So help me out here...

[gimil]

Nice start tom another little tweek:

All maps start life in the foundry as an idea in the "Map Ideas" sub fourm. Here is where the maps gain their feet, once they are well on their way in development the idea will be given an [adv. idea] by a CA and will be stickied at the top of the map ideas sub-forum. After they have been assessed by a CA and thought to be foundry-ready, they will be moved to the Main Foundry. To be fondry ready you must abide by all general rules and all standards stated by the map idea stamp.

[TaCktiX]

Aside from some spelling corrections, I think it's fine.

Section 3:

How a Map Progresses Through the FoUndry

"Map Ideas" sub foRUm

their idea stamp (no s)

map's development (missed the apostrophe)

Gameplay is balanced (to be consistent with the Graphics subsection)

you must aCquire the two stamps (saying other than this implies there are more than two)

there is enough support (extra T on enough)

sub forum a map's XML (missed the apostrophe again)

Although there's nothing stopping (another missing apostrophe)

After a map recEIves itS stamp for XML

You have just completeD your map, enjoy!

[wcaclimbing]

Just a few more changes in BOLD.
fixed a few typos, and added a bit more in the middle.

All maps start life in the foundry as an idea in the "Map Ideas" sub-forum. Here is where the maps gain their feet and work begins on improving the map. Once the map is well on its way in development, the idea will be given an [adv. idea] by a CA and it will be stickied at the top of the map ideas sub-forum. After they have been assessed by a CA and thought to be foundry-ready, they will be moved to the Main Foundry. To be foundry-ready, you must abide by all general rules and all standards stated by the map ideas stamp.

[AndyDufresne]

Continue revisions in edited quotes...it makes transfer, once we all agree, easier.


--Andy

[t-o-m]

i think that the map ideas bit is fine now...

i think that we should PM it to a few non-foundry regulars and see if they understand, or if they think there should be any tweaks in it?

[wcaclimbing]

i think that the map ideas bit is fine now...

i think that we should PM it to a few non-foundry regulars and see if they understand, or if they think there should be any tweaks in it?

I've got that covered. I'll post my results as soon as I get a PM back.
I know a few people out there that would be willing to help.
I'll send them a link to gimil's "how to make a map" post, and see what they think about it.

EDIT:
ok, I sent this to a few people that aren't part of the foundry:

If you have some time and are willing to help, the map foundry is looking for opinions from people that usually aren't part of the foundry process.
Apparently, the system is pretty confusing to people that are new to the foundry, and we would like to help fix that.

If you have some time to spare and would like to help out, please go and read this topic:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=40463

Then, write down anything that confuses you in the information on that page and PM it to me. The goal is to identify parts that are difficult for new visitors to understand, so we can then go and fix them so its all easier for everyone to use.

Thanks for your help. It is greatly appreciated.

If you know of anyone else that might be willing to give input, send them a copy of that.

[t-o-m]

i think that the map ideas bit is fine now...

i think that we should PM it to a few non-foundry regulars and see if they understand, or if they think there should be any tweaks in it?

I've got that covered. I'll post my results as soon as I get a PM back.
I know a few people out there that would be willing to help.
I'll send them a link to gimil's "how to make a map" post, and see what they think about it.

EDIT:
ok, I sent this to a few people that aren't part of the foundry:

If you have some time and are willing to help, the map foundry is looking for opinions from people that usually aren't part of the foundry process.
Apparently, the system is pretty confusing to people that are new to the foundry, and we would like to help fix that.

If you have some time to spare and would like to help out, please go and read this topic:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=40463

Then, write down anything that confuses you in the information on that page and PM it to me. The goal is to identify parts that are difficult for new visitors to understand, so we can then go and fix them so its all easier for everyone to use.

Thanks for your help. It is greatly appreciated.

If you know of anyone else that might be willing to give input, send them a copy of that.

pop onto live chat theres plenty of people who would love to help.

[wcaclimbing]

I got one response back so far.It's from Jonny_Bacardi. He read Gimil's "how to make a map" topic. These are the questions he asked in our conversation (but I've edited them to make them easier to understand). The questions he asked might already have their answers in the page, but these were the things he didn't understand after reading through it the first time:

1. In map ideas, when making your first post about creating a map, do you want a rough draft image, or just the idea, since its the "Map Ideas" forum?

2. So, you get some stamps, and then you make a new thread in a different part of the forum?

3. When I get a stamp, that means I'm completely finished with something, and I don't have to change anything after that?

4. How do you decide if you want to make a small map or a large map?

5. Which CA gives out each stamp?

6. "A map should be inherently unique either in gameplay, location, or theme"

A. What makes a map "unique"?
B. Do I have to make something thats never been done before, or can I re-vamp another idea?

