USA 2.1

[spiesr]

I think that a feeling which keeps many people away from posting in that foundry is that the foundry would not appreciate someone going in and posting on half the maps something along the lines of "this map is fundamentally flawed and development on it should stop."

[betiko]

myeh, myeh, myeh, you should've complained earlier.

[DiM]

One overall suggestion though is simple, There are a LOT of maps on this site. Perhaps at this point the focus should be on quality over quantity being produced.

that's easier said than done.
quality is completely subjective. a map that i love might be hated by you.
a few weeks ago there was a thread here about promontory summit. some hated it and called it the worst map ever, while others said it is great. do you make a poll? how many people must respond before you decide their opinion is valid for the whole community? a democratic approach to choosing the quality of a map is impossible.

you can do something else, make a committee and give them absolute power over what map is worth creating and what isn't. however chose the wrong people for this committee and you have a recipe for disaster.

one thing is certain. if you sit back and wait for the community feedback you'll end up with crappier and crappier maps, simply because there's nobody to complain and point out the flaws.

[DiM]

I think that a feeling which keeps many people away from posting in that foundry is that the foundry would not appreciate someone going in and posting on half the maps something along the lines of "this map is fundamentally flawed and development on it should stop."

of course they would not accept such a comment. imagine working for months on a map, then out of nowhere a guy comes and says your map sucks and then he leaves.

however if he came and explained why the map sucks it would be a totally different thing. it's ok to not like a map and to consider it sucks, however the map maker can't read your mind and see why you think the map sucks. so he needs your input, tell him if the colours are wrong, if the style is absurd if the graphics are cluttered or the gameplay too imbalanced. explain your thoughts as best as possible and i'm sure most mapmakers will appreciate it.

[owenshooter]

countless threads have been started in the GD about how the foundry and it's members run off/ran off anyone that came in with an opinion they did not like... the foundry started losing traffic a few years ago and the solution was to move the foundry above the GD in the forums menu... we were told this increased traffic and that we would be provided the numbers to prove it... still holding my breath... back then, it was hilarious that those in charge thought that moving forums above others in the menu would increase traffic... it made absolutely ZERO sense back then and that solution has proven to not be a solution... people within the GD would offer suggestions on how to increase traffic and how to include the regular forum goers, and they were assured things were different and changing, to no avail... no matter what the foundry goers promised to do or how they promised to change, it was the same old game... in my opinion, once you made making a map an "achievement" to gain a medal, you sold out. you had guys like blitzaholic scurrying to find ways to gain a medal with the simplest of maps... and now, just look at the maps being pumped out... they are ridiculous... many have been mentioned in this thread and there are dozens more that should not be on the site.. they are just garbage... anyway, the foundry has finally become what many of us said it would become years ago, when they were running off the regular forum goers... a ghost town devoid of varying input or open discussions... the forum got what it wanted, to be left alone, and it really seems to have worked out how they wanted... *eyes rolling*... you know what? there is still one more sub forum above the Foundry.. perhaps if you just move the Foundry to the top of the forum, all the problems will be solved in the same manner the last move of the Foundry did... the black jesus has spoken...-el Jesus negro

[Shannon Apple]

I've read most of this... Problem is, if you are going to go into a critique thread, and that is basically what all of the "map in progress" threads are, you can't just be a butt and tell people that their maps are shit. I would imagine that if people got chased off it was for unhelpful and hurtful comments that help no one. Helpful critique is that which tells someone what you think is wrong with their map, and suggest ways of fixing it. If you think it's shit, but don't actually care to explain in a civilized manner what is wrong with it, then chances are, no one is going to be willing to listen to you. When an artist creates something, they have put their time and effort into it. You have to appreciate that fact and go about it in a manner that shows that you are appreciating their efforts and want to help them create something awesome from the draft that they've put up.

USA 2.1 is not the worst map on this site. It's really busy, but organised busy, if that makes any sense. I actually like it's gameplay and don't have any issues working out what hits what. That's majorly important. There are some maps that have been created using bevel and emboss, that are truly horrible, like Ancient Greece. Philly map is just horrible and I refuse to play it because I can't read it. Someone tried to do something cute with fonts and it doesn't work.

[owenshooter]

I've read most of this... Problem is, if you are going to go into a critique thread, and that is basically what all of the "map in progress" threads are, you can't just be a butt and tell people that their maps are shit. I would imagine that if people got chased off it was for unhelpful and hurtful comments that help no one. Helpful critique is that which tells someone what you think is wrong with their map, and suggest ways of fixing it. If you think it's shit, but don't actually care to explain in a civilized manner what is wrong with it, then chances are, no one is going to be willing to listen to you. When an artist creates something, they have put their time and effort into it. You have to appreciate that fact and go about it in a manner that shows that you are appreciating their efforts and want to help them create something awesome from the draft that they've put up.

