Foundry Concerns

[natty dread]

It's not like I'm trying to do something crazy experimental. I'm not making avant garde cubist maps. I just want be able to come up with an end product that I'm happy with, and not be forced into creating something that pleases a mod at the expense of my vision. Besides creativity is NOT over rated ESPECIALLY from a design perspective.

I used hyperbole in my example. When someone does this, you should ignore the hyperbole and answer to the actual point, not the other way around like you did here.

And wanting to come up with an end product you're happy with is fine, if that end product you're happy with happens to coincide with what is considered a map that fulfills CC standards.

How is creativity NOT overrated ESPECIALLY from a design perspective? I said the opposite, but I also gave my reasoning for why I think so. If you want to give a counterargument, you should also give your reasoning as to why you disagree with my opinion.

Man give your self more credit. We work really hard on these maps. Coming up with the idea, and doing ALL the work is a world of difference between posting "I think you should move that border to the left" With out the people actually making the maps this site wouldn't be anything.

Besides I like my Salmon analogy more. The salmon being the map maker trying to reach his native spawning grounds in the final forge, so that he can give birth to his map there. The mods and posters should be the river that gently guides them to their goal.

We work hard on the maps because we love mapmaking. If this doesn't apply to you, if you have some ulterior motive to doing it, then you should really reconsider if it's worth the effort.

And this site would be something without people making the maps. Maybe it wouldn't be the same, and it wouldn't be a site I'd visit, but it probably still wouldn't just stop existing alltogether. I know some people who'd just be happy to see noobs like you and me disallowed from mapmaking, so then they could offer their amazing professional design skills to the site, for a fee...

As for your salmon analogy... you do realize that salmons swim upstream, even at rapids? That's some "gentle guiding" for you

This is the one which actually get's me ticked because theme is exactly as subjective as style. It's just an opinion no matter how you look at it. You can't prove that a style doesn't fit a theme. Some people will think it fits, while others wont. Doesn't mean one group is more right or wrong as the other.

Ok, now you're just being a tit. When people come and say that the style of your map doesn't really fit the subject of your map, you can fling the subjective-card and shout "you can't prove it!" all you want. But it still doesn't hide the fact that some styles just are not suitable for some maps, which is pretty universal. For example, you could make a futuristic cyberpunk-style map... of medieval England. You could say "in my opinion, it fits!" all you wanted... but the foundry would be stupid to allow a map like this to proceed.

[Victor Sullivan]

In defense of Tacktix, we talked about every map that passed through the melting pot just about everyday over IM. I did a majority of the posting, but they were usually conglomorations of both mine and tacktix ideas. As for his performance in the gameplay workshop, he's been active and has been posting. We've also discussed maps privately.

The CA's do a LOT of internal communication, far more than they used to back in the day (think 2008). So that "blast from the side" was the consensus decision after we all talked about it. While we communicate better among ourselves, we don't tend to communicate that we communicated to everyone outside. For cases where a CA "went back" on what they said, it's because one of us brought up valid points that that CA didn't think about. While it seems like a stab in the back, it's honestly to make sure the map is as good as it can be.

There's some discussion about this behind the scenes - so please be assured that it is a recognised concern that we are trying to find some kind of solution to.

Ah, you all brought up another concern: the Foundry process needs to be more transparent. Who knows what mystical things happen beyond the closed doors of the "Cartographers' Room"? It would be nice to at least explain what you guys do behind the scenes, or even, dare I say, create a locked forum in the Foundry that only Cartos can post in to discuss the various maps, so we can see what's going on and what your concerns are. Obviously, you'd still have your Team CC forum for the numerous secret projects you all undergo, but discussion regarding the current maps would take place in the locked forum.

-Sully

[AndyDufresne]

Ah, you all brought up another concern: the Foundry process needs to be more transparent. Who knows what mystical things happen beyond the closed doors of the "Cartographers' Room"? It would be nice to at least explain what you guys do behind the scenes, or even, dare I say, create a locked forum in the Foundry that only Cartos can post in to discuss the various maps, so we can see what's going on and what your concerns are. Obviously, you'd still have your Team CC forum for the numerous secret projects you all undergo, but discussion regarding the current maps would take place in the locked forum.

