logo

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 185 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:39 am 
General
General
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:06 am
Posts: 421
Location: Erie, PA
I want to apologize, folks, for not taking this discovery more gracefully. I'm already moving on and feeling better, and hope that it doesn't lead to further dispute.

_________________
Christopher West
west@mapsofmastery.com
http://www.mapsofmastery.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:01 pm 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
Okay, the Restricted maplist is what it is, at least until the revision in July, as LoboStele said. I want to thank everyone who was involved in the hard work of testing and re-testing the maps for this FloorRulesUpdate.

And without looking more like a Three Stooges show (all the face-slapping going on!), can I then ask why these two specific maps did not make the cut?

1. Swamp Caves:
-safe melee approach from both sides
-safe setup areas for both sides
-protected gambit
-hindering terrain to limit Yobuck
-a lack of doors, which limits override-abuse squads and helps to balance squadbuilding

2. Offworld Shipping Center:
-safe melee approach from both sides
-safe setup areas for both sides
-protected gambit (you have to get around to the side if you want to shoot into the area freely)
-a variety of approach and attack paths


And furthermore, if those are not in, then how did these get in?
1. Jabba's Palace
-it's a shooter's paradise, with far too much open space on the left side (perfect for mobile shooters)
-significant advantage for the left side with highly-protected gambit, while the right side’s gambit is very vulnerable
-limited attack routes, leading to stalemate situations (ie, player has 1 piece sitting in gambit and the rest of his shooters hanging in the back…the player on the right—already behind on gambit pts—has to step out into a hail of blasterfire if he wants to attack the opponent’s piece in gambit)

2. Bothan Spynet
-too many doors, making it easy to camp
-some very long shooting lanes, making it very difficult for melee to approach (during the MM tourney at Gencon, my Yobuck squad should’ve been slaughtered by my opponent’s Rebel Cannon squad, but he misplayed it)
-very limited approach and attack options


If the Restricted maplist has been decided, then it has been decided. We’ll use it and enjoy it. I’d just like to know some of the thinking behind some of the decisions, please. Thanks!

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:10 pm 
Big Bad Brad
Big Bad Brad
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:14 am
Posts: 5344
Trevor,

You can ask, but if you're looking for me to answer, I'm going to take the Les approach. Otherwise, I'll be at the computer all day for the rest of the weekend as people expect me to defend or argue their favorite maps. My answer above, in response to Aaron's comment, will be my stock answer. Feel free to repeat as needed. Sorry if I come off as an ass in that regard but yeah...

Brad

_________________
"200 or 2"
"Consistency is the key, not crying"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:12 pm 
The One True Sith Lord
The One True Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 2026
Location: Nixa,Missouri
my suggestion is next time there is a person looking for people to help him playtest these maps..... well maybe you should get involved.

this is like not voting and then whining about who won the election.

Brad pleaded more than once for some assistance in the playtesting of these maps. Only David Weeks responded to it.

Now folks want to know the hows and the results. Maybe that question would have been better served during the playtesting instead of afterwards.

Now I never expect everyone to like the choices map when it comes to maps... never have, never will. But I would think a couple of outspoken and well known community members would know that instead asking questions after the fact that maybe you should have participated in the testing and moreso in the discussion. Just like desgining pieces. Playtesting bears more fruit than just discussing a piece. Well we can talk about maps all day long but were you a part of the playtesting these map and trying to break them apart? Because when talking to Brad I got one name other than his and that was David Weeks.... that is it.

_________________
ImageImage
"What is your bidding, My Master?"

Collection: 934/934

SWM DCI Content Manager


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:35 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:08 pm
Posts: 8394
I don't mind saying that I looked at early drafts of a few of Chris' maps, but that said I did not put them through a rigorous battery of tests to determine if they were fine for top-level play. I'm sure Brad, Weeks, and Dean made the best decisions based on testing the maps. Please don't take my comments to mean otherwise. I fully believe - in having discussed this topic with all of you personally - that you want as many maps as possible on the list. NO ONE ever said, Damn I wish we could cut some of these just because...

