Foundry discussion

[porkenbeans]

I think all the maps that have reached beta has reached CC requirements [requirements at the time of quenching]. And those that haven't---haven't.


--Andy

But all the MAPS that have met CC requirements have NOT made it to beta.

And beta is NOT being used as it should be. It should not matter if a map is popular or not in the Foundry. Let beta do the popularity poll.

Then the numbers can be posted for all in the Foundry to see. If the Vets want to lend a helping hand at that point to bring those numbers up, then maybe the map maker will be able to raise those numbers the next time around. Certain min. scores on each question in the beta poll should be determined and can be adjusted as the process evolves.

In my opinion this one simple implementation of a more robust beta process, will fix the biggest problem in the Foundry.

pork, might you give us some examples of maps that did not make it through the foundry if most of the people were saying they wanted to play on it? might you also give us some examples of maps that made beta while many people in the thread were saying the map is terrible?

As for the people that didn't comment on the map while it was in the process but complained about it after... Isn't that like complaining about who was elected when they didn't vote? I think that if they don't care enough about new maps to tell us what they think of them, then we should care enough about their opinions to do something about it.

You just don't get it. You are too closed minded for me to be wasting my time. Why do I need to keep repeating myself, and trying to say the same thing in a better way to make you understand what I am saying ? When you just keep coming back with the same old tired talking points. You clearly do not want to have an honest discussion.

[the.killing.44]

I think all the maps that have reached beta has reached CC requirements [requirements at the time of quenching]. And those that haven't---haven't.


--Andy

But all the MAPS that have met CC requirements have NOT made it to beta.

And beta is NOT being used as it should be. It should not matter if a map is popular or not in the Foundry. Let beta do the popularity poll.

Then the numbers can be posted for all in the Foundry to see. If the Vets want to lend a helping hand at that point to bring those numbers up, then maybe the map maker will be able to raise those numbers the next time around. Certain min. scores on each question in the beta poll should be determined and can be adjusted as the process evolves.

In my opinion this one simple implementation of a more robust beta process, will fix the biggest problem in the Foundry.

pork, might you give us some examples of maps that did not make it through the foundry if most of the people were saying they wanted to play on it? might you also give us some examples of maps that made beta while many people in the thread were saying the map is terrible?

As for the people that didn't comment on the map while it was in the process but complained about it after... Isn't that like complaining about who was elected when they didn't vote? I think that if they don't care enough about new maps to tell us what they think of them, then we should care enough about their opinions to do something about it.

You just don't get it. You are too closed minded for me to be wasting my time. Why do I need to keep repeating myself, and trying to say the same thing in a better way to make you understand what I am saying ? When you just keep coming back with the same old tired talking points. You clearly do not want to have an honest discussion.

Did you by any chance do Debate Club in high school?

[The Neon Peon]

I think all the maps that have reached beta has reached CC requirements [requirements at the time of quenching]. And those that haven't---haven't.


--Andy

But all the MAPS that have met CC requirements have NOT made it to beta.

And beta is NOT being used as it should be. It should not matter if a map is popular or not in the Foundry. Let beta do the popularity poll.

Then the numbers can be posted for all in the Foundry to see. If the Vets want to lend a helping hand at that point to bring those numbers up, then maybe the map maker will be able to raise those numbers the next time around. Certain min. scores on each question in the beta poll should be determined and can be adjusted as the process evolves.

In my opinion this one simple implementation of a more robust beta process, will fix the biggest problem in the Foundry.

pork, might you give us some examples of maps that did not make it through the foundry if most of the people were saying they wanted to play on it? might you also give us some examples of maps that made beta while many people in the thread were saying the map is terrible?

As for the people that didn't comment on the map while it was in the process but complained about it after... Isn't that like complaining about who was elected when they didn't vote? I think that if they don't care enough about new maps to tell us what they think of them, then we should care enough about their opinions to do something about it.

You just don't get it. You are too closed minded for me to be wasting my time. Why do I need to keep repeating myself, and trying to say the same thing in a better way to make you understand what I am saying ? When you just keep coming back with the same old tired talking points. You clearly do not want to have an honest discussion.

Repeating yourself? When have you ever given an example of the two things I'd asked for?

If you can show how the process destroyed a map that was clearly wanted by the CC community (you don't need to explain anything, just give me the name), I would be happy to reconsider your suggestion.

[Industrial Helix]

Well, I'm not sure what Pork is on about but I would have liked to see The First Crusade get quenched. That map was in the works for the longest time and got caught up in the graphics gauntlet... though it looked pretty damn good to me. I figured that after a year people do in fact lose their enthusiasm for a map, as Pork says.

