you are here 4 years,and im here 6 years.
Lets see- for these period you create 170 tournament-and i create 8 maps(42 tournament per year,and 1 map per year). these mean that create map are very hard and not easy job.
From other side i create 22 tournaments(creating 7110 games) and you create zero maps( 3,6 tournament per year-zero map per year) these mean that for me create tournament are much easy then for you to create map.
Now you say that hard to win a tournament? And you have 45 medals?
I win in 5 tournament, and its not difficulty,only what i need to do its TO PLAY,, no hours of work in Photoshop.
Do you know how much i spend in creating of some maps? 16 month for WWII Europe-6 month for WWII Eastern Front. And for these time you manage to win in 45 tournaments, how can these be difficulty????
One day when you create map,then you can talk about development of maps.
Gillipig wrote: you think creating a map that will be playable on this site (not landgrab) is something anyone could do? You think just anyone could do it if they sit long enough? Your naivety is amusing.
Unlike winning a small tournament which anyone with some dice luck can win, creating a map will test your dedication and skill in ways playing a luck based board game will never do. ANYONE can win a tournament, because ANYONE can win a couple of games in a row, and that is often all it takes to win a tournament. Anyone can try to make a map, but very few can become good enough to prompt the site to use it as a playable map. You mentioned time, you don't think with time ANYONE can learn how to play RISK good enough to win a tournament? All you need is some advice from a veteran or a bunch of games on said map, I know that from experience.
Learning how to make a map is like painting, ANYONE can doodle down some ugly crap, but few can paint well enough to get their paintings into an art gallery.
Yes, I think that anyone can make a map here. It can take quite a while for some, but I'm been in the foundry and been a part of the process over there with a couple of maps. The foundry community is very helpful and patient. On this site, I believe that anyone can make a quality map.
I've worked on three maps, I know how much works lies ahead of you if you try to make a map, and let me tell you, it's a shitload of work! The mapmakers should be knighted for the time they put down on this site, not be compared with tournament organizers or even worse, tournament winners, who have done nothing special at all.
I don't have anything nice to say to you about tournament organizing, since you have abandoned 8 tournaments and finished only 1. With a record like that, how easy can tournaments be to run?
@qwert: You can say the same thing about tournaments. It's really top-heavy for the winners. As I said, 9761 winners and 2470 of those wins are from the top 2.5% (50 people). So, I don't think that your argument holds water.
It's one of the easiest things in the world to do. I'm about to finish one right now, and it was no effort at all to do so. Yet that tournament contains three times as many games as the lowest standard tournament. If you seriously think typing a few words in a forum thread and sending out invites to players is harder than spending at least 100 hours in photoshop working on a map (that's about the least you can get away with), then you've gone mad! Hosting tournaments is super easy! As long as you're on the site, I tend to come and go as I please and so that's why I have so many abandoned tournaments. Nonetheless, it's easy pickings to do and should not be compared to map making.
AoG for President of the World!!
I promise he will put George W. Bush to shame!
Metsfanmax wrote:Let's move the discussion on to something else, please. We don't actually gain anything by debating about which activity is harder to do.
well im all ready give mine oppinion-change romans with arabic numeral and problem solve.
Tournaments are easier to farm medals than map medals.
HOWEVER, BOTH are equally important to the site. Without maps this site would die, but without tournaments this site would also die. That is why both deserve recognition on the site.
The tournament communities and Map communities are very different though. It's like comparing different cliques in a school, do you REALLY want medal hunters to be all over the foundry just doing the bear minimum to get a medal? I don't think so. Map makers will never, ever be rightfully recognized unless they change recognition altogether. But I believe the truly dedicated members know and understand how much effort map makers put into their maps.
rdsrds2120...have you solved the mapmaker's medal problem (that i have) above 30 with the same solution?
PS. I've read through the discussion previous, and i have to agree with Qwert....change over to Arabic numerals, the functionality is far better.
And if there is ever a need for functionality, this is it!
In all the discussion, there is not one example considered of what this change might look like...it actually looks very similar to the army numbers that are generated on all the maps.
I don't think they look too bad.
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
ok a few things, I kind of agree with a few opinions here:
-there should be a clan tab with the wins per clan and per player, a tab for maps created, and a tab for map contribution, the same way as for tournaments and I think it should be on the scoreboard tab, not in the tourneys tab
-arabic numerical system is a good Idea.
-we should create a new total medal count system that would be based on points, not number of medals! Saying that a map medal has the same value of a tournament organization is ridiculous. Creating a map is the most complicated thing on the site, some people have been working hard on maps trying to make everyne happy for monthes, and also creating a map is the best thing you can do for the community, much more than winning an individual medal.
Winning a tournament is much more difficult that hosting one!!! We should come up with a point system for medals. You can't value the same way 3 bronze medals (60 unique kills total) and 1 gold (400 unique kills total). We should have a game score on one side (the one currently in place) and a medal score on the other, where each medal type is valued accordingly to its difficulty. That way I would see no problem to pass the system to arabic figures bellow the given medals.
Well screw you, not all tournaments are 16 player brackets, there are some TOs that put a lot of work.
I have been running some tournaments for 2 years now and giving more then just quickies.
benga wrote:Well screw you, not all tournaments are 16 player brackets, there are some TOs that put a lot of work.
