I want some representation from each team. Not necessarily the founders, but people that will hold an intelligent discussion about the map rotation. I would like to hold this ASAP. Right now the rotation is a bit of a joke, and needs to be hammered out once and for all.
Looking at the maps that have been added, removed, and changed thus far, it's fairly obvious to me that the community as a whole has no idea what they want.
I want some representation from each team. Not necessarily the founders, but people that will hold an intelligent discussion about the map rotation. I would like to hold this ASAP. Right now the rotation is a bit of a joke, and needs to be hammered out once and for all.
Back in the map council days, I was in there 24/7 evening out the views of z0dd. I want in.
Post edited by Kinesthetic at 3/29/2003 12:02:33 AM
I tried to organize a map council and even got a forums, but when I proposed a rotation to the admin(s) after working on it for several days and holding conversations with members of the community (approx 35 total), the rotation was ignored completely and so I said fuck it and gave up because all my work was ignored by a nazi who didn't care what the public thought and only wanted to see the maps he wanted.
The problem w/ the existing system is that the majority determines the entire map list. If 75% of the teams want only small maps, and 25% want only large maps, ALL of the maps will be small. It would be more reasonable to have 75% small maps and 25% large maps. Make the distribution of maps match the entire population...not just the majority.
I came up w/ an idea to get a balanced map list. It goes like this:
1. Categorize all of the competition worthy maps (maybe 30-40 maps?). This has already been done for several maps, and was posted in Satoshi's map thread about 3 weeks ago.
2. Determine what percentage of each map category should be used for the list (e.g. 30% open flag small non-vehicle, 10% closed flag large vehice, etc.). I recommend YOU, the ADMINS, determine these percentages -- use your best judgement. I made a graphical way of categorizing the maps, making it very easy to see the distribution of maps -- Satoshi already has this for several maps. I can send it to you if you want.
3. Determine the total number of maps you want to have on the list. Again, I recommend YOU, the ADMINS, determine this. Now, based on this number, and the above percentages, you can determine how many maps you want on the ladder for each category (e.g. 2 small open flag non-vehicle maps, 3 large open flag vehicle, ...)
4. Form a map council to rank the maps from step 1 for each category -- do a vote for this and put the results in a spreadsheet. Highest rank is 1. Lesser ranked are 2, 3, 4, etc. Determine the median ranking for each map. Those maps with the best rank from each category get placed on the map list, so long as you haven't exceeded the numbers from step 3. I cannot stress this enough: Use the median, as it is a more robust index than the mean.
Follow the above steps, and you will hopefully achieve a well-balanced map list. The majority will have their maps, and the minority will have theirs -- in reasonable proportions. I am willing to assist, but the admins need to be the driving force because they have the ultimate authority. Post edited by Captain_Kibitz at 3/29/2003 2:57:45 AM
The problem w/ the existing system is that the majority determines the entire map list. If 75% of the teams want only small maps, and 25% want only large maps, ALL of the maps will be small. It would be more reasonable to have 75% small maps and 25% large maps. Make the distribution of maps match the entire population...not just the majority.
I came up w/ an idea to get a balanced map list. It goes like this:
1. Categorize all of the competition worthy maps (maybe 30-40 maps?). This has already been done for several maps, and was posted in Satoshi's map thread about 3 weeks ago.
2. Determine what percentage of each map category should be used for the list (e.g. 30% open flag small non-vehicle, 10% closed flag large vehice, etc.). I recommend YOU, the ADMINS, determine these percentages -- use your best judgement. I made a graphical way of categorizing the maps, making it very easy to see the distribution of maps -- Satoshi already has this for several maps. I can send it to you if you want.
3. Determine the total number of maps you want to have on the list. Again, I recommend YOU, the ADMINS, determine this. Now, based on this number, and the above percentages, you can determine how many maps you want on the ladder for each category (e.g. 2 small open flag non-vehicle maps, 3 large open flag vehicle, ...)
4. Form a map council to rank the maps from step 1 for each category -- do a vote for this and put the results in a spreadsheet. Highest rank is 1. Lesser ranked are 2, 3, 4, etc. Determine the median ranking for each map. Those maps with the best rank from each category get placed on the map list, so long as you haven't exceeded the numbers from step 3. I cannot stress this enough: Use the median, as it is a more robust index than the mean.
Follow the above steps, and you will hopefully achieve a well-balanced map list. The majority will have their maps, and the minority will have theirs -- in reasonable proportions. I am willing to assist, but the admins need to be the driving force because they have the ultimate authority.