I dunno, I'd like to see what maps Pork is talking about cause outside of the First Crusade, I have no idea.

[porkenbeans]

sully:
but please keep in mind, if a few members love the current map they will be upset if you remove it from live play just because the rest of the community doesn't share their love for that map. There needs to be a way of protecting minority interests in maps, because some members can be very loud and unruly with regard to change, despite not actively participating in the process that creates those changes (ie Germany Revamp).

I think that every 3 months there should be a roster cut. If CC adds 5 maps during that period, then the 5 least played maps should hit the recycling bin. I say this not because I want to see maps hit the chopping block, but because my spidy senses tell me that CC has reached its current limit, with the number of maps it can support. So I would rather see 5 new maps added, than see 5 old and least popular maps stay.

If there happens to be a large following of supporters for a cut map, then it would only go to make for a ready made group, to contribute in the Foundry, to pull it out of the bin, and get to work on creating a much wanted revamp. This way you kill two birds with one stone. You protect the minority's interests, and you bring more blood into the Foundry.

[edbeard]

How does removing a map benefit anyone? If you don't want to play a map then don't play it.

If a map maker put hours and hours of work into a map and saw it "relegated" then you've removed incentive for them to keep working on maps. Cairnswk has made a ton of maps. I'll guess 30 or so. A lot of his maps aren't popular. If I were him, I would be quite mad if any of those were removed.

The current maps aren't preventing any new ones from being made.

I'd rather go with logic and common sense than your "spidy senses"

[TaCktiX]

Alright, before I launch into a reply on this, I'm going to go with a two-line pedigree. I am one of the most mild-mannered and patient people in the Foundry, just ask anyone. At the same time, I make insightful but not inciteful comments on maps and the Foundry in general. So everything I say is not driven by hate, ire, or a generic disagreeableness.

1.) The obvious clan manipulation of the "quenchers", or what ever it is that they call themselves.

Manipulation is not the right word. Guidance is. Every single "veteran" was once a newbie. They've done the system, they know what should be expected and what should not be, and they know it better than any post of rules and regulations could ever teach. Do they know it perfectly? No, but as a whole they offer a better insight than a bunch of people poring over a bunch of generic rules could ever have.

2.) Quenched maps that are NOT received well by the community, (this revamp for example). Along with others like British Isles, and a whole slew of cookie cutter pieces of crap.

We as humans are very nostalgic. British Isles badly needed a revamp. It may have been foundry history and one of the most popular maps of all time and all that, but it was hard to understand and looking extremely dated next to recent maps. It took well over 18 months for that map to release, mostly because of the worry about the complaints the revamp would receive JUST BECAUSE IT WAS NOT THE ORIGINAL. It could not be helped. The revamp was an improvement over the original in every way except the nostalgia factor, which it could not fulfill.

As for Germany, in the attempt to revamp for better looks pep went one further and aimed for geographically accurate. In the process he sacrificed readability and recognizability in terms of gameplay. Concerns that were somewhat allayed by the fact that pep took forever to update (easiest way to forget or downplay is to not need to comment on it but once a month). It's still the same map as the original, but it had flaws that the only people still following the thread (ironically, mostly the "quenchers") were numb to by the time it released.

As for "cookie cutter pieces of crap," I will have to disagree. While a lot of maps can be classified as a bigger or smaller Classic with different bonus regions, they all look distinct. The only places where there is similarity is where it is intentional (USA Map Pack, Egypt). Does it possibly boil down to the same strategies as a normal game of Classic? Likely, but a lot of people like that gameplay and only want to play it on new and interesting concepts. The so-called complex maps that push the envelope of what CC can do are a far minority in terms of larger interest.

3.) An overall bad reputation, that keeps away people, that just do not wish to deal with the overinflated egos, of a few that are, or act like children.

Welcome to art. We all have egos, especially if one is lambasting our countless hours of work on a concept that is "just gorgeous." I remember gloating on the first version of The Citadel to my father and all my friends. And it sucked. It's a hard medicine to take and the Foundry isn't exactly Mary Poppins about it. But hard love is what peer review is all about. I have bragged to people who could care less about how the Foundry implements peer review in one of the most civilized and enlightened manners possible. A few people have opinions, but most people who post have informed and educated opinions. That is priceless. Is it, as a whole, always in line with my vision for the piece I have created? Very rarely. Is it, as a whole, exactly what I need to read to make it the best piece for the site? Most certainly.

