Moderator: Cartographers
The only way I can think of is I start becoming more of a jerk. I'm hesitant to do this not because I mind being a jerk, but because people hating me for it cramps our productivity.oaktown wrote:2. increase standards from the beginning of the foundry process to tighten up the number of maps that are moving through the system. It would be nice to identify early on those maps that have little chance of being quenched so attention can focus on those that will, though I'm not entirely sure how to do this.
Coleman wrote:I'm interested in taking a far extreme position of limiting the number of maps people can work on at one time. I haven't talked with Andy about that yet though.
Like if you've never done a map you can only have 1. If you have done a map you can do 2. After your second you are open to 3 and never more then that.
This would decrease the number of maps in production, but would probably increase anxiety for map makers and cramp their creativity somewhat.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Coleman wrote:I'm interested in taking a far extreme position of limiting the number of maps people can work on at one time. I haven't talked with Andy about that yet though.
Like if you've never done a map you can only have 1. If you have done a map you can do 2. After your second you are open to 3 and never more then that.
This would decrease the number of maps in production, but would probably increase anxiety for map makers and cramp their creativity somewhat.
Coleman wrote:No I mean 3 at once. It's still bad though.
I think more cartos may be the best answer. It would help account for my decrease in availability (though I doubt anyone's noticed) and needing 3 or 4 people to agree versus just 2 takes slightly longer, allowing for more comment time.
Coleman wrote:The only way I can think of is I start becoming more of a jerk. I'm hesitant to do this not because I mind being a jerk, but because people hating me for it cramps our productivity.
Coleman wrote:The other possibility is more cartos and needing all of cartos acceptance to move something. Or we could change our stickies in Map Ideas to announcement and sticky maps that look promising.
Coleman wrote:Edit: I'm not much of a fan of moving things backwards in production, in response to that part of oaktown's idea.
oaktown wrote:Coleman wrote:• You can have one map in the Forge; a mapmaker shouldn't be fussing about trying to forge a bunch of maps anyway.
cairnswk wrote:Some people like myself....actually thrive on having two or three maps available in the process....reason....the feedback is so damn slow sometimes.
get more feedback happening, and i wouldn't have time to commit to working on three maps at once.
oaktown wrote:cairnswk wrote:Some people like myself....actually thrive on having two or three maps available in the process....reason....the feedback is so damn slow sometimes.
get more feedback happening, and i wouldn't have time to commit to working on three maps at once.
I actually agree with you cairnswk, I was just throwing ideas around. I've started new map ideas simply because feedback had dried up on another project.
Ideally, we would increase interest among the larger community, while tightening up the number of maps in the foundry by means other than arbitrary limitations. It would be better to say a map can't move because it doesn't meet expectations than to say a map doesn't move because we've capped somebody's involvement.
Limiting mapmakers to just one map in the Forge wouldn't make much impact anyway - and therefor may not be necessary - because its rare that somebody has two maps in the forge to begin with.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Coleman wrote:Is more cartos equivalent to that for you? lolDiM wrote:a revolution is needed
a revolution is needed
seriously now. the foundry isn't dead it's just hibernating because of the holidays.
but there's also noticeable decrease in comments. i agree with this. people that used to comment on every map are gone, several other map makers are gone, also the size issue that was never solved, the xml update that never came or the play testing area that is still unavailable, have contributed to some map makers losing interest. there are many reasons but there are also solutions. simple solutions? probably not. will they ever be applied? again probably not.
will advertising the foundry work? i doubt it. in fact i think too much advertising will kill the foundry altogether as we'll probably have a rush of crappy maps. take 1000 random people and ask them to comment in the foundry. 900 will ignore you and won't even visit. 50 will post random spam like "i like/hate it" and 50 will post 40 "brilliant/awesome" new maps that in fact have been proposed hundreds of times. and 10 will bother to make a crappy image in paint then they'll realise map making involves much more than that and they'll leave.
and the map limiting idea is crazy. why limit creativity? you'll lose even more people if you do so.
probably the best solution is something that was proposed several times before. a larger crew of people that will have the job to comment about each and every map.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users