I understand your frustration, Chris. But honestly nothing is being said here now that wasn't said 3 or 4 years ago. You want to design asthetically pleasing maps and that's great. It's your work and your design and there is an avenue of use for that. It's called the RPG. It's called scenario play. It's called casual gaming.

Personally - and this is just my opinion, I know others don't agree and that is fine - but I think Gambit is the problem with the maps. It's not the only problem, but it probably has the most to do with why your maps didn't make the Restricted list, if I had to venture a guess. There is this expectation of safely reaching the center of the map to score points, and maps (even something like Death Star) that favor a set-up of shooters to draw line down the open middle and cut up everything that tries to get to the center are not conducive to top level game play. If there were a new method of point scoring that negated or ignored Override and other forms of door control without requiring all the pieces be in one central location on the map, a lot of the issues with the maps would go away. I really do believe that.

I hope this is a positive learning experience and that you will continue to make maps for the community. Perhaps putting all your eggs in one basket (ie this could ruin my business, as you said) isn't the best idea. Maybe branching out the map line to reach the SW RPG crowd is a good idea. Minis players will buy your maps for as long as you make them, and they will always have a use in the RPG line.

_________________
Click here to check out all the people who have realized the truth. Someday you will, too.

"I would really, really like to not have anything else happen at the end of the round other than things just ending." -- Sithborg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:42 pm 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
I don't think you can be that dogmatic about it, Dean.

I would've loved to help playtest the maps, but I quite simply did not have the time to do it. Now does my not having the time also make me not have the right to ask questions?

Saying "Waawaawaa, I don't like it" is different than saying, "Can you please explain." I have no right to make the former comment (and I'm not) if I didn't playtest. But as a person who enjoys and plays this game (when I have time), I think I do have the right to ask my questions about decisions which were made and which I will abide by. If Brad or others don't want to answer those questions, that's their prerogative (and I can understand why)...but I'm not out of line by asking the questions.

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:43 pm 
Big Bad Brad
Big Bad Brad
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:14 am
Posts: 5344
thereisnotry wrote:
If Brad or others don't want to answer those questions, that's their prerogative (and I can understand why)...but I'm not out of line by asking the questions.


Cool. Thanks for understanding.

_________________
"200 or 2"
"Consistency is the key, not crying"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:56 pm 
The One True Sith Lord
The One True Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 2026
Location: Nixa,Missouri
thereisnotry wrote:
I don't think you can be that dogmatic about it, Dean.

I would've loved to help playtest the maps, but I quite simply did not have the time to do it. Now does my not having the time also make me not have the right to ask questions?

Saying "Waawaawaa, I don't like it" is different than saying, "Can you please explain." I have no right to make the former comment (and I'm not) if I didn't playtest. But as a person who enjoys and plays this game (when I have time), I think I do have the right to ask my questions about decisions which were made and which I will abide by. If Brad or others don't want to answer those questions, that's their prerogative (and I can understand why)...but I'm not out of line by asking the questions.


Well I think I can be that dogmatic about it.

The reason being Brad took ridicule from members of the community IE Sparks for looking for help.

For over four years going back to the days of being on WOTC we have implored Chris to listen to some advice on how to make a highly competitive map. In four years I have felt like that he has chosen not to listen. That is fine and his right to do so.

In turn it is my right to protect the fairness of competitive play. I find your questions about the maps more ridiculing in nature than a search for answers.

I mean if you cant look at swamp caves minus any doors and not figure out that it is certain death against a lancer squad than I really dont know what else to say. Talk to Urbanjedi about how that would work out if it was legal. He will be more than willing to show you how that would turn out.

I also dont mean to sound rude but I hear a lot of folks tell me they dont have time to playtest the maps but yet I see them on vassal playing games. Why not use a map on vassal and then send Brad some feedback about it. I am not saying you did that but oddly enough when you get on vassal there are tons of community members there playing.... how hard would it be to send Brad some feedback on a map after a game??