The Foundry needs new blood. As referenced by others before me (The Neon Peon), most maps in development are by new folks.
The foundry needs to dish out a little humility to some of its members. It does, but in a tough love sort of way. It tosses humility at the hands of a cartographer, telling them that their nest egg of massive effort needs work. Commenters are not bound by the same rules, and shouldn't be, as the sum of opinion is what should decide where to take a map next.
The Foundry needs to take the less played maps off of the roster, and kick them down to dead projects, where new or existing cartographers can have a go at making them better. No, the Foundry doesn't. Every single map on the roster earned its place. Is every map ridiculously popular? No, but they don't need to be. A lot of people, including me, like to sample every single map out there. Sure, I have my preferences, but knowing there's a new experience out there just waiting for me to click "Join Game" makes me happier as a player.

The Foundry needs a Revolution. To put it bluntly back, the Foundry is a constantly evolving revolution, learning from its own mistakes and constantly seeking new directions. It's not a disorganized mob of creative power, but a guided team of improving creativity.

[porkenbeans]

Well, I'm not sure what Pork is on about but I would have liked to see The First Crusade get quenched. That map was in the works for the longest time and got caught up in the graphics gauntlet... though it looked pretty damn good to me. I figured that after a year people do in fact lose their enthusiasm for a map, as Pork says.

I dunno, I'd like to see what maps Pork is talking about cause outside of the First Crusade, I have no idea.

I am talking about all those maps that just died in the Foundry for lack of support. The word "support" is a misnomer. It only means Foundry support, not community support. As soon as people would acknowledge that they are indeed two different things, then my job here is done, in a manner of speaking.
I am under no illusion that many turds will hit beta if my suggestion is implemented. I am only saying that a proper beta process with hundreds or more CC members, filling out a standard beta map form, will in the end, do a much better job at deciding the future of want-to-be maps.

The Foundry will, as a result, become a much more friendly place. And the elite and gifted map makers, will find that they are held with respect, and people would be much more willing, and eager to follow their advice when it is offered.

[the.killing.44]

I am talking about all those maps that just died in the Foundry for lack of support.

Such as…

[sully800]

I am talking about all those maps that just died in the Foundry for lack of support. The word "support" is a misnomer. It only means Foundry support, not community support.

Acknowledged! Currently you need support from anyone in the community who is willing to take the time to post opinions/ideas in the foundry. No, that is not the entire CC community, and yes it would be nice to have input from the larger CC community on many maps.

[Peter Gibbons]

[I am talking about all those maps that just died in the Foundry for lack of support. The word "support" is a misnomer. It only means Foundry support, not community support. As soon as people would acknowledge that they are indeed two different things, then my job here is done, in a manner of speaking.

I don't want to wade too deeply into this discussion, but I do have a couple points to make.

Based on this above passage and, indeed, the premise of this entire thread, it seems your main argument is that the community at-large (who, I agree, on the whole don't even visit the forums) are upset with the "product" (new maps) being produced. I would tend to believe that conclusion comes from facts not in evidence. Isn't the site growing every day? Where are the people complaining about bad maps? And if a "bad" map is produced, what negative impact does that have on people (as someone else said--don't play it)? I hope you don't find this rude but I would honestly ask who--other than you--feels the way you do? It seems like you have taken it upon yourself to advocate for who you consider the silent masses... which is a difficult position to take without any tangible supporting evidence of like-minded people.

Now, as the point itself. I say this as someone who has no map-making skills whatsoever... I was a casual player who never visited the forums. I saw a few new maps come out--liked some, not others. So I chose to investigate the process. Now I visit the foundry regularly. I comment on map concepts I like. I offer advice/critiques on maps that make it to the main foundry or final forge that I intend on playing. If an idea that I don't like gets floated or a map I'm sure I won't play makes it through the first stages... well, I ignore it. Bottom line is that, because I had an interest in how maps get made, I opted to involve myself in the process. I've felt welcome the entire time (in fact, I believe I got PMs from all the moderators welcoming me after my first post) and haven't sensed a hint of elitism. So, not only do I think you are off-based on that charge but I also am off the opinion that the early beta process that you are arguing for should not be implemented. It's like compulsory voting in politics: a bad idea. The people who want to actively be involved in this process should be and every single member of the site is welcome to be with no hoops (other than find the foundry) to jump through. There are a lot of casual gamers on this site that want nothing to do with the foundry and could not care less which maps are produced--they just like playing the game (and already have over 100 options).