I have been running some tournaments for 2 years now and giving more then just quickies.
and do you think it's more work than creating a map?
aren't tournaments supposed to last 1 year max for some reason? I feel like I did something really stupid when I'm in a tournament lasting more than 4 month, and as a TO doing such thing is a nightmare with all dropouts and replacements to be done. You shouldn't ve been allowed to run such a long tournament imo.
benga wrote:Well screw you, not all tournaments are 16 player brackets, there are some TOs that put a lot of work.
I have been running some tournaments for 2 years now and giving more then just quickies.
and do you think it's more work than creating a map?
aren't tournaments supposed to last 1 year max for some reason? I feel like I did something really stupid when I'm in a tournament lasting more than 4 month, and as a TO doing such thing is a nightmare with all dropouts and replacements to be done. You shouldn't ve been allowed to run such a long tournament imo.
now tournaments need to be designed to finish within a year but they weren't required to be when benga started that particular tourney.
yes, tourneys are less work than creating a map but once the tourney is over it is mostly forgotton whereas when a map is quenched only a few are quickly forgotton.
Metsfanmax wrote:I already posted once that this discussion is over. I shouldn't need to say it twice.
This...
Metsfanmax wrote:Let's move the discussion on to something else, please. We don't actually gain anything by debating about which activity is harder to do.
...does not equate to discussion is over... except to you.
greenoaks wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:I already posted once that this discussion is over. I shouldn't need to say it twice.
if the discussion is over then lock the thread, otherwise we can continue
...and yes i agree with greenoaks.
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
I was referring specifically to the discussion about whether tournament organizing or map-making is harder (which is obvious if you've read the original post to which I referred). If that continues, I will indeed lock the thread.
Metsfanmax wrote:I was referring specifically to the discussion about whether tournament organizing or map-making is harder (which is obvious if you've read the original post to which I referred). If that continues, I will indeed lock the thread.
Well aware of that... but i think if people want that discussion they'll have it here or somewhere else...topics quite often go off-track, but it doesn't help threatening
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
Metsfanmax wrote:I was referring specifically to the discussion about whether tournament organizing or map-making is harder (which is obvious if you've read the original post to which I referred). If that continues, I will indeed lock the thread.
Well aware of that... but i think if people want that discussion they'll have it here or somewhere else...topics quite often go off-track, but it doesn't help threatening
They're welcome to have it wherever they want that is not in Suggestions. I am not threatening, simply explaining what will happen.
Once again this topic comes up. What no one has realized or at least stated, these medals are virtual and do not cost money to produce(for the most part). Caps are ridiculous in my opinion.
Just like some tourneys are much more valued and important to me (both running and winning), all of the categories for gaining a medal come with less or more value. Unless you add a time factor for each medal you cannot numerically give credit of less or more value in a medal.
Since the medals are a basic count for an achievement, that is what they should be (a count). You have counts associated with most medals consisting of bronze, silver, and gold. Either make all the medals the same with the three medal colors, or use the Arabic numbers to indicate how many medals you have for each category. I would actually prefer the bronze, silver and gold, and then have a database where you can search each category like the Tournament tabs we have in the tournament world.
The thing is, everyone has their opinion and no way we will ever agree which way is right. Importance of a single medal is in the eye of the beholder anyway. If I made a map and got credit for one medal for making a map, I believe that would be more important to me than the thirty capped amount I have for winning tourneys. I think it was LMS who made a point of listing 30 old tourneys under the medal. In my case, I agree-why bother listing the first thirty tourneys I made and ran under each capped medal (looks just ridiculous). Don't list any.
There are many ways to get a medal. Crazy idiots like me will get a lot of them. Medal hunters will get a lot of them. It still comes down to what do they mean to you. I threw away over 20 real trophies a few years ago. I took pictures of them and moved on. I sometimes regret that decision, but in reality, they just took up space. I know what I accomplished with the real trophies. I know what I have accomplished insanely with CC.
Someone hopefully will make a decision on this one day, but even if they do and things change, the real meaning of a virtual medal is an individuals meaning and not much more.
Add this thread to the many times it has been suggested, then someone make a real decision, or more on until the next time it gets suggested--have fun.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit.
HighlanderAttack wrote:Wow, did not even realize this is not even in real suggestions anymore. Someone will start this topic again.
I am happy for DICKtator Metsfanmax he can flex his virtual muscles and move this to a suggestion not worthy of being on the front page.
HighlanderAttack, this suggestion is in the "Submitted Suggestions", which means it's been submitted to me and the programmer to actually be done! Besides that, we can be cordial to the Volunteer Team and I'm sure it will be reciprocated.
While I'm here, a minor update:
There's a process nailed down for each department, and I am now just waiting on the medal images to be made. Update coming soon(ish)!
HighlanderAttack wrote:Wow, did not even realize this is not even in real suggestions anymore. Someone will start this topic again.
I am happy for DICKtator Metsfanmax he can flex his virtual muscles and move this to a suggestion not worthy of being on the front page.
HighlanderAttack, this suggestion is in the "Submitted Suggestions", which means it's been submitted to me and the programmer to actually be done! Besides that, we can be cordial to the Volunteer Team and I'm sure it will be reciprocated.
While I'm here, a minor update:
There's a process nailed down for each department, and I am now just waiting on the medal images to be made. Update coming soon(ish)!
you think creating a map that will be playable on this site (not landgrab) is something anyone could do? You think just anyone could do it if they sit long enough? Your naivety is amusing.
