Conquer Club

thenobodies80: I would sign all of that.

Shame, and I'm not trying to blame you for that, that this sort of constructive criticism has not been here before!

thenobodies80 wrote:Hope you get what I mean, if you need help to develope a better map just let me know, send me a pm and I'll be here asap and I'll give you all the necessary support to create a novel map. Just I won't support your current layout because it's not so funny as you think, just that.
Remember I'm not trying to bin your idea, just trying to push it to a higher level.
Nobodies

Thanks for your latest post Nobodies. I appreciate your openness. After the initial feedback I did wonder if I made the map into a cow island, rather than a real cow it my solve a few of the issues that some people are having with it. I think I'll take you up on your PM offer and through some ideas your way.

Best Wishes,
Dana

dana1971 wrote:After the initial feedback I did wonder if I made the map into a cow island, rather than a real cow it my solve a few of the issues that some people are having with it.

Don't wonder.....do it!

I had planned to create a map myself, but reading all this makes me so NOT want to go there. Here is somebody giving up his own time to put his heart and soul in to a map. What happens? He gets blown out of the water. Nice way to get more people to put time and effort in.

wiekl wrote:I had planned to create a map myself, but reading all this makes me so NOT want to go there. Here is somebody giving up his own time to put his heart and soul in to a map. What happens? He gets blown out of the water. Nice way to get more people to put time and effort in.

I wouldn't judge the Map Foundry as a whole because of your perception of this topic. I may not agree with the posters who think this map is too novel, etc, but I understand we're all on the same team creating maps for fun play.

There are a lot of success stories in the Foundry---200 maps of success stories with 90 individuals creating maps, and with countless more untallied who simply give their input during the development process.

This is all a discussion for another topic.

=====

Back on topic, I still like the idea, but I am open to experimentation to see a Cow Island or whatever the heck was mentioned earlier.


--Andy

wiekl wrote:I had planned to create a map myself, but reading all this makes me so NOT want to go there. Here is somebody giving up his own time to put his heart and soul in to a map. What happens? He gets blown out of the water. Nice way to get more people to put time and effort in.

Sorry, but that's just not how it works... The cold, hard truth is that the amount of time you put in your work, the amount of "heart and soul" you put in it does not matter. It doesn't matter at all if your work doesn't meet the quality standards of the foundry.

The foundry does not exist to accommodate the feelings of the mapmakers - the foundry exists to provide the best possible maps, and sometimes that requires criticism, even harsh criticism. Someone who aspires to be a mapmaker needs to be able to cope with criticism, and to co-operate with the foundry community. This is going to sound harsh, but if one is not capable of that, then we don't need them as a mapmaker.

I'm not trying to paint a bleak picture here, though - mapmaking can be a lot of fun as well. It just isn't a thing where you can do what you want, and freely express your artistic vision - it's more a collaborative process, one where you have to make compromises, and listen to all the feedback and criticism and then go and make your work better. It's a process that pushes you to do the best you possibly can, to produce the best possible maps for CC. And that is something the foundry is not going to compromise on.

Also, what Andy said.

This may have been said before, but I think making the map an island is a bit ridiculous. It takes away from a really neat idea.
The attacking lines follow a nice logic that you'll lose if it becomes a weirdly-shaped island.

I don't really see what's the problem with just having a cow, I love the 'different' maps. Do the folk who decide this think that ONLY war-obsessives enjoy CC? Taking the folk I know who play, I'd say the majority aren't too bothered about history / war, they just love strategy and gameplay.

It feels a bit like CC isn't being allowed to naturally evolve. Surely, a good way to decide on maps in the long run is to look at popularity. I know that the people who run CC put an enormous amount of effort into it. But the site also relies on user-generated content, so it makes sense to me work this way.

So I say, try it out!

andrewpearce44 wrote:I don't really see what's the problem with just having a cow,

Don't have a cow, man. Had to be said...

The problem is that there's no theme in it. If we start making maps about whatever, what's next? Should we allow maps about sperm cels conquering an egg? Should we allow maps about computer keyboards or the anatomy of the spleen or what, anything goes?