I can concede two things that have been brought up or alluded to in this thread that are good, small changes: 1) MASSIVELY advertise any active revamps that make it to the main foundry, as those seem to be the main points of contention (and a revamp does affect people in the way a new map doesn't) & 2) advertise the foundry a bit more in general--perhaps just a standing link somewhere that says "Interested in developing maps? Click here" in a prominent place.

[porkenbeans]

@ TaCktiX
You seem like a pretty leveled headed person to me. And, I suspect that grown-up conversation is possible with you.

Let me start by telling you that I understand everything you said, you make perfect sense to me. I totally comprehend how a map maker can develop a certain pride for his masterful work of art. And, how it can sometimes be very hard to accept any negative criticism, of said masterpiece. This is only human nature, and I am indeed aware of this fact.

I do not believe however, that you are aware of certain things that some of your peers are doing.

Tough love is one thing. And, outright war against an individual in a conspiratorial manner is something else entirely.

Re: Conan the barbarian. new map.
by mibi on Fri Nov 06, 2009 8:13 am

This map is entirely pointless as well as being criminally hideous. I loved Conan the Barbarian, but this map looks like a diarrhea slick in a prehistoric square toilet. There is nothing that says Conan but the title. If there is some historic significance to Conan, it matters not, because it's not explicit in the map itself. It is quite obvious you are looking at the world in CC colored glasses, which is a mistake that many people make. They start seeing maps and saying 'wow this could be a cc map!", when in reality, COULD and SHOULD are entirely different. Could it be a CC map? Yes, CC has quite low standards these days. Should it be a CC map, of course not, it is quite literally a piece of shit. And whats with the squiggly territories? Please tell me that wasn't your idea. Nothing says Conan the Barbarian like a bunch of squiggly turd-like territories wedged together like they were extruded out of a designers rectum. And the names are suppose to be a joke right? Porkania ...Lackster...Optomus...Nobodies....Sully. Do these people really want to be corn kernels in your fecal party? The only good thing about this map is all the negative space you have in there. If there was anymore crap floating around in that space I would be forced to take a plunger to it.

My advice to you is this. Increase the amount of negative space you have about 500% until whatever is being excreted from the top of the map is entirely gone. Then go watch Conan the Barbarian. Come back with a map that incorporates Conan's themes in both the game play and design. Come up with own design, not some crap you googled. Then you might have something worth putting your time into.

Or, and this may be a better solution, you can just flush the entire thing down the foundry drain, wash your hands, slowly back out of the room, and pretend like you didn't stink up the place with the largest turd CC has seen since that Jamaica map a while back.[/url]
mibi

Is this your idea of tough love ?
Or does this look more like a person with an axe to grind ?
This post was made after I posted a first rough draft of a project. It was accompanied by similar posts by him and his merry band of stooges, in every map thread that I have started.
If you believe what this lovely person says, you would have to conclude that I know nothing of graphic art, and have no talent whatsoever.
But this does not jive with the fact that I have won two 1st. place graphics trophies here at CC. I have only entered two contests by the way.

As to the roster cut that I mentioned, Like I said, I do not wish to see maps cut, But if it means that new maps are to be slowed to a crawl, well I say cut away. Maybe they will find their way back in with a sparkling new revamp. More work for the Foundry members. I'm for that.

[natty dread]

I can concede two things that have been brought up or alluded to in this thread that are good, small changes: 1) MASSIVELY advertise any active revamps that make it to the main foundry, as those seem to be the main points of contention (and a revamp does affect people in the way a new map doesn't) & 2) advertise the foundry a bit more in general--perhaps just a standing link somewhere that says "Interested in developing maps? Click here" in a prominent place.

I agree with this person 100%. He is making a lot of sense.

On another note: None of my maps have made it out the drafting room yet, either. But instead of blaming the system of being unfair, I decided to try harder. Sometimes you just have to suck it up and have patience. I am certain that some day, somehow, one of my maps will make it through, and that moment will be worth all the pain.

As for cutting maps from the roster, that's totally unnecessary. Revamps are one thing, but taking maps out of play just to keep the amount of maps at a certain level is just dumb. The more the merrier. If even two paying customers like and play a map, there's no reason to take it down.

Explain to me, how exactly would deleting current maps help the development of new maps?

[porkenbeans]

I can concede two things that have been brought up or alluded to in this thread that are good, small changes: 1) MASSIVELY advertise any active revamps that make it to the main foundry, as those seem to be the main points of contention (and a revamp does affect people in the way a new map doesn't) & 2) advertise the foundry a bit more in general--perhaps just a standing link somewhere that says "Interested in developing maps? Click here" in a prominent place.

