Conquer Club

Is it me or does every thing seem incredibly slow since the Foundry re-opened.

In the Graphics workshop I get like one comment a week... in the FF a little bit more than a comment a week. (Which to be honest is fine, I'm tried of graphics nitpicks. I dunno why it takes 7 days to decide if the XML is good... same for Japan ect. If Forza checked it then its good right?)

But yeah, all the other threads seem to be moving incredibly slow besides my own. Any thoughts as to why?

I think it's just a normal lull. No science about it; it'll just pick up when people have more time.

Yeah. Atm the only thread getting lots of post action is the Clandemonium map in the gfx shop, and that's mostly because it's attracting all the clan people over to the foundry...

Things have been slow. Not many comments to any maps. Personally I try to drop a few lines each time an update is posted, but if I can't think anything to criticize, I don't often want to bother the mapmaker with "looks good, keep going" that has no real value to the map process...

I'm just wondering though if placing the 2 map limit on the mapmakers, has given people the message that the foundry is slowing down (as well as stateements that the mods don't have time anymore to do this volunteer work), and therefore there is less need to worry about commenting on maps.
"Come 'round what goes 'round."

I think the new setup was designed to make it easier for the mods, but they are realizing it is actually much harder when they have a timetable in place. There is more pressure to be fast. With the melting pot, some of the maps do deserve to be advanced, but many of the maps in the gameplay section that are begging to be moved aren't really ready by the old standards, so they shouldn't be ready by the new standards.

As far as people actually coming in and posting, I think it is just noticed more. Before the vast majority of maps in the drafting room were never going to move out of there, and most didn't make it past the first five or six updates. It is the same thing now. Even before there were very few maps that got stamped for gameplay.

I don't really know about the graphics section, as I haven't gotten in there much, I have been busy, but I can assume that that is just slow due to the mods getting busy at the wrong time.

when nothing changes for years, it's hard to be excited.

13 Colonies is in Beta, Italian and German Unification is in XML, of which I'm not even doing. When can I have another map moved into the gameplay workshop (South Africa 1885).

Making maps is fun and a good time killer, also a nice artistic exercise. I'd like to continue while my other maps "in production" just sit there.

Heh... this got merged with my other whiny complaint thread.

I'm back from a two month forced hiatus, and I have to say I'm disappointed. It's good to see a lot of the maps at Gameplay stage when I left are now Beta or Live. But at the same time, maps I thought wouldn't need much more to get Out There are stuck in Forge. My chief disappointment is leaving a long-worked-on, long-expected full version of Research and Conquer out there, with a full list of our concerns to get the gameplay on its way. Instead of seeing good solid answers or thoughts on any of those bullet points, people took three steps back and asked "where are the spies?"

I could be extrapolating data from nowhere, but if my own map is any indication, we've got to re-evaluate some priorities as a Foundry. Not a mod thing, not a veteran thing, a Foundry thing. Comments in line with what the mapmaker needs (and a lot of the more experienced mapmakers know exactly what they need to go further) are among them, but comments in general on all maps out there is needed. Yes, your own little nest egg of a map is important, but without community involvement, no one will have the desire to visit and comment on your map. Things are so slow because no one is being a team player and helping out others. Karma is in full effect here in the Foundry. People notice when you comment on their maps, and in most cases, they eventually check out your map and leave their two cents. That's how it's always been, but apparently time has created doubters. Stop doubting, and participate.

I agree fully with tacticx. Currently, every map seems to have it's own entourage of people following the map and posting suggestions / feedback. With some rare visits to other map threads...

What I'd like to see would be everyone commenting on all map threads. Even if you don't particularly care about a map, give your honest opinion to the mapmaker.

I myself try to post a comment every time I see a new update on a map... Although, if I can't see anything to criticize I usually don't post just to say "this looks good" when, although it might stroke the ego of the mapmaker, it doesn't really help the development of the map...

I agree with Tacktix and natty. Also I watching maps where the mapmaker has the ability to put on screen what their ideas are and those are the ones being put into the gameplay workshop and up. While those of us (like myself while I could study my butt off in English could only get a 65%), get left behind to try and figure out how to word our design brief. No map should move forward only on that alone. I think that if the mapmaker is making strides to present his/her ideas on the map then that is what it should really be based on, not how good you can present your ideas.

TaCktiX wrote:I could be extrapolating data from nowhere, but if my own map is any indication, we've got to re-evaluate some priorities as a Foundry... Comments in line with what the mapmaker needs (and a lot of the more experienced mapmakers know exactly what they need to go further) are among them, but comments in general on all maps out there is needed...

As an 'outsider' (not being a real mapmaker myself) I suppose I can give my own perspective on what you're saying here Tac.

First, the Foundry revisions, while criticized as being superficial, have made the forum a friendlier place for players-who-are-not-mapmakers to comment. The Melting Pot, specifically, is what I'm talking about. The name alone is more inviting to everyone, not just a clique of dedicated 'pros' who, through no fault of their own, make 'laymen' feel out of place.