There are some standards for maps at CC, one of which is that a map needs to have a viable theme. A viable theme is something that makes some sense in the framework of the gameplay mechanics of CC.

andrewpearce44 wrote:I don't really see what's the problem with just having a cow, I love the 'different' maps. Do the folk who decide this think that ONLY war-obsessives enjoy CC? Taking the folk I know who play, I'd say the majority aren't too bothered about history / war, they just love strategy and gameplay.

That's a strawman argument. No one is saying that all maps need to be war maps, in fact there are plenty of maps on CC that have nothing to do with war. That's not the issue here. The issue is that this map has no real substance to it - it's just a cow. There's no story to the gameplay, there's no context for the gameplay - for what the players are playing for. For example, in a regular geographical map, the players can be generals of armies which fight over that particular country. On a map about baseball, the players can be baseball teams playing against each other. On a map about outer space, the players can be civilizations looking to colonize planets, and so on.

When the map is "just a cow", there's no such context for the players, there's nothing for the players to identify with. There's no purpose or goal for the game they're playing, it becomes just an excuse to compete, and if that were enough, all maps could be like the old Classic Shapes - generic representations of gameplay with no substance or theme in them... but that would make CC a boring site.

andrewpearce44 wrote:It feels a bit like CC isn't being allowed to naturally evolve.

That's right, because CC is not an independent, conscious organism. CC doesn't just spontaneously evolve. It's up to the volunteers in the community (ie. mapmakers, in this case) and the appointed volunteer staff (ie. the cartography team) to guide the direction to which CC "evolves".

natty_dread wrote:

andrewpearce44 wrote:I don't really see what's the problem with just having a cow,

Don't have a cow, man. Had to be said...

The problem is that there's no theme in it. If we start making maps about whatever, what's next? Should we allow maps about sperm cels conquering an egg? Should we allow maps about computer keyboards or the anatomy of the spleen or what, anything goes?

There are some standards for maps at CC, one of which is that a map needs to have a viable theme. A viable theme is something that makes some sense in the framework of the gameplay mechanics of CC.

andrewpearce44 wrote:I don't really see what's the problem with just having a cow, I love the 'different' maps. Do the folk who decide this think that ONLY war-obsessives enjoy CC? Taking the folk I know who play, I'd say the majority aren't too bothered about history / war, they just love strategy and gameplay.

That's a strawman argument. No one is saying that all maps need to be war maps, in fact there are plenty of maps on CC that have nothing to do with war. That's not the issue here. The issue is that this map has no real substance to it - it's just a cow. There's no story to the gameplay, there's no context for the gameplay - for what the players are playing for. For example, in a regular geographical map, the players can be generals of armies which fight over that particular country. On a map about baseball, the players can be baseball teams playing against each other. On a map about outer space, the players can be civilizations looking to colonize planets, and so on.

When the map is "just a cow", there's no such context for the players, there's nothing for the players to identify with. There's no purpose or goal for the game they're playing, it becomes just an excuse to compete, and if that were enough, all maps could be like the old Classic Shapes - generic representations of gameplay with no substance or theme in them... but that would make CC a boring site.

andrewpearce44 wrote:It feels a bit like CC isn't being allowed to naturally evolve.

That's right, because CC is not an independent, conscious organism. CC doesn't just spontaneously evolve. It's up to the volunteers in the community (ie. mapmakers, in this case) and the appointed volunteer staff (ie. the cartography team) to guide the direction to which CC "evolves".

So the alternative is pumping out maps of geographically accurate, but over done, themes? Look, I love your Eurasia map (and mini). They're nice. But we have Eastern Hemisphere. We have a million (+/- a few) USA maps. Europe has been beaten to death. Given time, every geographical region will be mapped, xml'ed and over done.

Let's look at what we're actually doing here. We are playing a game that is independent of the map. Every map can be broken down to it's territories and attacking options. They could all be reduced to a simple grid. I would rather a humorous cow map to indulge in such activities than yet another iteration of Europe/USA/Asia/whatever. It's fun, it works, go with it.

I for one would rather attack and defend steak then another map that includes Asia, Europe, or any of the other 5 continents. Only because I realize that the game I am playing is independent of the map. The map is just a tool to attack/defend. Let it be beef!

Butters1919 wrote:So the alternative is pumping out maps of geographically accurate, but over done, themes?