I agree with this person 100%. He is making a lot of sense.

On another note: None of my maps have made it out the drafting room yet, either. But instead of blaming the system of being unfair, I decided to try harder. Sometimes you just have to suck it up and have patience. I am certain that some day, somehow, one of my maps will make it through, and that moment will be worth all the pain.

As for cutting maps from the roster, that's totally unnecessary. Revamps are one thing, but taking maps out of play just to keep the amount of maps at a certain level is just dumb. The more the merrier. If even two paying customers like and play a map, there's no reason to take it down.

Explain to me, how exactly would deleting current maps help the development of new maps?

A couple of weeks ago CC ran a thread about this subject. My guess is they are or have reached the limit of maps that they can currently support. It probably means that more money needs to be spent to allow the site to expand. I am sure there are more knowledgeable folks among us, that could explain what I am trying to say.

I will say it for the 3rd. time, if it is a choice between new maps, or old less popular maps, I say open the doors to the rest home and I will cheer as they start rolling them on in.

[the.killing.44]

My guess is they are or have reached the limit of maps that they can currently support. It probably means that more money needs to be spent to allow the site to expand. I am sure there are more knowledgeable folks among us, that could explain what I am trying to say.

This is why you think the Foundry is closed? You're very mistaken…

[porkenbeans]

My guess is they are or have reached the limit of maps that they can currently support. It probably means that more money needs to be spent to allow the site to expand. I am sure there are more knowledgeable folks among us, that could explain what I am trying to say.

This is why you think the Foundry is closed? You're very mistaken…

Where did I say that ?

[the.killing.44]

My guess is they are or have reached the limit of maps that they can currently support. It probably means that more money needs to be spent to allow the site to expand. I am sure there are more knowledgeable folks among us, that could explain what I am trying to say.

This is why you think the Foundry is closed? You're very mistaken…

Where did I say that ?

You implied it. So, if not, why do you think the site is at carrying capacity?

[TaCktiX]

I do not believe however, that you are aware of certain things that some of your peers are doing.

Now let us be fair, they are your peers too. The Foundry is the sum total of all of us, not just this group or that group.

Tough love is one thing. And, outright war against an individual in a conspiratorial manner is something else entirely.

snip snip

Is this your idea of tough love ?
Or does this look more like a person with an axe to grind ?

That's mibi. He's always been a fan of expressing his opinion in overdone and very vivid detail. He totally obliterated the fifth version of The Citadel, and others will tell you that this quote has been very well-traveled:

This map looks like someone pulled a beta version of CCU out of the garbage and proceeded to regurgitate botched photoshop tutorials all over it. Not only is this map an insult to the sighted community but the game play has been done before and done better, which completely removes any real reason for this map to exist, except for those among us who are military fetishists with low standards and I wouldn't even want those commendable souls to be condemned to a gaming experience so 3rd, 4th, and 5th rate as this reiterated graphical compost heap of bad taste.

My advice, take this map back to the drawing board, take the drawing board back to Ikea, and exchange it for one of those nifty couches so at least one of us will rest easy knowing something this reckless will never get into live play.

I deserved it. The map was crap (link here to version), but I was putting my Grade A effort into it. Where you and I diverge is in the response. Scroll down the page a little further and you'll see me post this: "Yep, my map is now legitimate. Mibi thrashed the ever-living crap out of it. *gets back to work on Version 6*". It wouldn't be for 3 more versions before the map looked decent, and 16 more after that before it was complete.

One thing you might have overlooked in my original reply is the phrase "as a whole", repeated twice. There will be bad-blood replies, there will be ones that sound like (or are) personal attacks. But they are not constructive, and thus should not be responded to or considered. It is the sum total of response that is valuable, similar to how Adam Smith's "invisible hand" works in capitalist systems. It is the constructive criticism that is the hidden gems, and even then they must be considered on all fronts. Only with the sum of the Foundry's response are you armed with the tools required to hammer your work of art into a David.

A tangent thing to consider is that most people consider you a lost cause, a retard who just wants to antagonize everyone. Whether by intention or not, you've burned most bridges to constructive feedback. It's why all of your topics end up full of venom and bile. We (and that's an everyone we) could, and should, take a step back and re-evaluate, but everyone must do so. We are partners in the Foundry, not competitors.

