Map Contest Status?

Hey folks,

Some thoughts after reading through the rules for the scoring system again. It's too late for this now, I guess, but in case you want to do something similar in the future and be it for another game:

• There are only 4 batches of points to award per category (3x10, 1x20). Expect to see draws...
  
  
• Subdividing into categories and then picking map with the most points as the overall winner has an obvious drawback: It's very likely that not the best map overall will win, but instead the one which is only better than the other in its category.
  
  As an example: In category A we have maps 1, 2 and 3. Now, 1 might be okish, but 2 and 3 are clearly worse. It's likely that map 1 gets all points in this category. Now, in category B maps 4 and 5 are brilliant while 6 is still pretty good. So, points might be split between 4 and 5 while 6 won't get any. The overall winner then is the mediocre map 1, even though it might be worse than map 6.
  
  I guess it would be better to have one list only. Problem then is that you have only 4 batches of points to award, so the list won't be very meaningful. So, instead, why not having everybody award 1-10 points (or 1-20 for the tournament finalists) instead of the fixed 10 for their personal choice?
  
  Figure that the subdivision is meant to increase diversity in the mappool, assuming that e.g. urban maps will have a hard time competing with rural maps. However, even with the list you still could give out prizes or include the best maps for each category if that's a concern.
  
  
• The popular vote and the tourney is nice, but wouldn't it be better to close the community vote only after the tournament? Let's face it, there will be very few players that actually take a look at all 10 maps or even a fraction thereof. However, during the tournament (which will be casted, right?) they might at least get an impression of them and thus have a potentially better basis (and more incentive) for their vote.
  
  

Some thoughts after reading through the rules for the scoring system again. It's too late for this now, I guess, but in case you want to do something similar in the future and be it for another game:

• There are only 4 batches of points to award per category (3x10, 1x20). Expect to see draws...
  
  
• Subdividing into categories and then picking map with the most points as the overall winner has an obvious drawback: It's very likely that not the best map overall will win, but instead the one which is only better than the other in its category.
  
  As an example: In category A we have maps 1, 2 and 3. Now, 1 might be okish, but 2 and 3 are clearly worse. It's likely that map 1 gets all points in this category. Now, in category B maps 4 and 5 are brilliant while 6 is still pretty good. So, points might be split between 4 and 5 while 6 won't get any. The overall winner then is the mediocre map 1, even though it might be worse than map 6.
  
  I guess it would be better to have one list only. Problem then is that you have only 4 batches of points to award, so the list won't be very meaningful. So, instead, why not having everybody award 1-10 points (or 1-20 for the tournament finalists) instead of the fixed 10 for their personal choice?
  
  Figure that the subdivision is meant to increase diversity in the mappool, assuming that e.g. urban maps will have a hard time competing with rural maps. However, even with the list you still could give out prizes or include the best maps for each category if that's a concern.
  
  
• The popular vote and the tourney is nice, but wouldn't it be better to close the community vote only after the tournament? Let's face it, there will be very few players that actually take a look at all 10 maps or even a fraction thereof. However, during the tournament (which will be casted, right?) they might at least get an impression of them and thus have a potentially better basis (and more incentive) for their vote.
  

Hehe, when you would know ...

I full agree here!

• Let's face it, there will be very few players that actually take a look at all 10 maps or even a fraction thereof.
  

A_E Should have put together a HYPE video that does a quick outline of each map! Woot!

A post announcing the updated map collection on Steam or the official forums would be nice.

I am a little surprised there's no mention of the contest on Steam. And more so that theres been no mention on the official forums of this last update.

A_E Should have put together a HYPE video that does a quick outline of each map! Woot!

Well atleast i streamed all maps with 30 viewers and also 20 people watched the VoD back.

A post announcing the updated map collection on Steam or the official forums would be nice.

I am a little surprised there's no mention of the contest on Steam. And more so that theres been no mention on the official forums of this last update.

Here on coh2.org is an update to that.

Also on the offical forum. Look under "Blog"

Some thoughts after reading through the rules for the scoring system again. It's too late for this now, I guess, but in case you want to do something similar in the future and be it for another game:

• There are only 4 batches of points to award per category (3x10, 1x20). Expect to see draws...
  
  
• Subdividing into categories and then picking map with the most points as the overall winner has an obvious drawback: It's very likely that not the best map overall will win, but instead the one which is only better than the other in its category.
  
  As an example: In category A we have maps 1, 2 and 3. Now, 1 might be okish, but 2 and 3 are clearly worse. It's likely that map 1 gets all points in this category. Now, in category B maps 4 and 5 are brilliant while 6 is still pretty good. So, points might be split between 4 and 5 while 6 won't get any. The overall winner then is the mediocre map 1, even though it might be worse than map 6.
  
  I guess it would be better to have one list only. Problem then is that you have only 4 batches of points to award, so the list won't be very meaningful. So, instead, why not having everybody award 1-10 points (or 1-20 for the tournament finalists) instead of the fixed 10 for their personal choice?
  
  Figure that the subdivision is meant to increase diversity in the mappool, assuming that e.g. urban maps will have a hard time competing with rural maps. However, even with the list you still could give out prizes or include the best maps for each category if that's a concern.
  
