What Are You Working On?

Yes that again, the wording implies that the judges are going to mess with maps freely. That's the vibe I got when I read your phrasing. If you're not even willing to make a case then don't expect me to listen to your opinion. And last I checked the poll was split even with several votes towards "opt in" which implies that we can still edit.

 

I don't have an opinion.

 

Cool then stop posting.

 

Then stop making demands of me.

 

Seriously if anyone really feels that strongly about the way we're approaching this contest, I will actually give you my number and you can call me and make your case. I'm willing to to actually discuss this with anyone.

 

Fine, let's just play it safe... Maps will be judged as is, even if it's only a weapons ammo count ruining the entire experience, it's out for the count.

It makes the process easier on the judges, makes the contestents happier, that should be the end of it.

Idc, i see the pros and cons of both perspectives. I mostly side with judging maps as is.

 

Make the weaponset a big judge criteria and the whole contest collapses. Second round will be near empty. Contest is over. Salt everywhere.

 

I agree with you on the judging/weapons thing. I would go even further and say it'd be like DQing the Subaru because it didn't have a touch screen radio like the Ford.

 

I don't understand. The gametype isn't working? You should just be able to set the type to have magnum primary, and None as secondary...

 

That moment you realize you quoted and replied to a post and there were 200 more posts after that. That was a hard read.

I honestly think you guys are getting a little crazy with this. It's not like you will design a map with a power weapon in a risk reward situation and they are going to delete it and not replace it with something, rendering that part of the map useless. Also, if a map was designed for CQC and only has CQC weapons on it they won't be deleting shotguns and replacing them with snipers for goodness sake. I swear I keep coming to this thread and seeing the stupidest arguments over the dumbest crap. It honestly sounds like insecurities and fear your map won't be picked due to weapon placement. Obviously if you designed a good map and picked good weapons you have nothing to worry about. Just make a good map and quit bitching.

This is an unbiased opinion as I will not be submitting a map. But say I did and look at the scenerio:

Judges: You're map is super good, maybe the best but the Rocket Launcher is OP and hurting the gameplay in various situations during testing.

Me: Oh my, I really liked that weapon and tried to design with it in mind.

Judges: Well we replaced it with Sniper and the judges agreed it was much better.

Me: **** you mother******, that's my **** and I'll stand by my choice no matter how much prize money is at stake!

Nope, gimme my money. You guys are just taking this way too far lmao.

 

Destiny 2 spoilers:











That raid was ****ing garbage

 

I'm sorry but that's a terrible idea imo. Disqualify the best map because of ammo count?...

If we could all just swallow our pride and lose the fear that our map won't win, then we would all agree that we want the best map with the best weapon set right? If I was a player entering a tournament that's what I would want to play on so why wouldn't we let them adjust them on the maps with the most potential to be the greatest?

You can't expect an author of a box with a pillar in the center to actually get mad that Spellbound was submitted and the judges changed a weapon on it and picked it for the win can you? (Just for an example).

Suck it up guys and make the right decision. Oh the butthurtedness of a contest.

 

Dumb or not, that seems to be what the community at large wants. And how most people expect maps to be judged by default, seeing as how that's how it's worked in the past.

I empathize with the concern, as a past contest participant, in maps being dq'd because of easily interchangeable parts. And it's not even just limited to weapons, just changing a small segment of geometry can potentially cause a ripple effect across the entire map changing how it plays, possibly fixing a problem that gets your map dq'd...

The reason i lean towards the 'as is' side of the argument, is because; you simply cannot draw the line when it comes to the amount of how much say a judge should have in changing another persons map. It's safer, more simple, and clear cut. No obscure conjecture, no debates, no participants becoming skeptical of conspiring judges, etc.

Either way, regardless of the parameters, i'll do my very best to determine which maps are objectively better as a whole, and i'm confident the rest of the panel will as well. It's for this reason i can also say that i don't care what happens, despite my disposition.

 

Judges: Your map has a pretty cool layout, but your spawns made the experience far less enjoyable than some other submissions.

Me: Well, can you fix the spawns then?

Judges: Sorry, but we can't make any alterations to the map. What you submit is what we judge.

Me: So, the bad spawns are being held against me, because they are a part of the experience.

Judges: Yes.

Me: Well that's just....rational.

 

Fixed*

By the way, I'm speaking on changing a weapon. I haven't said a word about spawns but there's a difference from deleting a couple problem spawn points than telling the judges to "fix my spawns please".

 

Both sides of the argument make sense. Both possible decisions address existing concerns, but create other concerns.

If no changes are allowed, you eliminate the concern that the judges will alter maps in a way that competitors disapprove of.

If changes are allowed, you eliminate the concern that judges will disqualify your map because they don't like the weapons you placed on it.​

Whichever choice is made, there's going to be a positive and a negative impact.


This is the problem I have with contests, and the reason I can't take them seriously. You can never satisfy everyone. You can never guarantee fair judging, and you can never guarantee that people will see the judging as fair (even if it is).

 

I don't think a map should be disqualified if the judges think it has a broken weapon on it--just lowered in score.

I think a map that would normally receive a B+, but has some "broken" weapon on it, should still receive a fair grade--say a B or a B- perhaps (not that you'll necessarily be grading things on an A-F scale). There are many different judging criteria, which I consider to be approximate to "partial credit;" and having a "broken" weapon is like flipping a sign or putting a number into the calculator incorrectly, I think. Hurts, but doesn't kill.

But I'm not a judge; just giving my 2 cents here.

 

Seeing that I kinda started this mess I am going to say one last thing about it to hopefully get the point across.

I spoke to Multi and NGA on live about this and explained it to them

I don't care what the rules for the contest are. Its a contest and they are the judges. The point I was getting at is, how ever they want to to judge the contest It needed to be agreed upon by all of them and that the rules would need to apply to all maps. Also the contest thread needed to be updated with a disclaimer at the bottom of the judging section. It could say something along the lines of.

*During the judging process, judges reserve the right to move/delete any weapon or spawn that they determine to negatively impact the design of the map.*

Boom Bam thank you mam.

I didn't mean for this **** show to happen and I apologize for the mess it has turned into. I like competing and I just wanted the rules to reflex it.

 

that's what I had, kept spawning into a new game with AR primary and tracker enabled










to everyone else - what are the RULES OF THE COMPETITION, and WHAT ARE THE DESIGN CATEGORIES BEING JUDGED?
figure these out and you can stop arguing