However, it took an article by Natty to make my comments feel 'welcome' enough to visit the Foundry. Actually the whole Foundry section of the Newsletter I think is great PR for soliciting outsider comments, but Natty's piece on the Melting Pot specifically convinced me that 'laymen' comments were actually wanted.

Even then, I viewed the forum for quite some time before actually commenting. This isn't unusual for a lot of forums, but the comments that get posted to these maps are often revolving around graphical issues very early on and involve jargon that only graphic artists would comprehend.

So, in essence, one barrier to community involvement is the elevated level of discussion going on. Natty and others are very patient usually and very supportive of everyone's comments, but it's still hard to feel like one is contributing to a map when people are talking about layers and pixelated edges and filters and so forth... I think, if mapmakers really want the community more involved, that the Melting Pot is where they'll have to focus their attention, and the mapmaker needs to moderate the discussion by continually inviting 'laymen' comments. Really, it seems silly or childish, but just posting something that says, "Hey, guys, this thread needs feedback, I value the 'Good job!' posts as much as 'Your territory border at Newlandia seems jagged' comments"- even if that's not completely true-could push a hesitant viewer over the 'hump' and get them to pitch in their two cents.

And on that topic, I think that some mapmakers have a case of wanting to have their cake and eat it too... they want lots of comments, but they only want the 'good' stuff (specific, constructive, insightful). Now it's OK to have standards, but if you're going to be picky about your feedback then you have to realize that you're not going to get a lot of it. Also, mapmakers like to make maps, but some don't moderate their threads very well; nor do they organize information in a viewer-friendly fashion.

If someone says, "Good job!", you might be inclined to groan for its lack of content (other than the slight boost to the ego). But look at this post as an opportunity rather than an annoyance- I mean, someone did actually bother to take the time to comment on the map, however vaguely, so there must be at least a little interest there. Ask the person who posted what they like so much about your map, what do they think are the strengths? Yes, you'll probably get a ho-hum answer (if they answer at all), but every so once in a while you might be surprised. No matter what, by doing this you're making it clear that you value ALL comments and that you really do want their full opinion. People pick up on that, and a welcoming atmosphere can have longer-term effects.

Once people comment in the Melting Pot, and if their comments are well-recieved, they'll be more likely to stick around and start visiting the Gameplay, Graphics and Final Forge forums. I know that was the intention of the revision, that I'm not stating anything new; I guess I'm just restating it because mapmakers currently in the Gameplay and Graphics forums who aren't getting comments need to perhaps publicize their maps back in the Melting Pot.

TaCktiX wrote:Yes, your own little nest egg of a map is important, but without community involvement, no one will have the desire to visit and comment on your map. Things are so slow because no one is being a team player and helping out others... Stop doubting, and participate...

A spot-on assessment from Tac. The Foundry does involve a lot of narrow-focus groups that pursue projects independently from each other. Natty, Industrial Helix and Isaiah are mapmakers that I've noticed provide a lot of community feedback, and of course the mods (particularly Andy) do seem to follow most of the threads fairly well, but beyond that I find it hard to think of any really involved cross-map commentators.

On the other hand, I will say that the number of maps does get a bit intimidating at some point. And the length of many of the threads becomes a serious barrier to first-time posters. Finally, the Melting Pot forum is way too large I think; similar problems plague the Tournament forums. Better organization might help visitors make sense of all of the ideas being tossed out there.

TaCktiX wrote:...It's good to see a lot of the maps at Gameplay stage when I left are now Beta or Live. But at the same time, maps I thought wouldn't need much more to get Out There are stuck in Forge. My chief disappointment is leaving a long-worked-on, long-expected full version of Research and Conquer out there, with a full list of our concerns to get the gameplay on its way. Instead of seeing good solid answers or thoughts on any of those bullet points, people took three steps back and asked "where are the spies?"

Let me state this again for clarity:
ANY comment on a map is an opportunity to get constructive feedback, if the mapmaker is willing to put in the work moderating the thread.

If a person asks, "Where are the spies?" a mapmaker might be inclined to bang his head against the screen. But you can turn this around by saying,"Hey, thanks for the interest so-and-so. Spies, unfortunately, had to be cut. However, we need some help with blah-and-blah. Any thoughts? Also, do you have any feelings in general about the map... I'd really appreciate your input. "

Mapmakers can't expect to just put out revisions and occasionally debate points with the posts that interest them and still keep the whole community involved. That's like inviting everyone to a party, and then just hanging out with the people you know... and then hoping that everyone else somehow has a good time.

I know that playing host for people who often aren't going to ultimately contribute anything meaningful can be a pain, but it will be necessary for any of the long-term changes that mapmakers seem to be looking for in the Foundry.