  
• The popular vote and the tourney is nice, but wouldn't it be better to close the community vote only after the tournament? Let's face it, there will be very few players that actually take a look at all 10 maps or even a fraction thereof. However, during the tournament (which will be casted, right?) they might at least get an impression of them and thus have a potentially better basis (and more incentive) for their vote.
  

There's some good feedback here for both now and for future events. Thanks for taking the time.

Say if Category A is super competitive and splits the vote between community, expert panel, and Relic Judge, each map would have 10 points before accounting for the tournament vote. If Category B is not as competitive and one map claims victory in all categories, it would have 30 points before the tourney vote.

We are going to remove the "20 points per category" aspect of the tournament finalist vote, and just have the top tourney players vote for their favorite overall map. The overall favorite map would receive 20 points.

In the event of a tie after all voting, we would allow our expert panel to pick their overall favorite map, deciding the winner. We'll update the rules accordingly.

Regarding the community vote, I tend to agree. However, to play devil's advocate, part of me thinks people watching a stream would place too much emphasis on map visuals. I'm also not sure that people watching a caster flicking around the map would be able to form a decent overall evaluation. I'd be interested to get other people's opinions on this point.

For what it is worth, we have had a decent amount of community feedback so far, but more would certainly be better. We will also reach out to people who provided feedback during the supply event and ask them to vote if they haven't done so already.

Thanks very much,

Andy

Regarding the community vote, I tend to agree. However, to play devil's advocate, part of me thinks people watching a stream would place too much emphasis on map visuals. I'm also not sure that people watching a caster flicking around the map would be able to form a decent overall evaluation. I'd be interested to get other people's opinions on this point.

I' ll give you my opinion.

When watching a stream, I do tend to look at the visuals of a map, since I am there for entertainment and like to look at something interesting and pretty. Obvious issues with maps do become apparent pretty quickly though, because you are objectively watching the battle play out in front of your eyes without the concern of having to move your units around and all. Issues such as garrison placement, cover, resource point placement, base locations and for example pathing issues can be easily spotted whilst watching a twitch stream. However, there is the bias risk of thinking there is something wrong with the map, when in fact it could just be the player being bad or rng being heavily involved.

More detailed testing is needed to find all the issues with a map, especially little things such as that particular piece of cover that makes one side of the map less favorable or a strategic point more favorable to defend or approach from one side of the map or that annoying little bush that keeps screwing up pathing or one cut off having a more favorable garrison or none at all etc. Here lies the bread and butter of the map, the core if you will. This needs severe testing and can't be justified by watching a few Twitch streams.

Both ways have their benefits, but the latter way is the way to rely on more heavily when testing maps for automatching.

Basing on my point of view (from a mapper) i would be happy about more "streams". When i had worked on Westwall during the 1on1 mapping contest any pvp stream of Westwall was welcome to help me to enforce the quality of Westwall.
I made the best and biggest changes for Westwall after the pvp streams because it was the best feedback i could get during the contest. Unfortunately the streams were too late to implement all stuff before the map was put into the map rotation.
I cant wait to see the maps at the tournament because that is the best way for me to enforce map quality (or with the help of a pvp expert - see SoE_Sturmpanthers stream).

The issues outlined here wouldn't have been issues if the contest ran properly. It didn't how is nobody addressing that? All of these maps could and SHOULD be better if it was done right. If the mappers had more than 2 actual phases for implementation and testing cause of all the issues. If the community voters that were lined up back in MARCH didn't bail because of all the stalling and back tracking on Relics end.

I had to PUSH for the supply event, it seemed like it wasn't even going to happen, this was meant to be run MULTIPLE TIMES to encourage feedback (like it did) so the mappers could have updated and live feedback, instead we got it TWO DAYS before the FINAL submission.

There were meant to be skins associated directly with this contest, and finally mappers getting paid for the FREE PRODUCE AND OUTSOURCING that we do for Relic. Hours upon hours upon hours of testing and making maps, just for them to turn out bad because we are only 1 person and can only get so much testing, not to mention the fact that we are also human and make mistakes. They bailed on the skins and did this PR stunt bullshit wildlife crap instead of actually investing in their community. AGAIN.

Everything about this contest screams at how much Relic actually care, and the simple fact is they don't. I mean for fuck's sake I had to ask Andy to make his account here. Its like the management over at Relic is just licking windows all day and doesn't actually take the time to lead their team of people are passionate (Kyle and Andy). It all just makes no sense. I entirely regret having the conversation making this an official contest instead of just running the damn thing myself and asking Relic to provide a prize and in game shoutout. This contest would've already been over and done with, the maps would have gotten proper feedback from top players, and it wouldve been weekly for 8 weeks. Just like before.

I just, really don't know what to say. This has been nothing but a shit show from the start (march) to now, and I'm sure the maps that get introduced will have issues, and the community will scream and cry like they do, and it will all be a wasted effort that has taken literally over half a year to fail.

