AN OPEN LETTER FROM FORGEHUB REGARDING THE 2V2 CONTEST

Discussion in 'Announcements' started by WAR, May 26, 2016.

By WAR on May 26, 2016 at 11:29 AM
  1. WAR

    WAR Cartographer
    The Creator Forge Critic

    Messages:
    1,568
    Likes Received:
    3,893
    AN OPEN LETTER FROM FORGEHUB REGARDING THE 2V2 CONTEST

    As the owner of ForgeHub and the creator of the 2v2 Throwdown Map Contest, I'd like to apologize for the recent events that have come to our attention regarding the perceived mis-management of this contest and would like to address all of the concerns raised with as much transparency as possible.


    WHAT HAPPENED?
    During testing for the 2v2 Throwdown Map Contest, improper testing conditions were applied to the map 'Orxgens', which was forged and submitted by thefro3po. As will be shown later in the article, this was totally unintentional. The judging panel had every intention of applying fair and equal testing conditions to all of the maps that were entered into the contest. Unfortunately, in the case of Orxgens, the version of the map that was tested had been updated after the submission deadline.


    HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?
    Once the submission deadline had passed, all of the submitted maps were saved via 'bookmarks', which meant that updates could be applied to a map file after it had been saved. Furthermore, if a bookmarked map file was deleted by the forger, the bookmark would be rendered 'Invalid'. With no intention of wrongdoing, the combination of these circumstances lead us into our current predicament.


    WHY DIDN'T WE SAVE THE MAPS LOCALLY?
    - With 145 map submissions and 100 local storage slots, we were unable to 'locally' save all of maps onto a single profile.
    - The convenience of being able to 'bookmark' all 145 maps onto a single profile seemed more attractive from a logistical perspective, as saving maps locally would have added a considerable amount of time to the process.

    Despite reasoning that seemed logical at the time, we recognize that this was a poor decision.
    All of the issues we encountered would have been prevented if we had properly saved all of the map files 'locally'. For this, we are deeply sorry. This will not happen again in future contests.


    WAS 'ORXGENS' MODIFIED PAST THE SUBMISSION DEADLINE?
    Yes, Orxgens was modified after the submission deadline.
    Without any intention of wrongdoing, the map used during testing was modified past the submission deadline by the original author. Due to maps being saved via 'bookmarks', all updates applied by the author automatically transferred over to the version we collected. The author updated the map after the deadline in an attempt to address feedback that was posted on his map page which, you can read below.

    Before the Submission Deadline (Midnight of March 1st)

    The following feedback was posted on the Map Thread for Orxgens:
    "I fixed your lighting issues to an extent" - purely fat (March 1)
    "I think you should take the Railgun off a weapon pad and drop spawn it. That many shots is going to break the map in Doubles. I'd also suggest you reduce the amount of lights on your map because you have framerate drops, most noticeably in the space area." - A 3 Legged Goat (March 1)​

    After the Submission Deadline

    The following changes were made to the map by the author, and addressed within the Map Thread:
    "I ended up changing the Rail to three shots, I don't like taking the weapons off of the pads, but not being able to change the amount of ammo is quite the downfall for sure" - thefro3po (March 2)
    "Just deleted a massive amount of lights and re-positioned others." - thefro3po (March 5)​


    WAS THERE EVER A VERSION OF ORXGENS PLAYED THAT WAS MODIFIED BY THE JUDGES?
    Yes. Please read on for the explanation.

    The version of the map that was used during contest testing all the way until the finalists (Top 5) had been solidified was NOT modified by the judges. All modifications and alterations were made by the original author of the map. We've searched through Game History on Waypoint to verify this.

    March 2nd (the day after the submission deadline)
    - There was an unofficial playtest on Orxgens (Waypoint Link). Note that if you look at the top left corner of the map image, it says 'PARALLAX'. As will become evident with the subsequent links, maps show up this way after they've been deleted by the original author.

    March 7th
    - First judging session occurs (Unfortunately, for some reason the Game History on Waypoint is unavailable for a stretch of days in March (Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C, Exhibit D), so there's no record of our first official judging session for Orxgens.