Strawman argument.

Butters1919 wrote:The map is just a tool to attack/defend.

No, that is exactly what it is not. If that was true, then we could just shut down the foundry and let the players draw their own images, or start producing generic "maps" of stick-n-ball charts with no real content, like the old Classic shapes.

Butters1919 wrote:It's fun, it works, go with it.

It doesn't matter if it's "fun". I could make a map of a bucket of vomit and some would consider it hilarious. But we'll never have such maps on CC.

natty_dread wrote:The problem is that there's no theme in it. If we start making maps about whatever, what's next? There are some standards for maps at CC, one of which is that a map needs to have a viable theme. A viable theme is something that makes some sense in the framework of the gameplay mechanics of CC.

natty_dread wrote:That's a strawman argument. No one is saying that all maps need to be war maps, in fact there are plenty of maps on CC that have nothing to do with war.

Granted, but most maps are about a conflict story, right? To be clear, Prime Beef doesn’t lack a 'theme', its theme is very strong. More importantly, it’s fun!

I see there’s no inherent conflict story, but that doesn't bother me at all. If we had a Sperm + Egg map with excellent structure, I'd play it. It's about having a dramatic, end-to-end game with lots of twists and unexpected turns. Prime Beef would be like that, I think.

natty_dread wrote:When the map is "just a cow", there's no such context for the players, there's nothing for the players to identify with. There's no purpose or goal for the game they're playing, it becomes just an excuse to compete, and if that were enough, all maps could be like the old Classic Shapes - generic representations of gameplay with no substance or theme in them... but that would make CC a boring site.

Players have never needed an excuse to compete! I see that first-time players would benefit from having a clearer, conflict-based narrative, but what percentage of CC players are first-time? My guess would be much less than 1%. The rest are looking for variety.

No purpose or goal? Do you really believe that? Players know exactly what the goal of a map is as soon as they’ve taken their first ever go.

The second part of this comment is a non-sequitur. Players move on from Classic Shapes because they crave variety. Prime Beef is different, players will love it.

Are you saying that the Classic Shapes are poor because they lack substance or theme? How popular is the Classic map?

andrewpearce44 wrote:It feels a bit like CC isn't being allowed to naturally evolve.

natty_dread wrote:That's right, because CC is not an independent, conscious organism. CC doesn't just spontaneously evolve. It's up to the volunteers in the community (ie. mapmakers, in this case) and the appointed volunteer staff (ie. the cartography team) to guide the direction to which CC "evolves".

Understood. This is getting to be another discussion. I believe that although the Foundry is a great resource, it needs to re-evaluate its criteria, think more about what the players want.

andrewpearce44 wrote:To be clear, Prime Beef doesn’t lack a 'theme', its theme is very strong. More importantly, it’s fun!

Yes, it lacks a theme. It doesn't have a context for the players to place themselves in. That's what is required for it to have a theme. Just because there is an image of a cow and all the stuff on the map is cow-related somehow does not yet make a theme.

andrewpearce44 wrote:If we had a Sperm + Egg map with excellent structure, I'd play it.

Well then, I have to say you have pretty low standards.

andrewpearce44 wrote:Players have never needed an excuse to compete! I see that first-time players would benefit from having a clearer, conflict-based narrative, but what percentage of CC players are first-time? My guess would be much less than 1%.

You are missing the point entirely. If the theme of the map doesn't matter, then any map can just as well be a blank piece of paper with generic lines and circles denoting regions. Why bother making any graphics at all? After all, it plays just the same.

There's more to a map than gameplay. We here in the foundry believe that theme is very important to a map. We believe that it benefits the players and gives them a more immersive experience if we provide them with maps that give them something to fight for, some purpose why they are playing the game beyond just "winning" and "getting points".

The rest are looking for variety.

Variety is fine, there is a huge variety of maps in CC already. Compromising the standards of quality to get more variety is not fine.

andrewpearce44 wrote:No purpose or goal? Do you really believe that? Players know exactly what the goal of a map is as soon as they’ve taken their first ever go.

Actually no, they don't. There are lots of complex maps here that baffle new players to the extent that they have no idea what they are supposed to do on them. That's fine, those are better suited for more experienced players anyway.