Basing on my point of view (from a mapper) i would be happy about more "streams". When i had worked on Westwall during the 1on1 mapping contest any pvp stream of Westwall was welcome to help me to enforce the quality of Westwall.
I cant wait to see the maps at the tournament because that is the best way for me to enforce map quality (or with the help of a pvp expert - see SoE_Sturmpanthers stream).

This is what I'm talking about. During the 1v1 contest, how many times did we (my stream community, and the top players i reached out to) play your map and give you feedback directly improving your map? How many weeks did we do this?

This is one of the many issues. This didn't happen at all. Instead we got 1 stream (when before it was multiple times a week and 100% on Sunday all maps were gone through that were updated from the week before, for 8 weeks)

And we got random feedback from people with 4 posts that can't scrape out of a 4k digit on their playercards.

So when the maps have issues, this could have all been avoided if Relic wouldve ponied up the proper resources for this.

But THEY CHOSE not too, it wasn't that they couldn't. It (read we, this community) isn't worth their time.

For the supply event:
Well. It was the best trick (harhar) to get any feedback. So i'm happy that you (Tric) have done everything to get it started for the 2on2 contest.
On the other side it is a problem that there is no mechanic to get the top pvp guys into the contest. They arent interested in any supplies. Unfortunately there is no "ingame mechanic" to deal with the problem. I think that will be the problem for any map making process in the future. Without a way to get a kind of "unofficial leader for community map plays" or a reward system (prestige, ingame rank, dont know...) or a "free mode with community map rotation system" there is no chance to enforce the quality of feedback we would need for community maps.

Furthermore i think that there is another question:
We will see any other mapping contest in the future? To be honest i have no idea what will happen with the CoH franchise. Sure. Relic is working on AoE 4. But this limited "living dead status" for CoH is a kind of a problem. I cant see any reason to work on more maps in the future when the game will be dead. On the other side this "survey email story" is confusing me because it looks like that there is a kind of a future for the coh franchise (beside the fact that i have no idea about the picking process for the email xD).

Well. It is a strange situation for me...
On one side a mapping contest is a good motivation for me to work on new maps.
On the other side this contest was/is frustrating me. I think i wont do it again for 3on3/4on4 map contest because making a map took a lot of time and the amount of frustration is in no relation to the "result" (hello death threat story :-/).

Well tbh the most people don't want to spent their freetime to test new made maps. Its timewaste for them, when this map don't come into automatch.

So better just wait and then complain about how bad this map is and how it is possible that nobody noticed it before Kappa

Well tbh the most people don't want to spent their freetime to test new made maps. Its timewaste for them, when this map don't come into automatch.

So better just wait and then complain about how bad this map is and how it is possible that nobody noticed it before Kappa

That is not true at all.

I did it for 8 weeks straight and have all of my feedback saved from the prior contest and that of the other peoples as well., If VODs lasted that long you would have 2 months of almost daily feedback across all maps, not even just finalist, and the streams would go for 8 hours or more and I would average 20-40 people depending on the day.

I don't care if they complain about the bad maps, the mappers can easily point the finger at them asking why they didn't help when they had every option and opportunity to.

And then we all go blind.

My vested interest in this contest is to see the maps being played. Which has yet to happen. This also means they may not be as good as they should be. Watching Tric cast the 1v1 map contest was awesome. You got to see the maps in action, then get adjusted, then get played again. And on top of that you got to hear Tric's expert commentary on the map and how it could be abused or will cause issues. So even if it wasnt your map being played you could learn things you may not have thought about and apply them to your own map. Invaluable. I agree the whole thing should have been a Tric contest sponsored by Relic to get the most out of it. The 2v2 tourney is coming up (When?) so maybe the maps will get played enough to help the finished product.

Relic has announced the official 2v2 Map Contest Cup on their blog!

Relic 2v2 Map Contest Cup

This should be a fun tournament, we will get to see the new maps in action, and it will be a nice warm up for the 2v2 Mixed Factions Tournament coming up in December.

Relic has announced the official 2v2 Map Contest Cup on their blog!

Relic 2v2 Map Contest Cup

This should be a fun tournament, we will get to see the new maps in action, and it will be a nice warm up for the 2v2 Mixed Factions Tournament coming up in December.

If the 2v2 maps of the contest are received really well we could even put those maps into the 2v2 mixed factions tournament

Relic has announced the official 2v2 Map Contest Cup on their blog!

Relic 2v2 Map Contest Cup

This should be a fun tournament, we will get to see the new maps in action, and it will be a nice warm up for the 2v2 Mixed Factions Tournament coming up in December.

Cool. Looking at that splash image it appears the winners of the visual categories have been chosen too.

Cool. Looking at that splash image it appears the winners of the visual categories have been chosen too.

Nope. Those are just the 1st maps in the lists they put out. Here is Sturmpanthers version:

Rural
Alliance of Defiance <---
Poltawa
Fields of Winnekendonk

Urban (we have four maps as there was a tie vote)
Stalingrad Station <---
Bialystock Market
Stadtschutt
Bugtenbach Lake

Industrial
Reichswerke <---
Normandy
South Orkney

Unless some of those are your maps then...YES! These are the winners

Unless some of those are your maps then...YES! These are the winners

Harsh.