No it is just the typical community response I have come to expect. We dont want help you come to your conclusions but certainly reserve the right to rip you apart later for them. Again I am not saying you are doing this.

_________________
ImageImage
"What is your bidding, My Master?"

Collection: 934/934

SWM DCI Content Manager


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:27 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 2:46 pm
Posts: 7960
Location: West Chester, OH (near Cincinnati)
dnemiller wrote:
The reason being Brad took ridicule from members of the community IE Sparks for looking for help.


I think it's safe to say that the members that Brad is getting response from now are NOT the ones that ridiculed him earlier in the project. Please, let's separate the two issues here.

At no time have I EVER tried to diminish Brad's work. Personally though (and I didn't say it then because I didn't want to ruffle feathers), but I think the whole 'behind closed doors' aspect of it was really crappy. To shut out people like myself or TINT because we don't have time to play as many games, or because we can't get on Vassal is really biased in my opinion, and is a waste of people who ARE willing to help. Too many times lately in this community, it comes across as 'help us the way WE want help, or we don't care about you'. That might not be what you intend, but that's how it comes across. Part of being a community is taking everyone's strengths AND their weaknesses, and trying to make it all work together.

For what it's worth, I did give quite a bit of input to this whole thing, as much as I was able to, seeing as how I don't get many chances to play games. I assessed the maps, played through scenarios in my head, worked through issues, counted squares, looked at setup zones, double-checked LOS, counted out deep strike possibilities, etc. To say that work of that nature is less valuable than Brad's is partly true, but that doesn't mean it should be just brushed aside completely. Frankly, I'm getting pretty tired of that approach with the members of this community.

I DID try to help with this whole thing. I offered my thoughts. I've probably played more games on Offworld Shipping Center than any of the other new maps added to the list. It 100% should've been added to the list in favor of several of the others on there....If for no other reason than to at least make an effort to show Chris that we do care about his involvement in the community! I'm not saying to just put one of his maps on there just to please him, but the fact is, Offworld Shipping Center is AT LEAST as good as Spynet and Anchorhead (if not better, IMO). So if that's the case, then wouldn't it have been good to include at least one of Chris' maps? Perhaps you don't feel like his work is up to par, but if even ONE of them is....reward the good behavior. Positive reinforcement always works better than negative reinforcement.

dnemiller wrote:
For over four years going back to the days of being on WOTC we have implored Chris to listen to some advice on how to make a highly competitive map. In four years I have felt like that he has chosen not to listen. That is fine and his right to do so.


To hear you say this.....nearly shatters my faith in you to handle the Floor Rules. How can you possibly say that Chris chose not to listen to the community? He has over and over and over again, with every new map he has created, posted up threads to discuss the maps, and garner input from the community. The fact that he HAS listened to us is VERY evident in his map design. Look at the last three maps of the Mass Transit series, and compare that to any of the ones he was doing shortly before that (Teth, Ossus, Train Station, etc.). The improvement is IMMENSE. Talk about slap in the face, indeed!


dnemiller wrote:
I mean if you cant look at swamp caves minus any doors and not figure out that it is certain death against a lancer squad than I really dont know what else to say. Talk to Urbanjedi about how that would work out if it was legal. He will be more than willing to show you how that would turn out.


Yep, I totally understand Swamp Caves for the Lancer/Yobuck deep strike issue. But on the other hand...I thought that was why we were introducing stuff like the Jedi Seer and the Mando Gunsmith. Yeah, not every squad will do well on those maps. But just like all along with the maps, you have to count on losing map roll 50% of the time. If you build a squad that depends on Swamp Caves, like Jason's double Lancer squad, you have to know that if you lose map and get stuck on more closed in, door heavy maps, you're screwed. Jason's squad ONLY worked well at Gencon this year because he played the absolute crap out it. And even he admits that. So we all know that it's not quite as competitive as the other top builds. So why should a map be excluded simply because of that? I feel that there are enough other things in the game now (Seer, Gunsmith, Jaster Mereel's CE, plus all the other pre-existing counters), that the open map is not so much of an issue.


dnemiller wrote:
No it is just the typical community response I have come to expect. We dont want help you come to your conclusions but certainly reserve the right to rip you apart later for them. Again I am not saying you are doing this.