7. "Gameplay features must be compatible with the game engines currently usable XML."

A. What is XML and how do I find out if my map is compatible with it?

8. What incentive do I have for making a map? Do I just do it for fun, or is there some kind of reward at the end?

So, Its a pretty good list, and from looking at the "how to make a map", a lot of the stuff he asked isn't on there.
This would be a good place to start the fixes, so we can at least clean up some things.
I'm not even sure of the answers to questions 6A or 8.....

[InkL0sed]

Well, 8 is easy. It's for fun.

Although I believe there is a map making medal now...

[wcaclimbing]

OFFICIAL how to make a map

Title Requirements
1. The page with the latest development of production. (I.E. ‘Update – Pg 3')
2. No use of [brackets]: use (parentheses), --dashes--, or “quotes” instead.
3. For every stamp you recieve the appropriate tag should be included in the title. [I, Gp, Gr, X]

I = Idea
Gp = Gameplay
Gr = Graphics
X = XML

Information Requirements on the first post of a maps thread
1. The number of territories currently on the map.
2. The number of continents. (If this makes sense for your map)
3. Descriptions of any unique features or areas.

I think this could be re-organized to make it easier to understand, and much more simple for people to find what they want and figure it out.
Something like this:

The First Post in your Map Thread
In the first post of your map thread, the development process will be most efficient if follow these guidelines:
Title of Topic:

Do include:

1. The title of your map.
2. The page with the latest development of production. (I.E. 'Update on Page 3')
3. The date that the most recent update was made.
4. For every stamp you recieve, the appropriate tag should be included in the title. [I, Gp, Gr, X]

I = Idea
Gp = Gameplay
Gr = Graphics
X = XML

Don't include:

1. Don't use [brackets]: use (parentheses), --dashes--, or “quotes” instead.
2. Don't write in ALL CAPS. It's just annoying, and not at all necessary.

Example Topic Title: ---Oasis--- Updated June 3rd (on pages 1 and 23) [I, Gp, Gr, X]

The First Post:

Do include:

1. The most recent graphical update of your map (a simple rough draft/representation is OK in the early stages of mapmaking. Just provide some kind of image to show what the map is like)
2. Links to previous updates of the map graphics.
3. The number of territories on your map.
4. The number of continents or bonuses that are on the map.
5. An explanation of any special features included in the map.
Don't include:

1. Just use your best judgment here. Include all the information you need, but keep it simple and concise. No need for paragraphs of explanations here.

Do you guys like that any better?
I think it would make it much easier to understand using this new version.

Feel free to quote that and edit it, if you see any changes that should be made.

[Ethitts]

Hey everyone, I'd like to add a comment which will hopefully be helpful. Recently I have started having a go at creating maps, but before I did I read through the "how to make a map handbook" and I understood it clearly. The following posts about the stamps doesn't seem right to me though. For my current map (and other maps in the forum that I have been following), it seems they meet the criteria for the first stamp:

The ideas stamps is required for a map thread to be moved from the ideas forum to the main foundry. To earn this stamp you must meet the following conditions:

1)The map, first and for most, must have some sort of clear plan of how production will go

2) Have a playable image. If we quenched it people should be able toplay on it. Ths should included the following:

* Territory names
* Working legends
* Speculative Bonuses
* Tentative Border Divisions

3) The working image needs to be beyond rough draft state. This means that you must provide the following:

* A working image done in some kind of graphic software. Pencil drawn images and images done on paint will not be accpected.
* Two quality updates must be provided.

4) Have honest and interested discussion. Not just you and three friends.

But they don't get the idea passed stamp. So obviously I'm not understanding something here or the criteria for the idea stamp is more than what's listed in that post. (I haven't really looked at the criteria for the other stamps as I'm obviously not up to that part in my map yet, so this isn't meant to be a stab at the person who made this post).

[wcaclimbing]

Thanks for the post, Ethetts.
I agree, the requirements for that stamp do seem kinda off.
I'll look into rewriting that section either tonight or tomorrow.
Is there anything else you have had difficulty with that would have been solved by a clearer explanation in the handbook?

[Ethitts]

Thanks for the post, Ethetts.
I agree, the requirements for that stamp do seem kinda off.
I'll look into rewriting that section either tonight or tomorrow.
Is there anything else you have had difficulty with that would have been solved by a clearer explanation in the handbook?

No I think I understand everything else clearly.

[AndyDufresne]

Glad to see some good coming out this all. I'll take a look at everything tomorrow when it is not late.