-Sully

Is the Foundry really not transparent? I mean, it's not like the CAs Private Message their critiques to the cartographer. It's all posted in the topic like everyone else. A locked forum wouldn't really serve a purpose, since really they are doing their work by posting in each map topic.


--Andy

[Victor Sullivan]

Ah, you all brought up another concern: the Foundry process needs to be more transparent. Who knows what mystical things happen beyond the closed doors of the "Cartographers' Room"? It would be nice to at least explain what you guys do behind the scenes, or even, dare I say, create a locked forum in the Foundry that only Cartos can post in to discuss the various maps, so we can see what's going on and what your concerns are. Obviously, you'd still have your Team CC forum for the numerous secret projects you all undergo, but discussion regarding the current maps would take place in the locked forum.

-Sully

Is the Foundry really not transparent? I mean, it's not like the CAs Private Message their critiques to the cartographer. It's all posted in the topic like everyone else. A locked forum wouldn't really serve a purpose, since really they are doing their work by posting in each map topic.


--Andy

The process really isn't. I think the Cheating and Abuse Team process as well as the Global Mods' deciding to ban someone needs to ban someone as well, because I think this might be the reason why there has been so much mod-angst (though it seems to have died down), because we have no idea if a mod just banned us on a whim or if he discussed it with his fellow Global buddies. Anyways, back to the Foundry: we, as mapmakers, like The Bison King said, have no idea what's personal opinion, what's a mod consensus, etc. I mean, my whole argument regarding TaCktiX was completely misplaced due to the fact that I had no idea his thoughts were being expressed through IH in the Melting Pot ("back in the day") and I still have no idea when other Cartos are sharing their insight through another or what, going back to TBK's issue.

[Industrial Helix]

Ah, you all brought up another concern: the Foundry process needs to be more transparent. Who knows what mystical things happen beyond the closed doors of the "Cartographers' Room"? It would be nice to at least explain what you guys do behind the scenes, or even, dare I say, create a locked forum in the Foundry that only Cartos can post in to discuss the various maps, so we can see what's going on and what your concerns are. Obviously, you'd still have your Team CC forum for the numerous secret projects you all undergo, but discussion regarding the current maps would take place in the locked forum.

-Sully

You want to know what its like behind the doors? It's disappointing. The first thing I did once I got permission was investigate what was said about my own maps and it was nothing that wasn't posted in my thread.

My conversations with Tacktix usually revolved around whether or not one of us wanted to move a map or not. If things got exciting, it was because one of us disagreed on whether a map ought to get moved. For example, I wanted Thyseneal to stew a little but Tacktix pretty much convinced me otherwise. One time Redbaron saw a strange border on Transsiberian RR that took me 20 minutes to find. Generally, preferences are expressed... I don't like, for example, army circle and line connectors. So I express my hatred for them and then ask someone else to look at the map because I'm biased. More often, we just bs about our private lives and occasionally mention a map. Even more often, if one of us has a map, we berate those in charge of approving it for opinions and ideas (not dissimilar to how other mapmakers pm us all the time to look at their map).

VS, if you have MSN, AIM or Skype, pm me your username and I'll pretend you're in charge of the graphics workshop for a day. Obviously you won't be moving anything but perhaps I can walk you through how our backroom conversations go and illustrate what it is that we're looking for in a map when deciding to approve it or not. But if you'd rather not, you're not missing out on nothing

[The Bison King]

It's not like I'm trying to do something crazy experimental. I'm not making avant garde cubist maps. I just want be able to come up with an end product that I'm happy with, and not be forced into creating something that pleases a mod at the expense of my vision

I used hyperbole in my example. When someone does this, you should ignore the hyperbole and answer to the actual point, not the other way around like you did here.

And wanting to come up with an end product you're happy with is fine, if that end product you're happy with happens to coincide with what is considered a map that fulfills CC standards.

Refering to:

Mapmaking is not art, as such. There's very little room for personal expression. The little that there is, go nuts with it, but the truth is that we're working within a pretty tight framework here.

I was answering the actual point. What I'm saying is that I am working with in the frame work. I try my best to live up to CC standards but I aim to do it my way.

How is creativity NOT overrated ESPECIALLY from a design perspective? I said the opposite, but I also gave my reasoning for why I think so. If you want to give a counterargument, you should also give your reasoning as to why you disagree with my opinion.