Finally, thread length and the first page of a post. These are serious problems in a lot of map threads. I won't elaborate too much as this post is becoming way too long itself, but obviously you can't expect someone to come into a thread 40 pages long and read it all before posting. So be patient with redundant comments, even if you feel the issue brought up has been put to bed.

The first post should be a table of contents, but after a while it in many threads it ceases to get updated properly. Mapmakers like to post 'previous versions' and '888 versions' to show the development of the map and its current viability. This is good for thoroughness, but this really should always go last on the first post as it's not really going to give casual viewers any useful information.

In many ways, mapmakers construct their first post for the approval of the mods rather than being a primer for the casual viewer. Technical information that means little to the laymen gets more of the focus.

Tac, the first post for Research & Conquer is really intricate and thorough in many ways... but it's also huge to navigate. Also, I'm not saying this to be negative, but the Research & Conquer map should perhaps have a more succinct first post for such a long thread. Spies are still mentioned as a possible part of the map, for instance. And the bullet points that you might want addressed need to be put clearly front-and-center by themselves, rather than incorporated in 'Gameplay Notes', 'Graphical Notes' or even the To-Do list.

Anyway, I hope some of this helps you guys. You mapmakers all do a wonderful job on your art and gameplay, and this site and the Foundry in particular have a lot of wise, eloquent and humorous contributors that deserve more consideration from the community at large.

MarshalNey, good insight and well-thought out responses. I partially disagree with you, so that's what I'll cover here.

Once people comment in the Melting Pot, and if their comments are well-recieved, they'll be more likely to stick around and start visiting the Gameplay, Graphics and Final Forge forums. I know that was the intention of the revision, that I'm not stating anything new; I guess I'm just restating it because mapmakers currently in the Gameplay and Graphics forums who aren't getting comments need to perhaps publicize their maps back in the Melting Pot.

The Melting Pot is an overloaded forum as is, sticking in advertisements and such of maps that are further along in stage would make it worse, even if it was just a sticky thread of posts noting present maps. The rest of the Foundry is not that much unlike the Melting Pot. You've got your in-the-clouds talk of "move the army circle 1 pixel to the left and 2 pixels up," but the real bread and butter for a mapmaker is general statements like "I think the map is too dark and the description text is hard to read." Yes, a few more words on "how to improve" are great, but that's something big that we as mapmakers can work to fix in future versions. Fixing one or two army circles pales in comparison. Food for thought.

ANY comment on a map is an opportunity to get constructive feedback, if the mapmaker is willing to put in the work moderating the thread.

If a person asks, "Where are the spies?" a mapmaker might be inclined to bang his head against the screen. But you can turn this around by saying,"Hey, thanks for the interest so-and-so. Spies, unfortunately, had to be cut. However, we need some help with blah-and-blah. Any thoughts? Also, do you have any feelings in general about the map... I'd really appreciate your input. "

Mapmakers can't expect to just put out revisions and occasionally debate points with the posts that interest them and still keep the whole community involved. That's like inviting everyone to a party, and then just hanging out with the people you know... and then hoping that everyone else somehow has a good time.

And my hand just got caught in the cookie jar. I have a tendency to vent elsewhere than my thread (you'll notice that I didn't have any of that talk in the map thread), need to work on that.

Finally, thread length and the first page of a post. These are serious problems in a lot of map threads. I won't elaborate too much as this post is becoming way too long itself, but obviously you can't expect someone to come into a thread 40 pages long and read it all before posting. So be patient with redundant comments, even if you feel the issue brought up has been put to bed.

The first post should be a table of contents, but after a while it in many threads it ceases to get updated properly. Tac, I'm not saying this to be negative, but the Research & Conquer map should have a better updated first post for such a long thread. Spies are still mentioned as a viable part of the map, for instance. And the bullet points that you might want addressed need to be put on the first post, clearly front-and-center. I saw a To-Do list, but I'm not really sure what kind of feedback you're looking for.

Here's my dirty little secret for map topics: I almost never read it all. Most often when I'm checking out a map, I will find its most recent revision and read it and all subsequent posts. Very rarely I end up commenting on an already-settled issue, but the 5% less-than-perfect at the gain of 95% of the time...good tradeoff in my opinion. There is little to no need to read an entire map topic, as there is too much change over time in a map. Reading anything earlier than the most recent 3 or 4 versions is like reading a history book compared to the present map.

As for the first post...I need to get with Oliver on fixing that, it's old and outdated compared to the present version of the map. A more authoritative State of the Map is just looking at my update posts (Version 2 at present).

RjBeals wrote:when nothing changes for years, it's hard to be excited.

Eh, I wouldn't worry too much about it for now. Things will change eventually.

MarshalNey wrote:it took an article by Natty to make my comments feel 'welcome' enough to visit the Foundry. Actually the whole Foundry section of the Newsletter I think is great PR for soliciting outsider comments, but Natty's piece on the Melting Pot specifically convinced me that 'laymen' comments were actually wanted.

Wow, that was exactly what the article-series was intended for. I'm glad I could make a difference