But you're missing the point entirely again. The map needs a thematic purpose. A reason why you're playing the game. Like when you're playing the classic map, the purpose is world conquest. What could be the purpose when you play on a map of a cow? To conquer a cow, or what? That just doesn't add up.

It isn't enough just to be "funny" or "something different". There needs to be substance, something for the players to fight for, something to make the gaming experience immersive and stimulating.

andrewpearce44 wrote:The second part of this comment is a non-sequitur. Players move on from Classic Shapes because they crave variety. Prime Beef is different, players will love it.

I'm not sure if you've been here long enough to remember Shapes... It was before the current classic map, and it had just a generic image with a ball-n-stick model of a map, with different shapes (circles, squares etc) as regions that were connected by lines. No theme at all, just a generic, bare-bones model of a map.

If the theme or backstory of a map doesn't matter, as you assert, then we might as well shut down the foundry and hire someone to produce similar soulless, storyless, generic representations of gameplay. Sure, they might have great gameplay, they might even be fun to play for some, but it would make CC a very boring and dull site. They would not give you anything more than boring repetition. It'd all be just about the competition then.

Secondly, on what do you base your assertion that "players will love it"? Do you know all the players?

andrewpearce44 wrote:Are you saying that the Classic Shapes are poor because they lack substance or theme? How popular is the Classic map?

Classic shapes was horribly unpopular when it was still in play. No one liked it. They played it, sure, but while playing they kept complaining, "when do we get a real classic map again?" The overwhelming majority like the new (current) Classic map tons better, because it has a theme.

The amount of games played on a map does not necessarily correlate to it's popularity. Furthermore, the popularity of a map does not necessarily mean it's the best quality map out there. The purpose of the foundry is to create quality maps, not to pander to the lowest common denominator.

This is the last time I’ll read this post, I think this is a foregone conclusion by the Foundry, which begs the question, why have a forum?

While I fully agree with most of your points, I think your view of what players want is too narrow.

Also, it seems you and other Foundry members are taking the debate personally, getting riled. Online discussions are a nightmare for this, so I’m backing out now.

natty_dread wrote:Yes, it lacks a theme. It doesn't have a context for the players to place themselves in. That's what is required for it to have a theme. Just because there is an image of a cow and all the stuff on the map is cow-related somehow does not yet make a theme.

We’re talking about the same thing here, I think, just don’t agree. Yes, Prime Beef doesn’t have a conflict based context, but I disagree with your definition of theme.

andrewpearce44 wrote:If we had a Sperm + Egg map with excellent structure, I'd play it.

natty_dread wrote:Well then, I have to say you have pretty low standards.

Come on, try to keep this an adult debate. Besides which, have you played some of the CC maps? The game play on some is appalling! Winning is often more about knowing idiosyncrasies in the over-complex maps, than actual strategy or diplomacy. Why did the Foundry let these maps through?

Worse still is the repetition. You agree about variety, so what went wrong with your selection procedure in the past?

andrewpearce44 wrote:Players have never needed an excuse to compete! I see that first-time players would benefit from having a clearer, conflict-based narrative, but what percentage of CC players are first-time? My guess would be much less than 1%.

natty_dread wrote:You are missing the point entirely. If the theme of the map doesn't matter, then any map can just as well be a blank piece of paper with generic lines and circles denoting regions. Why bother making any graphics at all? After all, it plays just the same.

No, I’m not saying that at all. The map does matter, you just don’t need all of them to be based on a conflict-story.

natty_dread wrote:There's more to a map than gameplay. We here in the foundry believe that theme is very important to a map. We believe that it benefits the players and gives them a more immersive experience if we provide them with maps that give them something to fight for, some purpose why they are playing the game beyond just "winning" and "getting points".

I think you’re speaking only one group of CC players here. Of course, strong conflict stories are great! But they’re not the be all and end all.

natty_dread wrote:But you're missing the point entirely again. The map needs a thematic purpose. A reason why you're playing the game. Like when you're playing the classic map, the purpose is world conquest. What could be the purpose when you play on a map of a cow? To conquer a cow, or what? That just doesn't add up.

