Foundry Death?

[Coleman]

In the interest of saying this quickly and with no regard to tact at all, DiM, lack has stuff that matters more he was busy doing. So give it a rest.

The play testing area has concerns we haven't agreed on. Mostly the idea that if it is too user friendly people could just make and play infinite maps and maps we'd never allow regardless of status or payment for no points. If we add it you'll likely need moderator help to use it.

don't worry about tact mate. i can take any blow.
i know lack has stuff to do stuff more important than a play testing area or xml updates and i totally understand and don't blame him. it's normal to solve current bugs before adding some new content that might bring other bugs.
i wasn't trying to blame lack i was just trying to explain what's going on.

Save the longer post and make a blanket out of it.

i won't make a blanket or a carpet or stuff like that because the post wasn't about this but rather about foundry etiquette.

This I can work with. We do understand it's been forever already.

Unfortunately I don't see what's going to get it done faster unless we just flat out rush it, and I'm in favor of good content over meeting community desired deadlines.

EDIT: Without quoting I actually agree with everything in that post.

[oaktown]

I think Civil War and Puget turned out well. Spaceness may be a problem, but I kind of knew that at the time, I was just at a loss as to what to advise about it.

Civil War and Puget turned out beautifully, but the best work was done after the maps reached the Forge. Neither met what I would consider to be graphics standards - pixelly borders, bad colors, etc.

[AndyDufresne]

A lot of behind the scenes events are going in...in regards to the Foundry. Expect to see a couple of new things within the next week. And really all throughout the month. Things take time to be 'created', for lack of a better word, and we can't 'create' things magically.


--Andy

[Lone.prophet]

there is way to much bureaucrazy,

just make clear and not just clear but very clear steps in how the map should roll through the foundry, now it one big mess

do something like

1. idea
2. graphics
3. Gameplay
4. Coding
5. Final touch (testing?)

[DiM]

I think Civil War and Puget turned out well. Spaceness may be a problem, but I kind of knew that at the time, I was just at a loss as to what to advise about it.

indeed civil war turned out great but at what cost? before i stepped in and totally upset elijah the map was a mess waiting to be quenched. i'm willing to bet an arm and leg that 2 more weeks in the forge and that map would have been quenched because nobody was saying anything. is that normal? certainly not.

[rebelman]

I need examples when some of the more observant among us think we moved something before it was ready. All I can think of is maybe Spaceness.

as you were the one that asked though i will use a map of yours as an example factories is in the foundry proper yet at the time it was moved and arguably still it should have remained in map ideas till it reached a particular quality level but it had met the criteria to move so it was moved

crossword 2.0 was another map that hit foundry before it was ready but it had met the relevant criteria to move

2 of the best looking maps in live play are puget sound and American civil war but both of these were final forged before they had reached the necessary level but again they had ticked the boxes so got final forged.

In terms of quenching until a test area is created we will always be stuck with xml bugs but if you had a panel as i suggested above there is no way d day and canada v2 would have been quenched with their obvious colour problems.

I don't mean to single out the above maps I'm just using them as examples to highlight what I'm talking about in response to Coleman's question.

On the flip side some maps which are languishing in map ideas might have progressed further if an expert panel oooked at them WW2 Europe comes to mind as an example of this yes it can't be quenched because of current size restrictions but in terms of quality this map is at least foundry and in my opinion its final forge standard.

[AndyDufresne]

DiM, I'm going to have to call bullshit...and say that it wouldn't have been Quenched. You are valuable to Foundry, but you certainly aren't it's only member.


--Andy

[DiM]

there is way to much bureaucrazy,

just make clear and not just clear but very clear steps in how the map should roll through the foundry, now it one big mess

do something like

1. idea
2. graphics
3. Gameplay
4. Coding
5. Final touch (testing?)

those steps are already here but unfortunately not all map makers and feedback givers realize them. i hate it when a guy comes 2 weeks after quench saying they don't like this or that but even more i hate people that come and yell quench when the map is horrible. such people destroy the foundry.