USA 2.1 is not the worst map on this site. It's really busy, but organised busy, if that makes any sense. I actually like it's gameplay and don't have any issues working out what hits what. That's majorly important. There are some maps that have been created using bevel and emboss, that are truly horrible, like Ancient Greece. Philly map is just horrible and I refuse to play it because I can't read it. Someone tried to do something cute with fonts and it doesn't work.

yeah... people went in there and were civilized and were run off for critiquing maps and their gameplay... you are making huge assumptions here about years of interaction within the foundry by it's members and other forum goers that have led it to where it is today... so, sorry, your post is kind of half cocked, because you are making assumptions that are just not true... there were multiple attempts to have the "attitude" of the foundry regulars put in check, so there could be more interaction with the community, and they never seemed to work... i'm not sure what will work or how to increase traffic, because all other attempts have failed and the general "arrogance" within the foundry still persists... then again, we can just move the foundry up another spot in the forum list to increase the traffic again... *cough*... the black jesus has spoken..-el Jesus negro

[Shannon Apple]

LOL, if you say so. I've seen some really horrible stuff said in the foundry. I've also seen a map maker go all "hurr durr, I'm quitting" when they got critiqued. It goes both ways. You have your opinion on what goes on, and I have mine. I have given my opinion on maps on the odd occasion, people listened, or they didn't, but I wasn't told to GTFO for saying something could be better.

I honestly can't see where your idea is coming from and my post above wasn't directed at you in case you feel that way.

[ManBungalow]

USA 2.1 is one of those maps which starts to make a little more sense when you actually play a game on it and see the troops on it in context, rather than trying to discern meaning in it in one glance from the map image alone.

[Dukasaur]

USA 2.1 is one of those maps which starts to make a little more sense when you actually play a game on it and see the troops on it in context, rather than trying to discern meaning in it in one glance from the map image alone.

You could say that about a lot of the larger and/or more complex maps. There are plenty of maps that I hated on my first time through, because I couldn't figure out what was happening, but once I got to know them I began to like them.

1982 is a classic example. I absolutely hated it the first time, because I was totally lost. But after a few games, I now understand what connects to what, and I'm starting to enjoy that map. Lunar War would be in that category, and Jamaica, and a bunch of others. Pot Mosbi is just sitting on the cusp for me right now. I got creamed the first couple of times on that map, didn't get the point, but I just won my first game on it, and I'm starting to understand how to read the legend, and slowly but surely I'm starting to like it.

It really boils down to whether you're willing to invest the thought to know what is going on, and a lot of that is a matter of personal taste and bias. Bamboo Jack is a map that is very complex and many people hate. However, the Bridge on the River Kwai was one of my favourite novels as a kid, and I've also read other novels from that zone of conflict, so when I discovered Bamboo Jack I was determined to understand it at all costs, and I actually became fairly good at it right from the beginning. Still, it was my predisposition, because I loved the novel, that made it possible for me to love the map. If I had approached it with a "WTF is this shite?" kind of attitude, I might have hated it.

[owenshooter]

Bamboo Jack is a map that is very complex and many people hate. However, the Bridge on the River Kwai was one of my favourite novels as a kid, and I've also read other novels from that zone of conflict, so when I discovered Bamboo Jack I was determined to understand it at all costs, and I actually became fairly good at it right from the beginning. Still, it was my predisposition, because I loved the novel, that made it possible for me to love the map. If I had approached it with a "WTF is this shite?" kind of attitude, I might have hated it.

no comparison... bamboo jack is a very pretty map with interesting game play... USA 2.1 is a plop of shit... the black jesus has spoken...-el Jesus negro

[DoomYoshi]

1982 is a classic example. I absolutely hated it the first time, because I was totally lost. But after a few games, I now understand what connects to what, and I'm starting to enjoy that map. Lunar War would be in that category, and Jamaica, and a bunch of others.