Well your example was a really exaggerated Scenario. Creativity should be prized in design because creativity is memorable. Any time someone see's something new or in a new way they have that aha moment which is more likely to be logged as a positive memory and therefore associate a positive feeling to whatever the design was supposed to support. But I don't think this has much to do with the foundry any more and has devolved into an annoying art school conversation. Besides I was also more of an Illustration guy.

We work hard on the maps because we love mapmaking. If this doesn't apply to you, if you have some ulterior motive to doing it, then you should really reconsider if it's worth the effort.

Get real, Do think I seriously would put up with this crap if I didn't want to be doing this? The process is messy, ugly, frustrating, and time consuming, I could care less for it. I work for the finished product. If you consider this an ulterior motive then I'm guilty.

As for your salmon analogy... you do realize that salmons swim upstream, even at rapids? That's some "gentle guiding" for you

Yeah I do actually, as I remember when I originally used that metaphor I likened the mods the the waterfall crashing against me, and then went on to say that they should be a gentle stream. Out of context it's kind of a bad metaphor.

Ok, now you're just being a tit.

seriously? and we were doing so good about avoiding name calling...

When people come and say that the style of your map doesn't really fit the subject of your map, you can fling the subjective-card and shout "you can't prove it!" all you want. But it still doesn't hide the fact that some styles just are not suitable for some maps, which is pretty universal. For example, you could make a futuristic cyberpunk-style map... of medieval England. You could say "in my opinion, it fits!" all you wanted... but the foundry would be stupid to allow a map like this to proceed.

Yeah there are blatant example's like that but nothing I have ever done has come close to that. Besides I don't have a style I use a technique. Saying Watercolors doesn't "work" for California is like saying Acrylics don't "work" for Bulgaria. Countries don't have mediums assigned to them. It should be up to the map maker to make it come to life how ever they want.

Whatever, the fact of the matter is it doesn't matter what you think. I was addressing my concerns to the mods and they have already given my a fairly satisfactory answer. They don't need you to fight their battles and they didn't ask you. We can disagree all we want about methods and motives but it doesn't make a difference. You'll do things you're way and I'll do things mine. Maybe your road is smoother and mine rockier but hey, it's the road I've picked.

[AndyDufresne]

The process really isn't. I think the Cheating and Abuse Team process as well as the Global Mods' deciding to ban someone needs to ban someone as well, because I think this might be the reason why there has been so much mod-angst (though it seems to have died down), because we have no idea if a mod just banned us on a whim or if he discussed it with his fellow Global buddies. Anyways, back to the Foundry: we, as mapmakers, like The Bison King said, have no idea what's personal opinion, what's a mod consensus, etc. I mean, my whole argument regarding TaCktiX was completely misplaced due to the fact that I had no idea his thoughts were being expressed through IH in the Melting Pot ("back in the day") and I still have no idea when other Cartos are sharing their insight through another or what, going back to TBK's issue.

I think sometimes the Community thinks our behind the scenes forums are bastions of wild discussion. In reality, there are a few discussion topics active at any time. When a user is up for discipline for breaking a Community Guideline, it is discussed in the Discussions HQ. From my knowledge, most of whatever the Cartos say about a map in behind the scenes forum, ends up in the topic---since that is where things have to end up anyways if they want to see progress and updates (and they do).

And really, the Cartos have done a fine job outlining duties of mapmakers and guidelines for maps in their various stickies and announcements, and through their own direction in the topics---more so than the scant and bare guidelines we had during the early years of the Foundry. Just recently the rest of Team CC re-wrote and updated the Community Guidelines months ago to make things clearer, in an attempt to provide the Community with that transparency you were looking for.

There can only be so much transparency before you can't see what you were trying to look at.


--Andy

[Victor Sullivan]

Discussions Volunteers have lighter green names. They have special tools in the General Discussion, Off Topics, and Questions & Answers forums. They are excellent resources if you have general questions about the Conquer Club community, website, or game. They also help keep the peace, and keep discussion lighthearted and fun.

Cartographers have blue names. They are responsible for helping users create maps for live play by facilitating map discussion. If you are interested in making a map, or helping out with those in production, head over to the Map Foundry part of the Forum.

Yes, because twill explained things so explicitly...