[Coleman]

Well if more cartos get added I won't feel so stressed with everything and I can actually spend an hour or more going over xml when it is made. Which didn't happen last quench as yeti_c did most of it and I felt he was solid because of who he was. (whoopsie)

A testing area would still be preferable, but I think we have too many concerns still to iron out. All I can think of for sure is that we make it so only cartos can start test games, but right now that's an admin power and they are too busy.

As for WWII Europe, I've been instructed to never move anything that doesn't meat size requirements for large or small. I love WWII Europe, but right now it isn't possible.

[gimil]

I think we need to stop disagreeing with each other and decided what we agree on, only then have we fully identifyed teh problem and we can move forward to discussing solutions.

Lets unite rather than scatter, eh?

DiM your wish list will get here eventually, its not going to be any faster so may i suggest you use your intelect to help with other pressing matters?

It seems we all agree that the current process is only viable if there is sufficent activity in the foundry. To oaktowns point (i think) i dont think the process needs to be chagned, jsut managed a little differently. Coleman and andy should simply make a judgement call on wether a map is losing intrest or discussion has been satisfied.

An expand on the carto's also sounds good more eyes to attempt to keep the process flowing. I also agree on the division of labour while allow different positions to overflow. (Not much more to say here)

Getting more people into the foundry is a must. How we do it doesnt really matter. I personally dont mind 100 people coming and leaving useless comments as long as in the end we up someone some valuable new comers in the end (even if its only 3-4). But how to get them here? Well im not sure.

I think i may have covered everything lol

[DiM]

EDIT: Without quoting I actually agree with everything in that post.

i knew you would

[rebelman]

I think what everyone has to realize...a map will most likely Dwell...perhaps horrendously...in the Final Forge sub-forum until it IS ready. It may be moved there too early for some tastes (or too late for that matter also) but it will stay there until it's ready. Look at Malta, and the other ones that have been in there for a while!


--Andy

andy as i highlighted in my above post maps are getting quenched as well that do not cut the mustard in some key ways and by no means are those the only examples.

[Coleman]

there is way to much bureaucrazy,

just make clear and not just clear but very clear steps in how the map should roll through the foundry, now it one big mess

do something like

1. idea
2. graphics
3. Gameplay
4. Coding
5. Final touch (testing?)

We have... You just may not want to read so much? Which I can understand, there is no way to condense it without leaving things out. I could try an in general one to two sentence for each part thing.

1. Have a working map that meets small or large map guidelines.
2. Maps should be at or above the quality of the latest quenched maps.
3. Maps shouldn't have gameplay that favors luck over strategy. They should be well thought out and willing to bend to the will of the community if they want portions of it changed.
4. XML should be complete and functional. Errors should not be present, but if found corrected quickly.
5. No map should ever reach live play without a play test being conducted or a mock one extensively considered.

[Lone.prophet]

2. Maps should be at or above the quality of the latest quenched maps.

this is so BS, and dont say it isnt

[Coleman]

I think what everyone has to realize...a map will most likely Dwell...perhaps horrendously...in the Final Forge sub-forum until it IS ready. It may be moved there too early for some tastes (or too late for that matter also) but it will stay there until it's ready. Look at Malta, and the other ones that have been in there for a while!


--Andy

andy as i highlighted in my above post maps are getting quenched as well that do not cut the mustard in some key ways and by no means are those the only examples.

I'm going to place that on you not us. We (moderation) like them as they were at time of quench. If somebody didn't they need to show up when we are doing our large/small/xml prodding or earlier.

[rebelman]

grrrrrrr another reason for me to hate the foundry while im in here get involved in this diuscussion i missed the battle royal on canada and i hasd a good feeling about that one

[DiM]

DiM, I'm going to have to call bullshit...and say that it wouldn't have been Quenched. You are valuable to Foundry, but you certainly aren't it's only member.