Jamaica is a hilarious example. Way back when I first started I said to Dukasaur: "let's get good at Jamaica since it's really complex". Yet, it's such a basic map

[Dukasaur]

Bamboo Jack is a map that is very complex and many people hate. However, the Bridge on the River Kwai was one of my favourite novels as a kid, and I've also read other novels from that zone of conflict, so when I discovered Bamboo Jack I was determined to understand it at all costs, and I actually became fairly good at it right from the beginning. Still, it was my predisposition, because I loved the novel, that made it possible for me to love the map. If I had approached it with a "WTF is this shite?" kind of attitude, I might have hated it.

no comparison... bamboo jack is a very pretty map with interesting game play... USA 2.1 is a plop of shit... the black jesus has spoken...-el Jesus negro

The black jesus is entitled to his own opinion, even when it's wrong.

USA 2.1, despite its size, is a good, straightforward map that's easy to understand.

[DiM]

USA 2.1, despite its size, is a good, straightforward map that's easy to understand.

while the gameplay is indeed straightforward with no gimmicks whatsoever, the map might appear overwhelming at first due to the large number of terits cramped in a rather small space, especially on the small map.
so at first glance all you see is terits and armies everywhere and that makes some people not like it.

[owenshooter]

USA 2.1, despite its size, is a good, straightforward map that's easy to understand.

while the gameplay is indeed straightforward with no gimmicks whatsoever, the map might appear overwhelming at first due to the large number of terits cramped in a rather small space, especially on the small map.
so at first glance all you see is terits and armies everywhere and that makes some people not like it.

you forgot the craptastic map legend... that, you can not forget... is that even a legend or just a place for all the names that didn't fit on the map? dear lord, i can't even look at it... the black jesus is dizzy...-el Jesus negro

[BigBallinStalin]

inb4: "myeh, myeh, myeh, you should've complained earlier." I'm sure people have already complained about its appearance.

How did this map end up like it is? What the f*ck happened at the Foundry?

Exactly for the reason you posted, almost no one complained about it.
This map reached the Beta stage on April 2013, the 17th viewtopic.php?f=358&t=152467&start=525#p4140050
This map was quenched on March 2014, the 16th viewtopic.php?f=358&t=152467&start=720#p4444231

In 11 months almost no one has expressed a so hard and, let me say, frank opinion of the map. I remember when i send the files to BMO, he expressed a few concerns about the map, concerns that in part i share. But considering that we were just discussing between us two, we had to move on and just wait and see if our concerns were shared also by other players.
It has not happened.
Well, in this case what i can do? nothing! My role is to oversee the process, no rule it.

I will never stop to say to people like you or owenshooter to come to the foundry and tell us if a product (a map) is shit or if it has something really wrong.
We really need people who speaks frankly; the only thing I always ask is to not come there and just say: "this map is ugly, i don't like it." but at least care to explain why you don't like it and/or post what you suggest to make it better.

What happend to the Foundry? Simple. We're suffering for the "old days decisions" and "technical limitations".
Let me explain in detail these 2 elements:

- Old days decisions: Those of you who were here in the old days are well aware about what i'm talking about. There has been a time in which there was a sort of "war" between the foundry group and some CC members. People who disliked other people without a real reason, people who was kicked out from the foundry for just speaking out of the group. People who stoppped to listen to the others just because "they didn't know what they were talking about".....all these things caused an half death of the foundry.
Today I want to stress about the fact that that type of behaviour has been "banned" from the foundry, in part because the people who caused and promoted that behaviour is is no longer here.
I don't want to accuse this group of people for "the hard time" we are having, but honestly think that since you are not able to draw a map makes you unable to say if something is wrong it's a nonsense.
If it's true that draw maps require skill, it's also true that the final product must be played. And, like a normal board game, you need customers and you need to listen to them; on the contrary you will end to play your map alone.
If you see finally we're going in that direction, we don't have behind the scenes maps, we have a testing ground now (everyone can take part to it), we still have a public discussion, we still force mapmakers to respond in a thoughtfull manner to all suggestions and take them into consideration.
Certainly there's more to do, the foundry needs a long cure, a necessary cure that will require time and lot of work. In any case it is better than decide to run away and make your own toy just because you don't like the one you have now.
So, there's a light at the end of the tunnel. The foundry is no longer the place "we are better than you so shut up". Come there and suggest, say if you think a map is ugly, say what you like and what you don't like, help us to make the product you will play better. If you post something usefull, objective and true (so not just say this map sucks and run away) I will be always on your side and I will work to make sure that a compromise is found. My #1 rule is: if you don't want to listen what people say, draw maps for yourself to play at home with your friends, not here because the foundry is a open process with a precise task.

