Custom Maps contest on the horizon

Srinidhalaya is spot on. Getting the word across to PCGamer when this thing kicks off would be a great way of getting some exposure over there (See: Rising Storm map contest) http://www.pcgamer.com/uk/2014/01/08/rising-storm-banzai-community-map-making-competition-winners-announced/

I love this idea (especially if Relic can add anything to sweeten the deal for those involved.

Having a set of categories based on number of players seems the natural way to go I guess.
Also, if the strategists/ mappers could have some kind of active communication with the contestants to provide feedback on the functionality of their maps that would be great. Similarly, we could offer the same kind of feedback on map detailing and the like both of which could only lead to more maps that could benefit competitive online play.


Lets say in the official announcement the call to action goes out that anyone entering the comp can come to COH2.org where they can get feedback and tips when developing their own ideas, site traffic increases - people feel involved - they have fun - everything is golden.

Basically what i'm trying to say is if we can make this a community wide effort and push it on all fronts we may be able to have some real impact on where the game goes. If we can really make a noticeable difference and get a lot of people on board then maybe it'll set a precedent for future Relic-Community projects.

Im so excited!

I rather not see a separate category for remakes.

I rather not see a separate category for remakes.

I don't think there would be, I was just talking to keep the discussion going.

I rather not see a separate category for remakes.

I would, because a remake is not the same as a original map from the "creative"-point of view.

I would, because a remake is not the same as a original map from the "creative"-point of view.

What if it was an original COH1 map that you made, then "remake" in coh2?
-Mind Blown!

I would, because a remake is not the same as a original map from the "creative"-point of view.

I understand what you mean and I agree, to a certain extent and creativity should always be nurchered. Yet, I'm of the frame of mind to let Relic keep doing the 'remakes' of maps, that's their beef. As a community I think we should aim to create new maps that are just as good for this game as those classic maps were for the last.. because, Langreskaya winter...

Besides, it would be just as easy to create a spiritual successor to a map, lets say Langres in this case, by using a similar resource layout (i.e preserving the dynamic of the map) whilst providing a fresh set of tactical situations (through building/ cover/ road placement etc) - if this is what you were hinting at in your post then I agree with you fully.

If i was in charge (which i am not ), i would not separate things into too many categories. Someone has to judge them all, which is hardly doable for 10 cathegories with 3 winners each. Also, this would mean 30 winners, how many entries do we expect?!

I'd go for this:

Categories:
(1 vs 1) competitive maps
(2 vs 2) competitive maps
(3 vs 3)/(4 vs 4) big team game maps with less of a focus on competitiveness

Each category has one winner and one runner up.

Judgement
Step 1)
Community vote for the top 5 entries of each cathegory via polls.

This way we would make sure that the top entries are well received by the community and the fun aspect is good.

Step 2)
A qualified judgement board with deep knowledge of the worldbuilder tool and mapping in general will have the final judge on the top 5 and pick the winners.

Technical aspects like optimization and detailing can only really be judged by qualified people. This way it is made sure that the winner maps are both fun to play and also high quality from the technical point of view

If i was in charge (which i am not ), i would not separate things into too many categories. Someone has to judge them all, which is hardly doable for 10 cathegories with 3 winners each. Also, this would mean 30 winners, how many entries do we expect?!

I'd go for this:

Categories:
(1 vs 1) competitive maps
(2 vs 2) competitive maps
(3 vs 3)/(4 vs 4) big team game maps with less of a focus on competitiveness

Each category has one winner and one runner up.

Judgement
Step 1)
Community vote for the top 5 entries of each cathegory via polls.

This way we would make sure that the top entries are well received by the community and the fun aspect is good.

Step 2)
A qualified judgement board with deep knowledge of the worldbuilder tool and mapping in general will have the final judge on the top 5 and pick the winners.

Technical aspects like optimization and detailing can only really be judged by qualified people. This way it is made sure that the winner maps are both fun to play and also high quality from the technical point of view

I like this but won't "older" maps generally have a larger following and thus be more popular? Ideally I would turn it around and let the judges select a shortlist but this would be a lot more work ofcourse. I like your categories.

switching the voting order would indeed work against the intention of reducing the number of maps that would then receive detailed analysis.