As to the roster cut that I mentioned, Like I said, I do not wish to see maps cut, But if it means that new maps are to be slowed to a crawl, well I say cut away. Maybe they will find their way back in with a sparkling new revamp. More work for the Foundry members. I'm for that.

New maps haven't been slowed down by the mass of them on the site. Lack has managed to get busier and busier in recent memory and since CC's founding he has been the only way to upload maps to the site. I know there is a fix that will allow the Boys in Blue to do it themselves, but I'm unsure of whether or not it's in place yet.

[porkenbeans]

Yeah, that was well done. You let his vulgar rant just roll off, like water on a ducks back, then while dismissing him entirely, you also managed to stroke his over inflated ego, by considering his attack as some sort of hazing ritual offered up by the great mibi. priceless, I wish I would have had the same kind of insight.

[natty dread]

Aww... I want my maps trashed by mibi too!

[MrBenn]

...
Tough love is one thing. And, outright war against an individual in a conspiratorial manner is something else entirely.

Re: Conan the barbarian. new map.
...

Is this your idea of tough love ?
Or does this look more like a person with an axe to grind ?

Your quarrel with mibi is hardly a solid basis for revolutionising the foundry: The foundry is, and will always be, greater than the sum of its parts.

[porkenbeans]

...
Tough love is one thing. And, outright war against an individual in a conspiratorial manner is something else entirely.

Re: Conan the barbarian. new map.
...

Is this your idea of tough love ?
Or does this look more like a person with an axe to grind ?

Your quarrel with mibi is hardly a solid basis for revolutionising the foundry: The foundry is, and will always be, greater than the sum of its parts.

MrB,
I did not say that it was. I was just responding to a comment about "tough love". I agree with you about The Foundry being greater than the sum of its parts. Seems like a good philosophy to follow.

FYI, I did not start this thread, or even name it for that matter. It was spun off from a conversation that I veered off topic from, in another thread.

[ender516]

I'd like to say that I agree with porkenbeans about beta testing. I don't think he has been saying that the maps coming out of the Foundry have been bad. I think he is saying that some good maps have not made it through. The process as it stands forces the mapmaker to appease (or at least graciously stonewall) every commenter before the community at large gets to test drive a map. I have seen many occasions in the Foundry where "better" has been the mortal enemy of "good enough", and I have seen a few good map ideas sink beneath the waves once a blue name (or worse, a red one) says "Gee, there's nothing really wrong with this map, but I'd never play it..." Why, then, not put it out to the masses? Take those beveled, stroked, and shaded mountains to Mohamed. We will NEVER get a large portion of the community to come into the Foundry to look at new maps early in development, and all of us in here have no doubt rolled our eyes at comments made during late beta which were covered months ago and pages back in the map discussion topic. The insiders and the outsiders are different and always will be. But we shouldn't expect the average user to dig through all the discussion. Just let them take the map for a spin and fill out an exit poll. That would get a wide range of opinions from people who were actually interested in the theme or concept of the particular map (assuming the title and thumbnail gave them the right idea). There just might be a viable segment of the CC community that would like to conquer a molecule, or a cricket pitch, or whatever, even if they don't want to spend a tremendous amount of time in the Foundry in an attempt to demonstrate "community support." We could make this early test another stamp in the process, and have those maps which earn it (through a respectable aggregate rating from a reasonable number of testers) return to the Foundry for all the usual twiddling and tweaking before and during Final Forge and Beta. Who knows, maybe some interested users will follow such a map into the Foundry and get more involved in the process.

If you need a new twist on this idea, set this up as alpha testing, where games have no effect on points. That way, if things go awry in a new map, it is easy to end it without cost to the testers: they can just stop playing. Alpha testing could even be a premium feature: if you want a big say in what maps eventually show up on CC, then you have to pay your money and make your choice.

[RedBaron0]

The Foundry needs a Revolution.

Yes, I named the new thread; based primarily on the above statement in what is now the the first post of the new topic. Porken, since it is the first post and you are the author, and you may change the title to whatever you see fit, as I explained, but its still the same.

Is there any trust in the fact there are things going on behind the scenes that will change the way things get done within the Foundry? I mean there are nightly parties with many-many adult beverages consumed, and at this point the remaining time of the Foundry being closed is cleaning up banana rum bottles.... but there are new things going into place with more volunteer help than the Foundry has ever had in the past.

Everything you are alluding to are past issues, porken. The Foundry has always been dynamic and evolving. Why not see what it looks like in the new year before passing judgment?

[AndyDufresne]

When the Foundry starts back up, I hope to see this much text and thought applied to the maps in production. They deserve it.


--Andy