-technical limitations: A map like Usa 2.1 needs more space, a different UI. Infact, even if I fighted a lot to have a different UI to allow larger maps...at some point, after a strike and other 1000 post/PMs to admins i stopped to ask and waste time. Probably it was my fault. Probably I had to say to isaiah40 to wait because there's no technical support to make a so large map clear enough with what we had, probably in that case the friend behind the foreman has step in and didn't find the way to cut a friend's project. I apologize for this.

Said that i see there's a lot of people who like the map as it is now and maybe just reply to you saying that we have so many maps that you can live without playing this one could seem a dumb reply, but since i can't change what it has happend in past, the only thing that we can do is to post in the foundry and tell to mapmakers when a map has something wrong, without any fear instead of wait a map is quenched and then start a topic about it in GD.

Guys, i really want the people stop to think about the foundry as an automated process in which maps are done in any case, we need you all, we need your thoughts. And don't tell me you don't know what to say or what it's needed. Comment a map is one of the easier things you can do, it requires just a bit of time. It's like when you are in a shop and you decide to buy a product instead of another. There could be some reasons (techincal, liking, etc) and maybe you are not an expert on all these aspects, but, in any case, you always know why you decide to buy something. What the foundry needs is to know why you will "buy or not" the next map.

Essentially this is what happened to the foundry in the last few years, no one cared about it.
Now, if you really care about map production (and i think you do) please come into the foundry and tell us we're doing wrong.
You're always welcome.

Nobodies

Almost nobody = .... somebody who complained about the visuals.

Besides, what's' wrong with post-beta complaints? I can insist that the mapmakers come here and pay attention to these complaints so that they avoid such blunders (just as you insist on us going there).

Anyway, I'll check out the foundry a little bit more often.

[BigBallinStalin]

USA 2.1 is one of those maps which starts to make a little more sense when you actually play a game on it and see the troops on it in context, rather than trying to discern meaning in it in one glance from the map image alone.

I don't have time for reasonable responses. On a slightly more serious note, I'm in a game where I've looked at that beast many times. It doesn't get any easier, requires more time per move, and I haven't had this problem for other maps. USA 2.1 is Fundamentally Wrong--in both religious and atheistic senses.

[BigBallinStalin]

USA 2.1 is one of those maps which starts to make a little more sense when you actually play a game on it and see the troops on it in context, rather than trying to discern meaning in it in one glance from the map image alone.

You could say that about a lot of the larger and/or more complex maps. There are plenty of maps that I hated on my first time through, because I couldn't figure out what was happening, but once I got to know them I began to like them.

1982 is a classic example. I absolutely hated it the first time, because I was totally lost. But after a few games, I now understand what connects to what, and I'm starting to enjoy that map. Lunar War would be in that category, and Jamaica, and a bunch of others. Pot Mosbi is just sitting on the cusp for me right now. I got creamed the first couple of times on that map, didn't get the point, but I just won my first game on it, and I'm starting to understand how to read the legend, and slowly but surely I'm starting to like it.

It really boils down to whether you're willing to invest the thought to know what is going on, and a lot of that is a matter of personal taste and bias. Bamboo Jack is a map that is very complex and many people hate. However, the Bridge on the River Kwai was one of my favourite novels as a kid, and I've also read other novels from that zone of conflict, so when I discovered Bamboo Jack I was determined to understand it at all costs, and I actually became fairly good at it right from the beginning. Still, it was my predisposition, because I loved the novel, that made it possible for me to love the map. If I had approached it with a "WTF is this shite?" kind of attitude, I might have hated it.

Yeah, but 1982 doesn't look like shit. The easier imaging helps one render 'what the hell is going on'. USA 2.1 doesn't have that.

[Dukasaur]

USA 2.1 is one of those maps which starts to make a little more sense when you actually play a game on it and see the troops on it in context, rather than trying to discern meaning in it in one glance from the map image alone.

You could say that about a lot of the larger and/or more complex maps. There are plenty of maps that I hated on my first time through, because I couldn't figure out what was happening, but once I got to know them I began to like them.

1982 is a classic example. I absolutely hated it the first time, because I was totally lost. But after a few games, I now understand what connects to what, and I'm starting to enjoy that map. Lunar War would be in that category, and Jamaica, and a bunch of others. Pot Mosbi is just sitting on the cusp for me right now. I got creamed the first couple of times on that map, didn't get the point, but I just won my first game on it, and I'm starting to understand how to read the legend, and slowly but surely I'm starting to like it.