I think sometimes the Community thinks our behind the scenes forums are bastions of wild discussion. In reality, there are a few discussion topics active at any time.

I believe it. The Newsletter forum is pretty much silent until the deadline is a few days away, and even at that posting is still limited.

When a user is up for discipline for breaking a Community Guideline, it is discussed in the Discussions HQ. From my knowledge, most of whatever the Cartos say about a map in behind the scenes forum, ends up in the topic---since that is where things have to end up anyways if they want to see progress and updates (and they do).

As far as disagreements are concerned, those are certainly worth knowing about, as the mapmaker can easily help resolve the conflict.

And really, the Cartos have done a fine job outlining duties of mapmakers and guidelines for maps in their various stickies and announcements, and through their own direction in the topics---more so than the scant and bare guidelines we had during the early years of the Foundry. Just recently the rest of Team CC re-wrote and updated the Community Guidelines months ago to make things clearer, in an attempt to provide the Community with that transparency you were looking for.

Sure, sure, things have improved, but certainly not to a perfect standard. I don't doubt that the Cartos are doing a fine job, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.

There can only be so much transparency before you can't see what you were trying to look at.

And there can only be so much opacity before there are trust issues and the mod teams seem like "secret societies" of arrogant jerks. That is not to say that I believe this, but you have to be aware, secrecy, even if the impression is given (though it might not actually be that way), can lead to unfortunate consequences and community views on mods.

-Sully

[TaCktiX]

I used to think like you did, VS. That the cartoes had all manner of secret information they were privy to and would refuse to hand out to me (and the Foundry, though I was more concerned about me). Heck, for a very long time I railed for wanting CA, long before I got it (think 2008). Eventually I was appointed to CA, and that impression was just not true. The only behind the scenes stuff we do is discussion before it gets announced. An example would be explicating through just how supersize standards would work. More often than not any topics we post are a spellcheck/editing opportunity for official announcements.

[RjBeals]

The foundry is what it is. It sometimes moves around the forums, but the user base keeps posting at the same rate, and the maps keep coming at the same rate. You all just need to accept what it is, and move on. Work with it or not. Nobody is getting paid for this.

[natty dread]

The foundry is what it is. It sometimes moves around the forums, but the user base keeps posting at the same rate, and the maps keep coming at the same rate. You all just need to accept what it is, and move on. Work with it or not. Nobody is getting paid for this.

This is absolutely the best way to put it.

Ok, now you're just being a tit.

seriously? and we were doing so good about avoiding name calling...

Saying that someone is being a tit is not name-calling where I come from. If you took it as such, I apologize.

Well your example was a really exaggerated Scenario. Creativity should be prized in design because creativity is memorable. Any time someone see's something new or in a new way they have that aha moment which is more likely to be logged as a positive memory and therefore associate a positive feeling to whatever the design was supposed to support. But I don't think this has much to do with the foundry any more and has devolved into an annoying art school conversation. Besides I was also more of an Illustration guy.

I'm not saying that creativity should be snubbed altogether, but it should not be the first priority. Creativity is an asset that in itself doesn't necessarily increase the value of the end product. But when said creativity is used to improve functionality, then it becomes valuable.

Btw, examples often are exaggerated scenarios. It is done to better bring your point across.

Get real, Do think I seriously would put up with this crap if I didn't want to be doing this? The process is messy, ugly, frustrating, and time consuming, I could care less for it. I work for the finished product. If you consider this an ulterior motive then I'm guilty.

You need to learn to enjoy frustration.

Yeah there are blatant example's like that but nothing I have ever done has come close to that. Besides I don't have a style I use a technique. Saying Watercolors doesn't "work" for California is like saying Acrylics don't "work" for Bulgaria. Countries don't have mediums assigned to them. It should be up to the map maker to make it come to life how ever they want.

Nobody has (in this discussion at least) complained about your technique. I haven't mentioned your technique. It is the style you are using. Watercolour does not need to be used in one way only. What I'm talking about is mostly about that certain texture and feel you give your maps... the land area, etc. when you look at the land areas across California, Celtic Nations and Thyseneal, you'll see a common pattern, in the land area... it's that certain style, that certain texture, which works well for Thyseneal, and for Celtic nations, but here on California, you miss.