And it would also work against your argument with the bigger following. If your map is good, it will make it into the top 5, even if there are 2-3 all time favourites which make it in there due to a following. The final judgement would then be independent of the following, but it would be judged by objective "experts".
The other way arround, the map with the biggest following will win, once it is in the top 5.

Fair enough

switching the voting order would indeed work against the intention of reducing the number of maps that would then receive detailed analysis.

And it would also work against your argument with the bigger following. If your map is good, it will make it into the top 5, even if there are 2-3 all time favourites which make it in there due to a following. The final judgement would then be independent of the following, but it would be judged by objective "experts".
The other way arround, the map with the biggest following will win, once it is in the top 5.

I would hate to have any sort of "popularity contest" involved in the judging, as many people can get 10,000's of upvotes, having nothing to do with map quality. This is pretty obvious, in the steam workshop, there are several maps, that are just small tweaks of stock maps, that have 15k+ subscribers, while other, very well made maps, sit well below 1000.
But of course, that doesn't mean the community shouldn't have any say, just maybe it should be a separate system than the rating system in steam workshop.

EDIT:
Your point about too many categories does hold a lot of weight. But I would like to see at least a winner for each player count map...maybe throw in a GRAND PRIZE WINNER that exceeds above all the others.
-Grand Prize
-Best 1v1
-Best 2v2
-Best 3v3
-Best 4v4

I beleive OS may be right in his thoughts about the categories - I'm dubious about how many people would actually submit 3v3/4v4 maps, thats not even takign into account that theres simply more mapping involved. That's not to say they should be neglected - hell I play a lot of team games myself and would love to see more of them. But if im being honest though and I (and this is just me) was creating a larger scale map, i'd want it to be able to reach as many players as possible and would therefore make it playable in both 3v3/4v4.

All of which is a roundabout way of agreeing with OS's idea on the categories.

What I am slightly dubious about is letting the overall community vote the final five maps in. Not that I dont want to see community involvement - that's the first thing I want to see - just that what people say they want and what they actually want are usually 2 different things. But it's finding some way of ensuring quality assurance (even before the professional technical aspects) that still lets the public get involved with the process.
That doesn't even take into account the ideas on most players playing for comp stomp (a la what Relic keeps telling us). In my opinion, comp stomp maps shouldn't be the focus of this competition - I mean the ToW mission/ competitive map ratio is pretty slim and those comp-stomp boys do pretty well for regular content... so let this one be about competitive play!

I think in my mind, I would reverse the way its been suggested. Have 'experts' shortlist the final 5 entries and then give a cursory period where the public can playtest them - then let them decide which one is the best. that way the public still has the say, quality is assured and competitive play is always retained to the best possible degree.

That doesn't even take into account the ideas on most players playing for comp stomp (a la what Relic keeps telling us). In my opinion, comp stomp maps shouldn't be the focus of this competition - I mean the ToW mission/ competitive map ratio is pretty slim and those comp-stomp boys do pretty well for regular content... so let this one be about competitive play!

I guess this is where the difference in views come in, I assume most of you guys are dedicated, if not exclusive, competition 1v1 and 2v2 mappers/players. I'm just the exact opposite, and my ladder stats show just that. I watch the replays of you competitors, and I get a headache just from watching the excessive multi-tasking.

I really have no expectations with this contest, I am really good with the world builder, but when it comes to designing a competitive map, its a no go for me. If this contest becomes focused on competitive maps, or is judged by a competitive criteria, you can pretty much count me out. That being said, I was already on the fence in the first place, rather to submit a map or not.

This is why, my previous suggestions, mentioned a category for co-op comp stomp, as it would separate the two play styles, and the competitive maps would be able to shine, without being bogged down by comp stomp submissions. From the eyes of a comp-stomper, I find it hard to believe the majority of players are playing comp-stomp. In fact, just mentioning that I played 2 vs 4AI in the other forum section, immediately resulted in competitive players flaming my post. But I've been wrong before, and I'll be wrong again.