This is an impasse. I wouldn’t care about the logic, it would be fun, and I would appreciate a ‘different’ map.

natty_dread wrote:It isn't enough just to be "funny" or "something different". There needs to be substance, something for the players to fight for, something to make the gaming experience immersive and stimulating.

Yes, I get this, and agree. It’s a good criteria in general, but you need to expand your criteria to allow for SOME variety. The randomness / absurdity of Prime Beef is one of the things that makes it fun.

natty_dread wrote:I'm not sure if you've been here long enough to remember Shapes... It was before the current classic map, and it had just a generic image with a ball-n-stick model of a map, with different shapes (circles, squares etc) as regions that were connected by lines. No theme at all, just a generic, bare-bones model of a map.

No, apologies, I didn’t realise there was a map called Classic Shapes. It sounds terrible! But as I said, I don’t think all maps should be like Prime Beef, just some.

natty_dread wrote:Secondly, on what do you base your assertion that "players will love it"? Do you know all the players?

Good point! Although, do you really need to be sarcastic? I know for a fact that you know more about CC players than I do. But I doubt you’ve carried out a proper survey either, about what players want (apologies if you have).

I know about 20 CC players personally, and they would all play Prime Beef, that was the basis of my claim.

natty_dread wrote:The amount of games played on a map does not necessarily correlate to it's popularity. Furthermore, the popularity of a map does not necessarily mean it's the best quality map out there. The purpose of the foundry is to create quality maps, not to pander to the lowest common denominator.

This sounds a bit superior, but I agree with your goal. But consider one final point. Prime Beef looks great, the quality of design is superior to most of the maps on CC.

We've droned on about this for long enough, haven't we? I mean, the Community Manager himself said there's a place for a map like this. I don't see how that's not sufficient approval to keep this going. While I'm not necessarily "ecstatic" about the map, I still think it deserves a go through the Foundry. There are some map ideas that simply have no place whatsoever, but I don't think this map crosses that line.

Anywho, can we get this back to discussing the gameplay/graphics of the map instead of whether or not this is a valid concept?

-Sully

No VS, we're not going to discuss gameplay or graphics untill the previous point, in which i think I found an agreement with Dana1973, is solved.
btw when andy post here is expressing his personal opinion, he is not writing a official statement or this site wouldn't have a community manager and a foundry foreman but just a single role. So please don't speak about things you don't know, it's not the first time i have to say this to you.

As I said previously the map of "just a cow" will go nowhere.

thenobodies80 wrote:No VS, we're not going to discuss gameplay or graphics untill the previous point, in which i think I found an agreement with Dana1973, is solved.
btw when andy post here is expressing his personal opinion, he is not writing a official statement or this site wouldn't have a community manager and a foundry foreman but just a single role. So please don't speak about things you don't know, it's not the first time i have to say this to you.

As I said previously the map of "just a cow" will go nowhere.

I am well aware you are "the man in charge" here, nobodies. I mean to say Andy's comment holds a lot of weight, given his experience as Foreman, and his closeness with lack, as I doubt he would support a map that lack would disapprove of.

And this map is going nowhere because you are making it go nowhere.

-Sully

Andy 's comments have the same weight that anyone else. Again you're assuming things without put in gear the brain. His closeness with lackattack is something not related with this map specially because things related with maps are a thing between Lack and myself, not Andy. In fact, as said previously, Andy is the community manager, not the foundry foreman, when he posts here is just a user to my eyes, nothing else. But obviously I'm not a licker like you.

Victor Sullivan wrote:And this map is going nowhere because you are making it go nowhere.

This is 100% true. And it's supposed to be my job. If you don't like how I do my job write to Andy. Nothing will change anyway, because I do my job in the right way.

Anyway I'm not here to argue with you, I don't have nor I care (afterall you know i dislike your way to think about things and probably there's nothing that can change my opinion about this although i tried more than in a occasion) except that lot of people is really annoyed by your presence.....anyway this totally off-topic and I have more important and usefull things to use my time, more than repeat myself with you.

For now and the time being I'll just wait to see what Dana has to say and how is future update looks like.

Dana sorry for this useless degression in your thread.

Nobodies

I think that dana should now try to develop something in the direction of what you suggested, nobodies.