What I'm saying is, you should stop limiting yourself with the watercolour. Start using it as an asset. Be... ahem... Creative with it. Think outside the box. You're using digital image processing any way, so it doesn't always have to be a linear process.

Saying things like "I have a signature style" is just a cop out IMO... To me it just seems like laziness, not wanting to move beyond the comfort zone of what you know, not wanting to experiment with techniques and styles... in other words, limiting yourself to certain styles or techniques is limiting your growth as an artist.

Whatever, the fact of the matter is it doesn't matter what you think.

Too bad that you feel that way.

I was addressing my concerns to the mods and they have already given my a fairly satisfactory answer. They don't need you to fight their battles and they didn't ask you.

I'm not fighting battles for anyone. I'm talking of my own experience (of not just the Foundry), take of it what you will.

[grifftron]

Those that think they can do better then what we have now, why don't you just make your own map foundry social group and see if you can get even 1 decent map out of it... if so party on

[natty dread]

Those that think they can do better then what we have now, why don't you just make your own map foundry social group and see if you can get even 1 decent map out of it... if so party on

Has been tried before... didn't work.

[The Bison King]

Whatever, the fact of the matter is it doesn't matter what you think.

Too bad that you feel that way.

Ugh, you know I don't mean it like that. I always respect your opinion in the foundry. In the context of this thread I was really only looking to have a dialogue with the mods.

[Industrial Helix]

Whatever, the fact of the matter is it doesn't matter what you think.

Too bad that you feel that way.

Ugh, you know I don't mean it like that. I always respect your opinion in the foundry. In the context of this thread I was really only looking to have a dialogue with the mods.

What do you want a dialogue about? Hit me up via PM or something.

[Riskismy]

I have no experience with mapmaking, and the only knowledge I have of the process is the little I've gleaned from reading a foundry thread here and there. So, I hope you'll excuse the presumptuousness of posting a suggestion in this regard.

Speaking to the issues of transparency in the process and how the mapmaker can tell "where he's at", I think there may be some merit to assigning a specific cartographer to each map.
In stead of, or perhaps in addition to, having specific people sitting at specific points in the process (like some at the very start, then one at XML verification, then a couple more at design etc.), put one guy in charge of this specific map. He might work as a mentor for the less experienced mapmakers, and have the final word in whether a map is ready to move on. The other cartographers sitting at the respective points in the process would and should have their say, of course - but the mapmaker would always know where to turn with questions regarding the process, and the other cartographers would never have to worry that their post be taken as gospel, since the assigned cartographer would be god in issues of the process.

Well, I think you get the gist of the idea. Not sure if this would work for this situation, but my experience with organisations and teams tells me that there's a lot to be gained from having a go-to man that has had his hand in the project from the moment it took flight.

Hope it helps.

[TaCktiX]

That idea has been done in the past, and generally it doesn't work, partly due to time constraints on the part of any one CA and partly due to the fact that any one CA is not a master of all parts of the Foundry process. I myself am really good at nitpicky graphical details and the overall gameplay feel of a map, but broad-stroke graphics and statistics in gameplay are beyond me.

[grifftron]

Those that think they can do better then what we have now, why don't you just make your own map foundry social group and see if you can get even 1 decent map out of it... if so party on

Has been tried before... didn't work.

sure it has, which proves a good point of why the foundry is important.. DUH!

[Riskismy]

That idea has been done in the past, and generally it doesn't work, partly due to time constraints on the part of any one CA and partly due to the fact that any one CA is not a master of all parts of the Foundry process. I myself am really good at nitpicky graphical details and the overall gameplay feel of a map, but broad-stroke graphics and statistics in gameplay are beyond me.

Well, seems to me that the only real problem, then, is the time issue. Maybe the OP had a point about making more CA's? Even from my short time reading these forums, I can tell there's a lot of knowledgeable people taking part already.

[Industrial Helix]

Well, hopefully the rearrangement made in january is going to speed things up a bit... in the short time I've been in the graphics workshop, things appear to be speeding up significantly. I see six maps moved on and three more about ready to move... impressive by foundry standards of speed.

[Riskismy]

That's great news, congrats on the improvement. Have you posted about the changes, or is there a thread discussing them? I'm curious.

Thanks.

[Industrial Helix]

I suppose this is the thread discussing them.

This is the thread in which they were announced: viewtopic.php?f=127&t=136363