Of interesting thing to keep in mind here though. You're hearing complaints from one of the ONLY THREE map makers for the community, and then some of the top-end players. Not the typical complainers. And we DID offer to help come to the conclusions. You all chose to ignore the help we had to offer.


Look, in the end, I did think through the post I put up earlier. The only reason why I'm responding with such shock and energy in my posts, is because I am quite simply...SHOCKED! :o

Seriously though...through all the discussions we've had over the last couple years, all I've heard over and over and over again, was general praise for Chris' latest work. Sure, some of them are still more artistic and not as much competitive, but I can't think of any time where I've seen someone accuse Offworld Shipping Center of being abusive. So yeah, I'm being outspoken because I too feel like the rug was pulled out from under me.

I really don't want to point any fingers or claim favoritism in any way here.....but I know for a fact that when Jabba's Palace was being designed, even Bill said he wasn't sure it would be suitable for the Restricted List. So I ask the same question that TINT did.....how did that get on the list when Offworld Shipping Center didn't?

Also, I thought the whole point of having the Floor Rules be updated twice a year was so that we could utilize the Regionals in order to identify any problems in the tournament setting. So if some maps like Offworld Shipping Center or Swamp Caves were marginal, then why not put them on the list for now, and if they do indeed prove to be abusive, take them back off in July. We have that system in place. Why not use it?

Overall, I'm quite happy with the list. Just looking for a little explanation. And yeah, I'm getting heated about it, because as usual, I ask a question, and instead of people being civil and giving an explanation or their thoughts about it, they just get all huffy and say that the rest of us should just take what we're given and be happy with it. Well, I'm letting you know, just like Chris and TINT, that I'm not happy about none of Chris' maps making the cut, and I think it's a mistake (not just because we could potentially lose Chris' support, but simply because I think some of his maps truly are great for Restricted).

Anyways...rant over...

_________________
-Aaron
Mand'alor
"You either die a hero, or you live to see yourself become the villain."
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:47 pm 
General
General
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:06 am
Posts: 421
Location: Erie, PA
It's not my desire to stir the pot further, but I've got to address this comment:
dnemiller wrote:
For over four years going back to the days of being on WOTC we have implored Chris to listen to some advice on how to make a highly competitive map. In four years I have felt like that he has chosen not to listen.

Above all else that has been said in this thread regarding my work, this right here is exemplary of my main frustration with regard to this subject, in this community. It's something I take issue with, and frankly, I feel it contributed to the situation we're discussing.

The only way someone can honestly hold this view about my willingness to listen to feedback and tailor my maps to the needs of competitive play, in my opinion, is if they have not been paying attention. The threads have been many, and productive, and the evolution of my work should speak for itself.

But this notion that I only want to make pretty maps, and that competitive balance is a secondary concern, keeps being asserted by a handful of people. It isn't true--particularly of the maps in question here--but it has been repeated enough that people assume it's true. And in that assumption, their opinion is colored by their expectations.

So, that's the crux of it.

The maps we're talking about today were designed with competitive balance as a top priority, to fit the criteria expressed by many in this community. They were tailored to suit those needs, and as they were introduced, they met with the approval of the folks who set forth that criteria.

If I tried to make championship-quality maps and failed, and was told so at the time, I wouldn't have any basis for complaint today. What prompted my reaction last night is the fact that I was assured--almost unanimously, in some cases--that these maps were successful in this regard. That's what makes this disappointing, and what makes comments like Dean's, above, particularly hurtful.