--Andy

[hulmey]

LOL, this is an interesting thread so ive decided to throw my rubbish chit chat in. Firstly, the foundry will never be able to draw in the amount of people or interest from other forum's. One players hardly have an interest in how maps are made and 2 the elisit views of a few map makers here (some of you are abit like chef's). This was quite evident with the classic and british isles fiasco.

I really like the way the new stamp thing has been implemented because it gives the map maker a sense of achievement and motivation. The only problem i see with this is that the CA's without wanting are not letting some map makers take the direction they want to go. Espically the new ones (mapmakers) who feel that they must implement whatever the CA says. This ineffect shapes the map into the CA's map.

Finally, I dont think there is basis towards map makers just that the older map makers know the system, have the talent and mostly listen. However, from another viewpoint how the hell did Cairn's latest map get passed the foundry. gameplay was completely riddled, almost flawed!! hmmm, could there be basis in the map foundry after all!?!?!

[gimil]

I really like the way the new stamp thing has been implemented because it gives the map maker a sense of achievement and motivation. The only problem i see with this is that the CA's without wanting are not letting some map makers take the direction they want to go. Espically the new ones (mapmakers) who feel that they must implement whatever the CA says. This ineffect shapes the map into the CA's map.

There is no CA here forcing people to take me. oaktown, or anyone elses opinion. The option to reject what we say is there. If someone has a valid reason to not impiment a suggestion I make i wont push it further.

Finally, I dont think there is basis towards map makers just that the older map makers know the system, have the talent and mostly listen. However, from another viewpoint how the hell did Cairn's latest map get passed the foundry. gameplay was completely riddled, almost flawed!! hmmm, could there be basis in the map foundry after all!?!?!

How easy to you realisticly think it is for gameplay on such a complex map to be balanced using thory and guessing what would happen by just looking at the image? SO no I dont believe their is extreame bias opinions within the CA's.

[wcaclimbing]

gonna try and re-do the "general rules" section here.

This is the original version:

General Rules
1. A map should be ‘inherently unique either in gameplay, location, or theme’.
2. Gameplay features must be compatible with the game engines currently usable XML.
3. A maps content must be the original work of the cartographer unless consent to use copyrighted works is gained. This is your responsibility.
4. All sound advice must be followed unless a logical rebuttal by the cartographer or another member of the community is provided.
5. To proceed through the foundry the community must show a reasonable amount of interest towards a map.
6. Host the image using Photobucket.com, imageshack.us, or something similar. The type of image file must be PNG, GIF, or JPEG.
7. For a map to be used for live play the cartographer must agree to the Conquer Club copyright agreement*.
8. All maps should be posted using [bigimg] tags instead of the standard [img] tags when posting map drafts.
9. A map must work within the following map size restrictions:

Here is my new version:

The General Rules of Mapmaking

1. A map should be inherently unique in gameplay, location, or theme.

A map that is very similar to another usually won't be very popular. Try to develop an idea that is unique and different from the rest of the maps that are already being developed/completed.
2. Gameplay features must be compatible with the game engines currently usable XML.

XML is the code that tells the website how the map works. To see a list of the XML features and an explanation on how it all works, [CLICK HERE].
3. A maps content must be the original work of the cartographer unless consent to use copyrighted works is gained. This is your responsibility.

It is best to make your map entirely by hand. If you use copyrighted work from someone else, you need to be sure that you have permission to use that material, or else the map will not be allowed.
4. All sound advice must be followed unless a logical rebuttal by the cartographer or another member of the community is provided.

In the map thread,if someone leaves logical suggestion,you either need to do what is suggested or respond with a logical answer explaining why you wont be doing it. As a mapmaker, you have the right to refuse any suggestion that isn't backed up with a logical explanation.
5. To proceed through the foundry the community must show a reasonable amount of interest towards a map.

If no one is there supporting your map, it won't move forward through the foundry. You need to have some support from the community to move your map forward and to develop it.
6. Host the image using Photobucket.com, imageshack.us, or something similar. The type of image file must be PNG, GIF, or JPEG.

Thats the easiest way to get the image here for everyone to see.
7. For a map to be used for live play the cartographer must agree to the Conquer Club copyright agreement*.

Scroll farther down this page to see it.
8. All maps should be posted using [bigimg] tags instead of the standard [img] tags when posting map drafts.

[bigimg] allows large images to be posted on the forums. Clicking the image brings it up to full size. Regular [img] tags won't hold large images.
9. A map must work within the following map size restrictions:

-updated to include quert's suggestion.

I'll add the size restrictions section later.
Do you like this one?

[gimil]

When making the handbook my key goal was to ensure that it was a short but informative as possible. Adding extra information is something I would like to restrict unless absolutly nessesary. The less me folk have to read the better.

Maybe rather than rewritting the handbook we can make something new. Like the map makers bible? Where everything can be explained in long posts.

