Quad Cities Map [Quenched]

[DiM]

Nah. I've already taken snobby posts like yours personally and moved on. My map has been approved through this point and while I've made plenty of efforts to touch it up, this is pretty much where its at now. I'm sorry it doesn't meet your elitist graphical standards, and I'm sorry I don't have some wacky gameplay which seems to be a free pass for crappy graphics.

snobby post. don't make me laugh. just because i demand that your map meets at least the same quality standard as the other maps now in final forge does not make me a snob. if anything i believe this is a decent request. i did not ask your map to be the best, heck, i didn't even ask it to be great. all it needed was to be at least at the same level as the other maps that are now in final forge. can you honestly compare your map with Golfe Du St. Laurent or Austro-Hungarian Empire or Baltic Crusades or any of the other maps in final forge?

you claim to have made plenty of efforts to touch it up? HA. you've made almost no improvements from this version: http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a193/ ... isk630.png
and that was 8 months ago. my god man in 8 months you can develop enough photoshop/gimp/fireworks skills to seriously improve this map. what you did was simply add some horrible bevel and change the background.

people with much more experience than you have scraped their whole work and started from scratch when the community reasonably demanded it.
i looked a few pages back and i saw foundry veterans complaining about the poor graphics on this map. what was your response? nothing. you simply ignored them. heck, back in the day this map would have never left the drafting subforum especially with a map maker that has your attitude.
but hey, it seems like any crap goes nowadays if you're patient enough and keep on ignoring what you don't like.

This was my first map. I've taken note of posts similar to yours and will consider them on my next project. Once this goes Beta I invite you to give it a play if you're not too put off or agitated by its mediocrity.

Come slumming on the inadequate Quad Cities Map!

i don't care if this is your map. ignoring valid comments just because you're too lazy or you don't have the skill to implement what people request is intolerable. especially since this is your first project you should pay more attention to other people say especially when they're more experienced than you.
as for me playing this map...god forbid. when i have ~180 maps that look better and play better, why would i bother with this?
by all means, prove me wrong, turn this map around and create a beautiful and interesting map and i'll be the first to play it and congratulate you. but until then all i can hope is that andy won't be insane enough to quench this. afterall maps of this quality were standard in 2006. it's been 5 years since then.

[MrBenn]

A line has to be drawn somewhere, and for me that line was crossed a long time ago. I remember having an argument with cairnswk about a map at a time when I was determined that each CC map should be better than the one before. However, times have changed, and we have new mapmakers with different perspectives on things. While we still strive for quality, the emphasis that the current community places on maps is that it should be the best the mapmaker can do, rather than the best *any* mapmaker can do. Sure there are legitimate nitpicks that can be made about pixelation, rotated borders and so on; but the place to argue a case for a graphical overhaul should really be in the graphics workshop.

For a first map, I would happily argue the case that this map brings something refreshingly simple and crisp back to the cc table - too many maps recently have been overly confusing and cluttered and it is purely my tardiness of late that has delayed the forging of some of these maps in the forge.

As for attitude, some mapmakers have developed an "it's my map and I can do with it what the hell I like" attitude, that really grates with me. This is not the impression that I have had from seeing how ironsij0287 has handled the development of this map over the past few months. If this map is bland and lacklustre, then that is the fault of the community that has shown its support. It is the fault of the experienced mapmakers who have failed to pass an opinion before the finishing line is in sight. It is the fault of the CAs for not extinguishing the light when the map was on the drafting room floor....

Yes, there are many maps and mapmakers who have reached the finishing line only to encounter a barrage of criticism, including several of the current CA team. We have all learned what it takes to make a map and have (most of us) all experienced the thrill of having our creation available for play by the rest of the community. When I look back at my own body of work, I can honestly say that Europa would look completely different if I were to spend another 11 months on it. I might change the bonus scheme on Wales to make it slightly less dice-dependant. I would make England less open. I would change the way that the ports worked on Mexico. I would like to have added even more territories to the Balkan Peninsular map.... While there are things I would like to change about each of my maps, the real door-opener was my first. If I had been faced with demands to completely revamp my work after 10 or 11 months, then I probably would not have stuck around. The voices I listened to were those of the people who had helped and guided me through the mapmaking process; my contemporaries who were making maps at the same time as me; people who offered advice, insight, and specific methods as to how things could be improved - and as far as I can tell, where ironsij0287 has been given constructive criticism, it has been taken on board.