Feel free to deem my maps unworthy of championship play, but do not pretend that I haven't been listening.

And thank you, guys, for backing me up on this.

_________________
Christopher West
west@mapsofmastery.com
http://www.mapsofmastery.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:58 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:08 pm
Posts: 8394
Chris, I realize you have been far more attentive to community input and have shown off a few maps to make them more competitive.

I respect your decision to make your work your own. I would have the same attitude if I was in your shoes. That said, the trade-off is that without understanding the formula Dean and Brad used to make the maps, you can't blame anyone else when your creative artistic decisions trump balance of form. I do agree with Dean that we don't need another day of Snowspeeder/Teth style squads dominating the entire event. I think the best thing you could do if you want to make a competitive map that makes the cut is to talk privately with Dean and Brad about their formula, and then send them a preview of a map you design. Let them actually play on it before you get it printed for distribution. And if they tell you a certain squad breaks it, then make changes. It's still your own and all you've done by going that route is make it more valuable to have.

I also agree with the comment Aaron made, that DotF was meant to balance out some of the power problems in the game, and honestly I don't think a lot of what we did with that set has yet been realized. There are some hidden gems in the set that are not seeing play, from what I've read online. The game is wide open right now, and I think that is the first time I could ever say that with a straight face.

Please don't stop making maps just because of this, though. I'm getting ready to ramp up my RPG again and I'm going to need some new maps for it. Plus I intend to do some skirmishing and I will definitely be using any and every map I can get ahold of. :)

_________________
Click here to check out all the people who have realized the truth. Someday you will, too.

"I would really, really like to not have anything else happen at the end of the round other than things just ending." -- Sithborg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:59 pm 
Big Bad Brad
Big Bad Brad
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:14 am
Posts: 5344
LoboStele wrote:
I DID try to help with this whole thing. I offered my thoughts.


I read, reread and read again everyone's thoughts as posted in thsi same thread. Fan favorites played a part in the decision making process. Theed was actually one of the lower rated maps for the restricted list. However, a lot of people's opinions were simply that or came off as such. I can' tell one persons experience over another unless it's explicitly stated.

LoboStele wrote:
I've probably played more games on Offworld Shipping Center than any of the other new maps added to the list.


There's really no way to respond to this without sounding (IMO) like a dick, so forgive me in advance. I've probably played more games on Offworld Shipping Center AND any of the other new maps added to the list than you. So my opinion (and again its just that on both parts) is suddenly devalued simply because you disagree with it? That's not really fair.


LoboStele wrote:
It 100% should've been added to the list in favor of several of the others on there....If for no other reason than to at least make an effort to show Chris that we do care about his involvement in the community! I'm not saying to just put one of his maps on there just to please him, but the fact is, Offworld Shipping Center is AT LEAST as good as Spynet and Anchorhead (if not better, IMO). So if that's the case, then wouldn't it have been good to include at least one of Chris' maps? Perhaps you don't feel like his work is up to par, but if even ONE of them is....reward the good behavior. Positive reinforcement always works better than negative reinforcement.

Anyways...rant over..


Ok, so now you're saying I made no effort to include Chris' work? I was 100% behind the idea of trying to include at least 1 map from every map pack etc. Of course, when each of Chris' work is only one single double sided map thats a bit of a stretch. In the middle of all this work, who did what map got a little muddled and became less of a focus. It wasn't until after my list was completed that I was asked how many and from whom/where, that I realized only two made the list from Chris.


LoboStele wrote:
but I think the whole 'behind closed doors' aspect of it was really crappy..


Ok, bullcrap. Bullcrap. I hate to devalue your statement like that, but BULLCRAP. I don't even want to respond to this because I know another admin is going to have to come and edit this.

The real meaning behind this statement is that YOU had no input in your opinion (see above for the truth)! Seriously, I'm really surprised that you would make this kind of statement.