--Andy

2 weeks of nobody complaining and several people yelling quench and you're telling me you wouldn't have quenched it?

would you have stepped in and said the map was crap?

as for me being a valuable member i have just 1 thing to say. nobody is irreplaceable.

[Coleman]

2. Maps should be at or above the quality of the latest quenched maps.

this is so BS, and dont say it isnt

How can a should be bs? Maps can be a worse quality then the current maps? I don't want to release stuff that we want to immediately turn around and revamp.

[AndyDufresne]

I do have a backbone, DiM. Right above my ass.


--Andy

[Coleman]

I think it's required people go back and read what gimil wrote bottom of last page before continuing this discussion.

[gimil]

Here it is coleman

I think we need to stop disagreeing with each other and decided what we agree on, only then have we fully identifyed teh problem and we can move forward to discussing solutions.

Lets unite rather than scatter, eh?

DiM your wish list will get here eventually, its not going to be any faster so may i suggest you use your intelect to help with other pressing matters?

It seems we all agree that the current process is only viable if there is sufficent activity in the foundry. To oaktowns point (i think) i dont think the process needs to be chagned, jsut managed a little differently. Coleman and andy should simply make a judgement call on wether a map is losing intrest or discussion has been satisfied.

An expand on the carto's also sounds good more eyes to attempt to keep the process flowing. I also agree on the division of labour while allow different positions to overflow. (Not much more to say here)

Getting more people into the foundry is a must. How we do it doesnt really matter. I personally dont mind 100 people coming and leaving useless comments as long as in the end we up someone some valuable new comers in the end (even if its only 3-4). But how to get them here? Well im not sure.

I think i may have covered everything lol

[oaktown]

2. Maps should be at or above the quality of the latest quenched maps.

this is so BS, and dont say it isnt

How can a should be bs? Maps can be a worse quality then the current maps? I don't want to release stuff that we want to immediately turn around and revamp.

It's not BS, but it is problematic because it is arbitrary... does Unit_2's next map have to look as good as Age of Magic (which I like the look of) or Iberia (which I don't like the look of)? There does need to be a set of expectations in terms of graphics quality, and those expectations will constantly change as new maps are produced. Such a set of expectations needs to be developed, and should include text and army count readability, pixelation, color palette, etc.

[DiM]

I do have a backbone, DiM. Right above my ass.


--Andy

and then why didn't you say anything?
why did i have to step in and say what others were afraid to?
why did i have to take the role of the asshole and say the hurting truth?

that map shouldn't have reached the forge the way it looked. it should have stayed in the foundry until it was made better or abandoned. instead you forged it. and in my opinion that was a big mistake because when i came in and said a final forged map looks crappier than a map ideas sketch i was targeted as the jerk of the month despite being right.

and civil war is not the only example of a map getting forged prematurely.

you say that it will stay in the forge for as long as it takes to be quench worthy. that's wrong. maps should reach forge only when they're 99% done. as a map maker i'd hate to see people asking for major revamping if my map is in forge and i'd be less inclined to do it.

[Coleman]

2. Maps should be at or above the quality of the latest quenched maps.

this is so BS, and dont say it isnt

How can a should be bs? Maps can be a worse quality then the current maps? I don't want to release stuff that we want to immediately turn around and revamp.

It's not BS, but it is problematic because it is arbitrary... does Unit_2's next map have to look as good as Age of Magic (which I like the look of) or Iberia (which I don't like the look of)? There does need to be a set of expectations in terms of graphics quality, and those expectations will constantly change as new maps are produced. Such a set of expectations needs to be developed, and should include text and army count readability, pixelation, color palette, etc.

Isn't that what this place is for?

[AndyDufresne]

Sorry, DiM, I'm moving on. We've got better things to talk about. You can argue with the wall if you'd like.


--Andy