    More Tests on Orxgens
    March 18th - Waypoint Link
    March 24th - Waypoint Link
    March 25th - Waypoint Link
    March 27th - Waypoint Link
    March 28th - Waypoint Link
    March 29th - Waypoint Link
    March 30th - Waypoint Link

    As can be seen by looking at the top left corner of the map picture in each link, the map being used was last updated by thefro3po. The judges did not make any alterations to the map during contest testing. Testing concluded when we reached a top 5 decision on March 30th. One more note regarding this - click This Link for proof that the Game History shows the last person to modify a map as the author (Matclan shows as the author of this map, which was originally forged by Shifty).


    BUT I THOUGHT YOU SAID THE JUDGES PLAYED ON A VERSION OF THE MAP THEY HAD MODIFIED?
    After Orxgens reached a finalist position (Top 5), I was responsible for preparing maps for the 2v2 playlist. We made an alternate version of the map with the Camo and OS placed on Weapon Pads, and found that it played better with those adjustments. I handed in the final selection of maps to 343 with the adjustment I noted above shortly afterwards.

    I had to make adjustments to all of the 2v2 maps to properly hand them off to 343. Maps that go in matchmaking must undergo a series of refinement checks to ensure that the general population will have the best experience possible. That requires a full inspection of the map including other changes such as player containment, name location volumes, decals and other aesthetic touches for player orientation. The changes made to the 2v2 maps in no way impacted their placement in the Throwdown Map Contest.​


    March 1
    - map submissions due midnight
    - Goat recommended to update lighting and railgun (dropspawn) fro3po's map page
    - Match with aPK and Warholic (midnight) - Orxgens (unofficial playtest, not all judges present)

    March 2
    - Chunk bookmarks all 2v2 maps
    - Railgun changed on map by author

    March 5
    - Lighting updated on map by author

    March 7
    - First judging session occurs

    March 30
    - Prepared 10 maps for matchmaking, fine tuning and other necessary adjustments made
    - Top 5 maps established
    - Alternative version of Orxgens with Weapon Pads tested - Waypoint Link

    March 31
    - Maps sent to 343 for playlist


    THE VERDICT
    Since the version of Orxgens used in testing sessions was modified by the author after the submission deadline, we have no choice but to disqualify it from the Map Contest. On behalf of all the judges, we wish to express our sincerest apologies to thefro3po for our failure to properly save your map. We're embarrassed and disappointed at our own lack of foresight, and deeply saddened by the fact that it's resulted in this disqualification.
     
    #1 WAR, May 26, 2016
    Last edited: May 26, 2016
Tags: this article has not been tagged

Comments

Discussion in 'Announcements' started by WAR, May 26, 2016.

    1. Mabolsa Ritchie
      Mabolsa Ritchie
      Wonderd what had come of this comp.
    2. Doctor Squishy
      Doctor Squishy
      Orxgens is still heading to matchmaking right? If so, not everything is bad. Sure he won't be getting money, but he still will get some recognition out of it and the satisfaction of getting a map into matchmaking.
    3. WAR
      WAR
      Yes, Orxgens is still in the running for the 2v2 playlist.
      Xandrith, CL0WN FAC3, Zandril and 3 others like this.
    4. MultiLockOn
      MultiLockOn
      Good write up war. Very transparent of you.
    5. Preacher001
      Preacher001
      Sometimes the Forging community makes me sad.

      I will not expand on this comment.
    6. SecretSchnitzel
      SecretSchnitzel
      Now if we could only disqualify Hangar, as it's a map that's been in the works since Reach, all will be right in the world. ;)
      Xandrith, MultiLockOn and Legion Vs like this.
    7. Dunco
      Dunco
      [​IMG]
    8. Legion Vs
      Legion Vs
      Apologies for hassling you guys on twitter. Had no idea this was happening in the background. Great write up though, thanks for letting us know.
    9. RPAL
      RPAL
      Absolutely fantastic post Warholic. Although I hate seeing someone miss out on a great prize, I truly believe this was the correct decision as it was the only way to keep the contest results fair for all those who participated. I know none of this was intentional and it is definitely not fun for anybody when stuff like this happens. I'm sure it was deserving of its spot before any of this drama.