But to actually respond to your criticism in this statement: The suggested map list was posted in the Lansing Tournament thread on Jan 1st (I made sure of that as a promise to Jason) and it was no big secret if anyone bothered to read between the very open lines. Prior to that I had sent the list to Weeks, Nickname and I forget who else, Jonny I think.

Prior to that, when I was reviewing the maps themselves, I would go to whom I considered "squad experts" when I felt a particular squad might be able to abuse a map and I didn't feel like I could give that squad a fair shake.

Oh and let's not forget that it was pretty apparent to anyone on my FB account (which you are) that's Dean has had this list for over a month. I know he and Jonny and Bill poured over it and discussed it. Did you ask to look at it? Apparently not, so the only one who wants to make this a closed door elitist argument is you!

_________________
"200 or 2"
"Consistency is the key, not crying"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:04 pm 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
Okay, Dean you make a fair point: it would not be hard for people to send game/map reports to Brad. I was not trying to cause trouble, and I’m sorry if I came across that way.

I think this is really an issue of communication and trust. I’ll carry the rest of my comments to PM. :)

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:12 pm 
Ugnaught Master!
Ugnaught Master!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:02 pm
Posts: 2948
Location: SW Missouri
I'll chime in with this one little tidbit.

We have community members with sick wives, no jobs, wrecked cars, and whatever else is plaguing our players, and you are all fighting about which colorful pieces of paper we can/can't play on in various tournaments? Real nice priorities!

_________________
That's right, it's always the one in the middle you would least expect to be the most dangerous!
ImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:13 pm 
The One True Sith Lord
The One True Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 2026
Location: Nixa,Missouri
Mapmaker wrote:
It's not my desire to stir the pot further, but I've got to address this comment:
dnemiller wrote:
For over four years going back to the days of being on WOTC we have implored Chris to listen to some advice on how to make a highly competitive map. In four years I have felt like that he has chosen not to listen.

Above all else that has been said in this thread regarding my work, this right here is exemplary of my main frustration with regard to this subject, in this community. It's something I take issue with, and frankly, I feel it contributed to the situation we're discussing.

The only way someone can honestly hold this view about my willingness to listen to feedback and tailor my maps to the needs of competitive play, in my opinion, is if they have not been paying attention. The threads have been many, and productive, and the evolution of my work should speak for itself.

But this notion that I only want to make pretty maps, and that competitive balance is a secondary concern, keeps being asserted by a handful of people. It isn't true--particularly of the maps in question here--but it has been repeated enough that people assume it's true. And in that assumption, their opinion is colored by their expectations.

So, that's the crux of it.

The maps we're talking about today were designed with competitive balance as a top priority, to fit the criteria expressed by many in this community. They were tailored to suit those needs, and as they were introduced, they met with the approval of the folks who set forth that criteria.

If I tried to make championship-quality maps and failed, and was told so at the time, I wouldn't have any basis for complaint today. What prompted my reaction last night is the fact that I was assured--almost unanimously, in some cases--that these maps were successful in this regard. That's what makes this disappointing, and what makes comments like Dean's, above, particularly hurtful.

Feel free to deem my maps unworthy of championship play, but do not pretend that I haven't been listening.

And thank you, guys, for backing me up on this.


I hate to disagree but judging by your facebook post you rely on you to make the maps and that is about it.

Help has been offered and you want to put your own slant on it. Well that is fine but then dont get upset when your slant does not take into account how the game actually plays.

Swamp Caves..... 4 safe squares period.

I am sorry but I have learned that when you allow a less than perfect map on the restrictive list then a tier 2 squad becomes tier 1.

The Lancer which everyone says is tier 2 and is abusive becomes tier 1 when we give it a map in which you literally have an auto win. Next thing I know someone is going to wonder why I did not put mustafar from back int he day on the restrictive list.

@Aaron. I am not sure what you mean by super secretive. But I thought when someone makes a post asking for a committee of players and keeps begging for help from anyone that you pretty much can rule out super secretive as a description.