It really boils down to whether you're willing to invest the thought to know what is going on, and a lot of that is a matter of personal taste and bias. Bamboo Jack is a map that is very complex and many people hate. However, the Bridge on the River Kwai was one of my favourite novels as a kid, and I've also read other novels from that zone of conflict, so when I discovered Bamboo Jack I was determined to understand it at all costs, and I actually became fairly good at it right from the beginning. Still, it was my predisposition, because I loved the novel, that made it possible for me to love the map. If I had approached it with a "WTF is this shite?" kind of attitude, I might have hated it.

Yeah, but 1982 doesn't look like shit. The easier imaging helps one render 'what the hell is going on'. USA 2.1 doesn't have that.

I haven't found any problem figuring out what's going on on USA 2.1.

I don't like giant maps in general, but compared to other giant maps like Hive and Colosseum and Spanish Armada, USA 2.1 seems to be really, really clear. All the connections are very clear, unlike some other large maps like King's Court II, where without BOB it's impossible to figure out which squares are actually connected by roads and which ones are beside the road but not on it.

I honestly don't see what is your problem with USA 2.1.

[macbone]

It's a fun team map on fog. There's lot of places to lie low, take over a few states, sneak in some bonuses. The gameplay factor is pretty high for me.

[Mr Changsha]

It's a fun team map on fog. There's lot of places to lie low, take over a few states, sneak in some bonuses. The gameplay factor is pretty high for me.

Yes, overall I give it 8/10, partly because it is the first map I have been able to really see the point of nukes in large standard games.

BBS is complaining, but I have started a 12 man standard and a 12 man dubs (nuke, parachute, sunny) and they are both playing excellently.

Oh and btw, let's show a little love for france 2.1, which is just beautifully designed, perfectly-sized and a joy to play on. I haven't enjoyed a map so much since the original 2.1. 10/10.

[isaiah40]

In response to this thread, late due to RL, this may not be my best map, as thenobodies80 has mentioned we really need a better UI for this. The names in the legend "COULD" fit on the map, but would anyone be able to read the names easily. This is the best alternative I could think of. Now IF others had any better ideas during the time it was going through the process, then I could have done something about it at that time. IF people had come in and made good suggestions while in the foundry, then, again, I could have done something about it at that time.

As I stated, due to RL, there won't be any updates from me anytime soon or in the future. Maybe if I have some spare time I can do some fixing, or if bigWham gives permission for me to go wider - oh wait, no one will like a "bigger" map - then I can make more room and get rid of some of the city names in the legend to "clean" it up. IF that can be done I would be willing to possibly redo the graphics at the same time. bigWham would have to authorize the larger size. So if anyone wants it to happen then petition him and thenobodies80 to make it possible.

isaiah40

[Mr Changsha]

In response to this thread, late due to RL, this may not be my best map, as thenobodies80 has mentioned we really need a better UI for this. The names in the legend "COULD" fit on the map, but would anyone be able to read the names easily. This is the best alternative I could think of. Now IF others had any better ideas during the time it was going through the process, then I could have done something about it at that time. IF people had come in and made good suggestions while in the foundry, then, again, I could have done something about it at that time.

As I stated, due to RL, there won't be any updates from me anytime soon or in the future. Maybe if I have some spare time I can do some fixing, or if bigWham gives permission for me to go wider - oh wait, no one will like a "bigger" map - then I can make more room and get rid of some of the city names in the legend to "clean" it up. IF that can be done I would be willing to possibly redo the graphics at the same time. bigWham would have to authorize the larger size. So if anyone wants it to happen then petition him and thenobodies80 to make it possible.

isaiah40

I wouldn't worry..the more I play it the more I think USA 2.1 is a seriously good map.It does actually remind me of finding world 2.1 for the first time and thinking "This is risk but seriously improved". Moving from world 2.1 to USA 2.1 is the same kind of thing.

I would seriously suggest that players who enjoyed/enjoy 2.1 flat/no cards long games should try out USA 2.1 on the nukes, parachute settings. I can remember when 2.1 was immensely popular, USA 2.1 is simply a step up.

The key of it is that USA 2.1 is big enough to support nukes and 12 players (about 10 cites per turn are getting smashed). The nukes stop STACKING, which has always been the great flaw in no cards/flat games. So the games are supremely open and exciting.

8 man 2.1 made 6 man classic kind of irrelevent. 12 man USA 2.1 does the same to 2.1 (though add the nukes).

Anyone keen on joining some of these are welcome to contact me. I'm aiming to set up four or five more 12 man games on either standard or 12 man dubs.

[owenshooter]

Anyone keen on joining some of these are welcome to contact me. I'm aiming to set up four or five more 12 man games on either standard or 12 man dubs.

farmer... the black jesus has cracked wise...-el Jesus negro

p.s.-