EDIT:
But dont let that stop you competitive guys. What you do, is truly amazing.

You got me all wrong. haha.

I'm not even that good. Majority of my games (bout 80%) are 2v2 with about 10% 3v3 and 5% 1v1/4v4. I much prefer team games to be honest.

Maybe I was a bit over-zealous with the no comp-stomp maps involved... they should be included, everyone's preference should at least try to be included. I just think that the competitive scene is in need of a good shot in the arm.

I'm not a competitive player tbh (actually im quite shit) but It's the competitive guys that stream, and compete in the tourneys, which get watched etc etc and so I thought that by at least putting some emphasis on comp maps it could get more exposure for the community, maybe even invigorate a tourney or two.. that's what we need I think.

Both of my maps can be played as both, but I really have focused vs AI because it's really the only way to play custom maps right now, without trying to invite a bunch of strangers to find your maps.

You got me all wrong. haha.

I'm not even that good. Majority of my games (bout 80%) are 2v2 with about 10% 3v3 and 5% 1v1/4v4. I much prefer team games to be honest.

Maybe I was a bit over-zealous with the no comp-stomp maps involved... they should be included, everyone's preference should at least try to be included. I just think that the competitive scene is in need of a good shot in the arm.

I'm not a competitive player tbh (actually im quite shit) but It's the competitive guys that stream, and compete in the tourneys, which get watched etc etc and so I thought that by at least putting some emphasis on comp maps it could get more exposure for the community, maybe even invigorate a tourney or two.. that's what we need I think.

Yeah, I would have to agree. I suggest the primary GRAND prize, be related to competition based map. And the prize should have monetary value, as to attract the best talent in the world building. As for the comp stomping, I would have the prizes be something cheap and novelty.

Both of my maps can be played as both, but I really have focused vs AI because it's really the only way to play custom maps right now, without trying to invite a bunch of strangers to find your maps.

I feel your pain, but I welcome strangers to find my map. I would really love to get a 4v4 just to see how it plays out, but it's tough...

working on it, keep ideas coming here people !

Perhaps some kind of year categories for maps could be interesting.


I mean maybe there could be 5 years categories starting in 1941 and ending in '45
each contestant picks a category and creates a map based on a campaign/battle that took place in that year. It could be quite nice to see a few more location based maps being submitted?

If someone could give me a summary of everything you'd like to see implemented in a contest, that would be great. I might need it

If someone could give me a summary of everything you'd like to see implemented in a contest, that would be great. I might need it

3-4 different map categories (mapsize)ether:

• 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4.
  
• (2 -4), (4 - 6), (6 - 8).
  1-3 winners in each categories.
  You are allowed to submit entries to all categories, but only one in each( or?).
  All entries has to follow the steam workshop guidelines for coh2(example: no full-on recreations of an existing map/level, but a entry can be loosely based on one).
  All entries has to be a "complete package"(?), complete whit minimap(and not the auto-generated one) and loading-background.
  Any map/level created from the launch of the coh2 worldbuilder to the end of the deadline can be submitted as an entry.
  
  Prizes: the wining entries of course gets "fame and glory", and... well lets see what/and if Relic and Sega whats to sponsor as prices, but getting the wining entries added to the map-pool and be featured in some mini-tournament would be cool.
  
  Judging: (mostly what OnkelSam wrote but added step 0)
  
  Step 0)
  Pre-screening process: one/(a couple of) qualified judge(s) independent from the judgment board(see Step 2) sorts out the entries and removes/disqualify entries that is not up to par whit the steam workshop guidelines for coh2.
  
  Step 1)
  Community vote for the top 5 entries of each cathegory via polls.
  
  This way we would make sure that the top entries are well received by the community and the fun aspect is good.
  
  Step 2)
  A qualified judgement board with deep knowledge of the worldbuilder tool and mapping in general will have the final judge on the top 5 and pick the winners.
  
  Technical aspects like optimization and detailing can only really be judged by qualified people. This way it is made sure that the winner maps are both fun to play and also high quality from the technical point of view
  
  
  edit: I think this summary would do it =)