[wcaclimbing]

When making the handbook my key goal was to ensure that it was a short but informative as possible. Adding extra information is something I would like to restrict unless absolutly nessesary. The less me folk have to read the better.

Maybe rather than rewritting the handbook we can make something new. Like the map makers bible? Where everything can be explained in long posts.

I've seen people have trouble with rules 1, 2, 4, and 5, all just recently.
I think adding that little bit of information would be enough to clear up any questions that anyone might have, no matter how new or old they might be in the foundry.

[Qwert]

4. All sound advice must be followed unless a logical rebuttal by the cartographer or another member of the community is provided.

In the map thread, if someone leaves a suggestion, you either need to do that suggestion, or respond with a logical answer explaining why you won't be using that suggestion.

I belive that must be change these a little.
-In the map thread,if someone leaves logical suggestion,you either need to do that sugestion,or respond with a more logical answer explaining why you wont be using that suggestion-
Why these,because in last several post,i get sugestion like"i feel that you must change these,but i can not explane how"
I also think that that you can add-

Map maker can refuse all sugestion who dont have more valid explanation-

[gimil]

qwerts i WOULDNT classsuch feedback asa reasonable suggestion. BUT a reword of the rebuttel rule may benefit everyone.

[DiM]

has anybody ever noticed how gimil and qwert seem to have the same horrible spelling? i smell a multi

I belive that must be change these a little.

qwerts i WOULDNT classsuch feedback asa reasonable suggestion. BUT a reword of the rebuttel rule may benefit everyone.

[oaktown]

The only problem i see with this is that the CA's without wanting are not letting some map makers take the direction they want to go. Espically the new ones (mapmakers) who feel that they must implement whatever the CA says. This ineffect shapes the map into the CA's map.

Finally, I dont think there is basis towards map makers just that the older map makers know the system, have the talent and mostly listen. However, from another viewpoint how the hell did Cairn's latest map get passed the foundry. gameplay was completely riddled, almost flawed!! hmmm, could there be basis in the map foundry after all!?!?!

The problem here is this: the CAs (myself, gimil, coleman if/when he returns to his post) are human beings. I know, I know, sometimes it would seem as if we are supernatural beings with unearthly minds and talents, but in reality we have all of the same flaws as the rest of you; for instance, some of us can't spell.

This reason this is important to point out is that, as humans, we do the following:
1) We make mistakes. One example of an oaktown mistake would be the Schloss map, in which I didn't catch the problem that would arise in two/three players games with the artillery guns. But nobody else caught it either, so I'm not beating myself up over it.
2) Whether we intend to or not, we are subjective. When I look at a map that I think looks like ass I am going to be less enthusiastic about stamping it, and I'm also going to be more likely to to dish out some of those "tough love" posts that we tend to shy away from because it is in my best interest to see bad projects die. Seeing bad projects die is in my best interest because...
3) We have a finite amount of time to devote to this. I don't have a couple of hours to devote to a bad map every week. I have to figure out how to allot my limited time, and I'd rather pour more of it into projects that I think have a chance. That's why I don't spend a lot of time in Ideas (gimil's domain, and I trust him in there) and why I've begun taking on deputies to free me of having to follow each and every map thread.

I don't want to be the foundry bad guy, and I don't want to get run out of town like poor Keyogi was, so I've got to figure out how to walk the fine line between being too nice (which would be ineffective) and too strict about the rules. If rewriting the rules a bit makes my life easier, I'm all for it.

[Qwert]

by gimil on Wed Jun 11, 2008 2:16 pm

qwerts i WOULDNT classsuch feedback asa reasonable suggestion. BUT a reword of the rebuttel rule may benefit everyone.

[wcaclimbing]

4. All sound advice must be followed unless a logical rebuttal by the cartographer or another member of the community is provided.

In the map thread, if someone leaves a suggestion, you either need to do that suggestion, or respond with a logical answer explaining why you won't be using that suggestion.

I belive that must be change these a little.
-In the map thread,if someone leaves logical suggestion,you either need to do that sugestion,or respond with a more logical answer explaining why you wont be using that suggestion-
Why these,because in last several post,i get sugestion like"i feel that you must change these,but i can not explane how"
I also think that that you can add-

Map maker can refuse all sugestion who dont have more valid explanation-

Thanks quert, I edited the previous post.
It now says this:

4. All sound advice must be followed unless a logical rebuttal by the cartographer or another member of the community is provided.

In the map thread,if someone leaves logical suggestion,you either need to do what is suggested or respond with a logical answer explaining why you wont be doing it. As a mapmaker, you have the right to refuse any suggestion that isn't backed up with a logical explanation.

better?