But, that said, nobodies, I can't understand your commentary towards VC when you didn't say a single thing about the condescending treatment andrewpearce44's intelligent commentary got here. I guess I won't be back to the Foundry for some time, because this really is painful to watch...

J_Indr, please keep coming back. Not all threads are like this. like all people, we can get a bit hot headed from time to time and that may make us a bit OTT. While I agree with both sides of the argument, dana really does need to keep this moving in a direction that has been pointed out to him countless times.

Victor Sullivan wrote:We've droned on about this for long enough, haven't we? I mean, the Community Manager himself said there's a place for a map like this. I don't see how that's not sufficient approval to keep this going. While I'm not necessarily "ecstatic" about the map, I still think it deserves a go through the Foundry.

the vomit map had plenty of support too.
and there are plenty of map ideas that would have tons of support. much more than this cow map.
heck, make a map with guns and naked chicks and 90% of the site population will love it.
if the community would be the only deciding factor then we'd already have maps about invading sperm, keyboards, pianos and all sorts of random absurd things.

Victor Sullivan wrote:There are some map ideas that simply have no place whatsoever, but I don't think this map crosses that line.

and who decides where that line is drawn? me? you? the map maker? nope. the foreman and his CAs. that's their role. they're supposed to decide what gets done and what doesn't. you don't like their decision? no problem express your concern talk to the foreman and ultimately complain to lack. if the foreman goes crazy with power and starts making wrong choices then enough people will complain and he'll be changed. that's how things work.

now, we should all just either let this map die or let it evolve into something acceptable.

First time post for me in the foundry but i am always browsing looking at the maps that are on the way out.

And the reason i have decided to post is to show some support for this map, I actually really like it and would definately play it, and as far as i can see there is a fair bit of support for 'Prime Beef' too.

Who cares if it is just a cow, it is a lovely looking map and Dana deserves to be recognised for his work.

How about this gets a poll in the main forums on whether it should continue, i bet you will be surprised by the results thenobodies

DiM wrote:now, we should all just either let this map die or let it evolve into something acceptable.

Hear hear.

padsta wrote:How about this gets a poll in the main forums on whether it should continue, i bet you will be surprised by the results thenobodies

i want to make a map of jenna jameson. do you think people would vote yes in a poll about this?

DiM wrote:

padsta wrote:How about this gets a poll in the main forums on whether it should continue, i bet you will be surprised by the results thenobodies

i want to make a map of jenna jameson. do you think people would vote yes in a poll about this?

fair enough good point.............


You know Dim i am actually surprised you are so against this map considering the map 'patch wars' you have currentley in beta.

I am not bashing that map i think it is also nice, just wondering why a map of 'just a patchwork quilt' has not had exactly the same problems going through the foundry as this one has,

this is a post by the nobodies a couple of pages back detailing what dana needs to look at and i asked myself the same questions about patch wars,

thenobodies80 wrote:Now ask yourself: Who are the characters in the map? (backstory, why is this map significant or a cool story)
What is your map about?
Where does it take place?
When does it take place?
Why are the events taking place? (again backstory)

When you decide to develope an uncommon map (not a territory/region to conquer like in maps about regions or cities) you should find an answer to these questions or at least there should be something that makes it possible for the future player. (it shouldn't be the same for everyone but there should be an answer)

With your map:

Who are the characters in the map? (backstory, why is this map significant or a cool story) Zero
What is your map about? A cow
Where does it take place? In a cow? In a butcher shop? No sense if there's no reference on the map.
When does it take place? Probably not necessary if you find the right place to set it into
Why are the events taking place? (again backstory) No answer, just fighting in a cow right now

and as far as i can see patch wars answers these just as badly as prime beef does, how come 1 map is allowed and the other isn't

padsta wrote: how come 1 map is allowed and the other isn't

i don't know, maybe because in patch wars i actually created something. a setting. a micro universe of a child that gets some buttons and toys and plays on a quilt. maybe some people already identified that setting with their inner child or even some old memories. i know for sure i used to play with toy soldiers on the quilt that layed on my bed. i used to make folds and creases and pretend they were trenches and hills.

a map with toy cars on a carpet with streets made of pencils and rulers would also be a silly map but would be accepted because again it's not something arbitrary like a cow, it's something that, for lack of a better word, has soul.