone else noticed some of the voters give questionable values for technical and performance.
- i get the feeling that there may be a misunderstanding of what these categories mean, or perhaps, if the person dislikes the map they are just marking these down.
whilst i can understand the other categories are down to personal taste and opinion, issues like "are spawns broken" or "is there bad clipping" or even framerate or file size should be more consistent across the board. at the very least the distributions ought to line up a little better.
so i'm just saying: please check what these categories mean when you give them a score.
technical is things like:
- clipping
- cp functionality
- door functionality
- spawns
- resupply cabinets
- etc
performance is things like:
- file size
- fps
- good use of draw distance on props/overlays
- etc
- i get the feeling that there may be a misunderstanding of what these categories mean, or perhaps, if the person dislikes the map they are just marking these down.
whilst i can understand the other categories are down to personal taste and opinion, issues like "are spawns broken" or "is there bad clipping" or even framerate or file size should be more consistent across the board. at the very least the distributions ought to line up a little better.
so i'm just saying: please check what these categories mean when you give them a score.
technical is things like:
- clipping
- cp functionality
- door functionality
- spawns
- resupply cabinets
- etc
performance is things like:
- file size
- fps
- good use of draw distance on props/overlays
- etc
Last edited:
My experience of the public opinion in the server is "OMG THIS ONE THING ISN'T CLIPPED, NOT VOTING FOR THIS MAP IT'S HORRIBLE".
This is why we value the public vote at 40% and judges as 60%. At least i believe this is still how we do it as we can't rely on quality critical thinking from random people on the internet.
I just played a public game (non-event) where we held CP1 on stage 1 on Mojave, then half the attacking team complained about imbalance and bad authorship with 1 round's experience; even when the teams were switched at the end of the round and we rolled stage one in under 4 minutes they complained about the map being broken and poorly balanced.
People are idiots. Go figure.
This is why we value the public vote at 40% and judges as 60%. At least i believe this is still how we do it as we can't rely on quality critical thinking from random people on the internet.
I just played a public game (non-event) where we held CP1 on stage 1 on Mojave, then half the attacking team complained about imbalance and bad authorship with 1 round's experience; even when the teams were switched at the end of the round and we rolled stage one in under 4 minutes they complained about the map being broken and poorly balanced.
People are idiots. Go figure.
Last edited:
- Feb 26, 2008
- 1,626
- 1,325
While I'm sure we all know what you mean here I'm gonna make this my personal campaign on the forum, addressing an overall disdain for the average player. It's more appropriate to say that the average player lacks the filters we use when considering a map's merits... if anything the case you just cited points out that if a map aggravates team imbalance issues, especially in an a/d map that will switch sides at some point, the effect is exponentially felt- hence the importance of extremely-fine winrate tuning
The problem is a little unique here, though, don't you think? Most of the time such things are said about TF2 players in jest (if not with a little truth), we all know we should take feedback with a pinch of salt and as individual authors we can choose to ignore the less relavent comments and dilute them in a pool of other experiences to get a better understanding of the reality of the situation. "Players are dumb" Is merely an equivalent way of saying "sure, you got mugged just then, but at least you have your life"; to look at the bigger picture and don't feel so bad about it.
The "disdain" comes down to the fact that these ratings will be considered in the final calculation on equal terms with ratings by "people with appropriate filtering", ratings that include revenge votes from butt hurt players with biased opinions made from insufficient data.
A player should realise that when their team lacks a medic on offence that they will not fair well against defenders who do. That their loss is as likely to be from their team make up and/or skill as much as it is the environment design. But players, or people in general, don't like admitting fault on their part because it is humiliating. Rather, they retaliate in anger by blaming the author and the layout design for mistakes by other players/themselves. I'm not sure where fine tuning of win rates really resolves this situation. Especially when the notion itself is odd considering these projects were all made within a time limit; fine tuning doesn't really come into it.
*A vote should not be cast off a single isolated experience.
*When evidence to the contrary of your understanding is presented you should not be stubborn about your initial experience and accept that this is not a valid fault int he grand scheme of gameplay.
*When your team is steam rolled you should ask yourself whether it was your teams class make up, skill or experience on the map first: Some players will have more knowledge than you to exploit and that is not the maps fualt.
The "disdain" comes down to the fact that these ratings will be considered in the final calculation on equal terms with ratings by "people with appropriate filtering", ratings that include revenge votes from butt hurt players with biased opinions made from insufficient data.
A player should realise that when their team lacks a medic on offence that they will not fair well against defenders who do. That their loss is as likely to be from their team make up and/or skill as much as it is the environment design. But players, or people in general, don't like admitting fault on their part because it is humiliating. Rather, they retaliate in anger by blaming the author and the layout design for mistakes by other players/themselves. I'm not sure where fine tuning of win rates really resolves this situation. Especially when the notion itself is odd considering these projects were all made within a time limit; fine tuning doesn't really come into it.
*A vote should not be cast off a single isolated experience.
*When evidence to the contrary of your understanding is presented you should not be stubborn about your initial experience and accept that this is not a valid fault int he grand scheme of gameplay.
*When your team is steam rolled you should ask yourself whether it was your teams class make up, skill or experience on the map first: Some players will have more knowledge than you to exploit and that is not the maps fualt.
Last edited:
Actually I'm pretty annoyed with a "nearly perfect map" getting a solid 10. What would a perfect map get then?
Or the apparent lack of playtime on some of these maps. Or certain bad maps rating higher than certain good maps. I don't want to name actual maps here, and it isn't just about my own.
If the split is really 40/60 I want that adjusted. Or some of these posts just not counted. I can't believe we trust these people to do anything.
Some voters haven't even played all the maps, according to steam chat chatter.
I think in some places they are trying to rank the maps, or something. There's no other way to examine some of these votes; they're like bell curves. That's not what the votes should be like because 95% of them are high quality.
Or the apparent lack of playtime on some of these maps. Or certain bad maps rating higher than certain good maps. I don't want to name actual maps here, and it isn't just about my own.
If the split is really 40/60 I want that adjusted. Or some of these posts just not counted. I can't believe we trust these people to do anything.
Some voters haven't even played all the maps, according to steam chat chatter.
I think in some places they are trying to rank the maps, or something. There's no other way to examine some of these votes; they're like bell curves. That's not what the votes should be like because 95% of them are high quality.