That is basically the plan. Categorizing maps, and then following an outline for the rotation. As for everything else, we need teams to get their reps chosen, so we can get started on this. I think I'm going to say we should start Monday. Whoever doesn't have a rep by then, too bad. -------------
The problem w/ the existing system is that the majority determines the entire map list. If 75% of the teams want only small maps, and 25% want only large maps, ALL of the maps will be small. It would be more reasonable to have 75% small maps and 25% large maps. Make the distribution of maps match the entire population...not just the majority.
I came up w/ an idea to get a balanced map list. It goes like this:
1. Categorize all of the competition worthy maps (maybe 30-40 maps?). This has already been done for several maps, and was posted in Satoshi's map thread about 3 weeks ago.
2. Determine what percentage of each map category should be used for the list (e.g. 30% open flag small non-vehicle, 10% closed flag large vehice, etc.). I recommend YOU, the ADMINS, determine these percentages -- use your best judgement. I made a graphical way of categorizing the maps, making it very easy to see the distribution of maps -- Satoshi already has this for several maps. I can send it to you if you want.
3. Determine the total number of maps you want to have on the list. Again, I recommend YOU, the ADMINS, determine this. Now, based on this number, and the above percentages, you can determine how many maps you want on the ladder for each category (e.g. 2 small open flag non-vehicle maps, 3 large open flag vehicle, ...)
4. Form a map council to rank the maps from step 1 for each category -- do a vote for this and put the results in a spreadsheet. Highest rank is 1. Lesser ranked are 2, 3, 4, etc. Determine the median ranking for each map. Those maps with the best rank from each category get placed on the map list, so long as you haven't exceeded the numbers from step 3. I cannot stress this enough: Use the median, as it is a more robust index than the mean.
Follow the above steps, and you will hopefully achieve a well-balanced map list. The majority will have their maps, and the minority will have theirs -- in reasonable proportions. I am willing to assist, but the admins need to be the driving force because they have the ultimate authority.
wut he said... sounds intelligent... not going to bother reading it.
motherfucking add SB and RC plz, oh yeah and SH but that might already be on there, but I dunno, I might not even be playing T2 anymore... Post edited by Golbez at 3/29/2003 10:29:59 AM
What you need are even-handed people that will make sure to represent each "style" correctly. I mean, for fuck's sake, it's not hard to come up with a good map list that caters to every player's style, from large z0dd-like v-maps to tiny clusterfests.
Get together for a few hours in IRC, hammer our a map list, and go with it.
This is by means not a complete list but should help with some with trying to figure out what maps are what. I keep meaning to expand this to include all the maps and info but havent quite got there yet.
Yes, the few should talk for the many. This is not a true democracy, so short of elected officials we need to pick people that in our mind will represent the "will of the people".
You need people that will recognize that a map list should not be all Minotaurs, or all Reversions, but a healthy mix of all maps. Put a map list up to a vote, and you're gonna see the most ridiculous shit ever.
Originally posted by: -Hyde
and the few should not speak for the many...
not when the vast majority of the many have little to no idea what they're talking about. you and a couple others of course are the exception i'm sure though, right?
I think the more maps the better, only reason NOT to have a map available is if there is a bug/flaw in the map (example : Firestorm is a fun map , but tends to get clogged by all the action in 14 man..better suited for 7man) ... or if its just impossible to score on (like Recalescence)
For example, i dont care for Death Birds Fly, but if it comes up i'll play it. In a smaller map rotation, the more likely though it is to pop up. To me playing different maps is more fun then the same 2or3 maps over and over.
Btwn Base, Xpack2, and Classic maps the only ones i see problems with are :
archepelgio- too much water.
Astrogrbber - bad terrign.
dust 2 dust- indoor flag+spawn
firestorm - as mentioned above machine is bogged down.
gorgon - *untested but seems similiar to D2D
lakefront - too much water - vehicle dependant
recalasence- flag to far inside.
thin ice - bad terriegn, flag indoors + spawn
maps i'm not crazy about.. but not impossible:
(maybe have them weigh less in popping up)
tombstone
hydro-electric
erubus
reversion
death birds fly Post edited by pray4mojo at 3/29/2003 3:58:37 PM
It doesnt matter what maps are picked, some people are going to be disappointed. So it should at least appear to be a fair system. Maybe interested reps from teams on the ladder, max 1 per team. That way teams that dont care wont have input, and those that do, will. Vote amongst those after discussion. Can't vote if not at meetings, etc....
It doesnt matter what maps are picked, some people are going to be disappointed. So it should at least appear to be a fair system. Maybe interested reps from teams on the ladder, max 1 per team. That way teams that dont care wont have input, and those that do, will. Vote amongst those after discussion. Can't vote if not at meetings, etc....
That's basically what the deal is going to be. -------------