GLad to hear you have almost lost total faith in my ability to do the floor rules. I will avoid trying to make such slaps at you and stick to the topic at hand.

I am sorry so many people are too busy to help out Brad and in turn myself. But when you are too busy to help please try to find something better to do than to ridicule the people that did do the work.

_________________
ImageImage
"What is your bidding, My Master?"

Collection: 934/934

SWM DCI Content Manager


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:34 pm 
General
General
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:06 am
Posts: 421
Location: Erie, PA
Grand Moff Boris wrote:
Chris, I realize you have been far more attentive to community input and have shown off a few maps to make them more competitive. But, and I hope you don't mind a quote from Facebook directed at some of us in the community, particularly Engineer:

I do mind, frankly, for a few reasons:

First, the quote you selected is taken entirely out of context. It was a very long discussion with a lot of back-and-forth, written candidly on a discussion set to "friends only", in my personal Facebook page, not my public one. I went on to try and explain myself more and apologize a bit further down the thread.

Second, it was written around 4 in the morning on no sleep, when I was feeling extremely defensive and more than a little snarky, and snappish, in response to what I perceived as a suggestion that I should quit designing maps. I was reacting in anger. I'm not proud of it.

Third, that remark accidentally sparked very hard feelings between myself and someone I considered a friend, and I'd prefer not to have a reminder here of my thoughtlessness.

Finally, it doesn't accurately summarize my true feelings about working with others; most of my career has been spent illustrating maps from sketches provided by others, and I don't have any objection to that sort of work, on principle. My point there was, basically, that I wouldn't be comfortable selling others' designs under my Maps of Mastery brand.

_________________
Christopher West
west@mapsofmastery.com
http://www.mapsofmastery.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:38 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 2:46 pm
Posts: 7960
Location: West Chester, OH (near Cincinnati)
Wow Brad....just wow.....I have no idea how to even respond to you. Honestly 90% of my comments were meant to be taken in general about all sorts of things, not aimed specifically at you.


And this was NOT about whether or not MY thoughts were included on this. And I never once was disputing how much time or effort you put into this. I even said that I appreciated all the work you did on it.

There's a lot more I'd love to say on the subject, but it really doesn't matter. You guys have done what you think is best, and I'll just go with the flow. At no point in any of it am I saying that any of work was wrong, or not worth it. I know for a fact that you spent way more time than I could on it, and I commend you for that.

_________________
-Aaron
Mand'alor
"You either die a hero, or you live to see yourself become the villain."
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:41 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:45 pm
Posts: 3886
(looks around confused) Hmm, thought I was at bloomilk for a minute...

Anyway, it is too bad that none of Mapmaker's maps made it. But honestly, the Restricted list can't be affected by outside factors other than what is on the map. Regardless of Restricted legality, I still plan on picking up some of his maps eventually.

The Celestial Warrior worked real hard on this list. I will trust his opinions on some of the maps. Offworld Shipping does seem a bit odd to be left off.

I still love Spynet, even if it leads to be play badly. Way too easy to overextend Revan on that map.

EDIT: I also think it is disingenous to say that Mapmaker hasn't been listening. I honestly think some things might have changed in what we need in a map since Legacy of the Force, thanks to the extreme speed some squads have. Protected starting areas has become fairly important, as it gives some squads way more of an advantange than on another map.

_________________
Bloomilk Ambassador


Last edited by Sithborg on Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:42 pm 
Big Bad Brad
Big Bad Brad
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:14 am
Posts: 5344
This thread has gone well past it's prime. Nothing further can be, nor needs to be said.

_________________
"200 or 2"
"Consistency is the key, not crying"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: List of Candidates for the restricted list and standard list
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:44 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 6662
Location: Chicago, IL
The_Celestial_Warrior wrote:
This thread has gone well past it's prime. Nothing further can be, nor needs to be said.


Here's a suggestion of a thread to look at to take a different outlook

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10547


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 185 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Jedi Knights style by Scott Stubblefield