      With that being said, I look forward to playing on the map in the future 2v2 playlist!
    10. SecretSchnitzel
      SecretSchnitzel
      Personally, I feel the map doesn't belong in the top 10 on merit of quality alone, but that's clearly a difference of preference between myself and the judges.
      MultiLockOn likes this.
    11. a Chunk
      a Chunk
      I just want to say on my own behalf that I echo the sentiments expressed by Warholic.
      As we began investigating the situation, our original intent was to defend the site and the contest, as there had been many accusations made against both. Once the evidence was gathered, any satisfaction we felt after collecting proof that there was no intentional wrong-doing was quickly overshadowed when we realized that the version of the map we had been testing was updated after the deadline. I personally feel a great deal of responsibility for this disqualification. Though we don't know how far the submitted version of Orxgens would have progressed, it truly sucks to know that it never got that chance because of a poor decision that I was a part of making.

      @thefro3po I'm sorry. It's doesn't feel fair that your map has been disqualified despite no wrong-doing on your part. Though I'm sure it's not much consolation, Orxgens was one of my personal favorites in the contest, and I'm really happy to have the opportunity to play it more once the 2v2 playlist debuts.
    12. SecretSchnitzel
      SecretSchnitzel
      Also, for future contests, I highly recommend that you make a rule that stipulates that entries must be named "Map Name - Contest" and keep a version named different for themselves so as to allow them to continue to work on the map separately from the contest entry.
    13. Erk
      Erk
      Chances are a lot more people would be disqualified (even if they were bad maps) if we had a way to look into last modified dates during the contest. Seems like a pretty shitty situation for both sides especially with how minimal the changes were anyway. (well framerate issues should have been obvious to the creator)

      Glad the map is still in the running for MM regardless of this hullabaloo.
      BodeyBode and MultiLockOn like this.
    14. Tom Cinder
      Tom Cinder
      Thanks Warholic and Chunk. I appreciate the transparency and I empathize with the challenges of running such a tournament in the face of an ever-changing forge.

      Might I suggest a bracket-style tournament in the future? Not necessarily for money because a lot of deserving maps might not do as well in such a format, but just for fun. This would provide ForgeHub members with weekly feedback and excitement over current maps.

      Personally, I'd love to see a 1v1 contest. It's my favorite game type and it's the quickest to test. Furthermore, it leaves forgers with a tremendous amount of budget for aesthetics.
      HeX Reapers, Dunco, Xandrith and 2 others like this.
    15. Overdoziz
      Overdoziz
      My map sure as hell didn't make it near the top anyway, but I'm curious if my map Smokestack was 'invalid' as well because the original file deleted itself off my map list shortly (I think) after the deadline.
    16. a Chunk
      a Chunk
      Not sure exactly what your asking here, but I'll answer both possible questions.

      Was the actual map file we originally downloaded 'Invalid'? I don't recall for sure, but I'm about 90% sure we ended up having to re-download your map after the submission deadline, so I think that qualifies as a 'Yes'. (Note - We never went back to check the map thread or Game History for your map to verify this).

      Was the map disqualified because of this? No.
      However, when we were discussing the Orxgens situation internally I did mention the fact that I believed we tested a version of your map that had been updated after the deadline. If it had made it to the top 5 and we subsequently realized that we may have been testing a different version than the one you originally submitted, we would have gone through the same investigation process we did with Orxgens. If it then became clear that we had tested an updated version of the map, then we would have unfortunately had to disqualify it.

      Hopefully that answers your question.
    17. a Chunk
      a Chunk
      "it's a map that's been in the works since Reach"
      You basically just described every map you've ever made, lol.
      Kidding (kind of)
    18. SecretSchnitzel
      SecretSchnitzel
      Except Regret, Twice Forsaken, and Raven's Lair. But yeah, close enough.
    19. ProFessor436
      ProFessor436
      Damn, I missed this competition altogether. When is the next one and how can I find out about others?
      theSpinCycle likes this.

Share This Page