Let's be honest here. This map is not a Puget Sound or a Japan. If this were the 2nd, 3rd or 4th map that somebody was churning out, with little stylistic change and with an attitude of superiority, arrogance or ignorance then I would be amongst the voices clamouring for change. However, the map is clean. It is simple. It is refreshing. It is a decent map by a first-time mapmaker who deserves a chance to go on to bigger and better things.

[DiM]

so let's see if i get this straight. in order to get a map quenched all you need is: shitty graphics with a bland gameplay to turn away away almost everybody, a lot of patience, very few minor updates, ignorance for those that you don't like and absent minded CAs. wham bam 8-12 months later your map is on display.

yeah, i wasn't around here when the map was in graphics. does that mean i'm not allowed to voice my concerns? if i remember correctly a few years ago maps used to be taken a step back when the community demanded it and no badge was final. anything was changeable up until the very end.

benn with all due respect but your words sadden me the most. when a foundry foreman deems this map worthy of a graphic badge and even more, he defends the map and says it's ok then it can only mean the foundry has died.
take a look at this map. take a really good look:
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a193/ironsij0287/qcrisk630v5.jpg
now look at this one:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v450/rjbeals/iceland/Iceland_Large_R12.jpg
now realize that it's been over 3 years since rjbeals finished that map. and one would expect that quality at least is kept at the same level if not even increased.
a few years ago if the community didn't object to a map that deserved objecting then the CAs would promptly intervene and offer feedback. plenty of times people have been upset that CAs were very strict and insisted that even pixel sized mistakes be corrected. just ask qwert what ordeals he had to endure and what specific requests he got from CAs. and that was 3-4 years ago when keyogi or coleman would come and complain about a missligned shade or a bit of pixelization on one border.

if the standards have plummeted so far, to the point where this map gets a graphics badge then by all means, make a public announcement that any paint botch job get quenched and soon we'll have 1000 maps just like grand strategy or lux delux and all the other crappy CC clones.

back in the day the foundry was proud of the quality of maps that were produced and lackattack always said that's what makes us stand apart. that grand strategy and lux delux prioritised quantity over quality while CC prized it's masterpieces. a few great maps instead of dozens of crappy ones. from what i see here CC is starting to look like lux delux from a few years ago.

and the irony is that if you check out lux delux you'll see they're starting to improve the quality of their maps.

[cairnswk]

ironsij0287, i've posted this here so i can see what i am talking about.
I don't want to get into the above discussion, but there are a few things that can be done to simply tidy and enhance the map to an improved stage...posted below

[Victor Sullivan]

DiM, I am a fan of your work, particularly the one currently in development (as I'm sure you know ), but I have to agree with MrBenn on this one. I've been following this map for a fair while; I even remember when it got its Graphics stamp, and rightfully so. I think you are only seeing things from your perspective, and not willing to see the beauty behind the simplicity that ironsij0287, MrBenn, I, and many others do. Each mapmaker brings a distinct graphical flavor to their maps, and ironsij's is one that seems to have been lost from CC's assortment. I think Charmin had some wisdom when they said "less is more"

As ironsij has said, he will be taking everyone's comments into consideration for his next project, so let's chill and enjoy the map for what it is - a work of art

-Sully

[cairnswk]

finishing touches for me...

• the title is great, although i would have placed Davenport, Rock Island and Bettendorf on the top line and put East/Moline together on the line underneath, thereafter centering that slightly more in that real estate.
• the river where the white ridges are looks like it is a snake running through the map with high ridges (bevel) in those areas...are you able to flatten this somewhat or make it look like the river sinks into the map rather than sit over it.
• there is some major pixelation going on with the inner borders, and many a cartographer has been asked to fix this in the past. It seems to me you are using a vector program as this pixelation is caused by not having 1. continuous lines from end to end or 2. un-straight lines that are joined midway...
  is there anything you can do to go over these lines, straighten them, and remove the little notches like the one between Rockingham and Credit Island half way along the down curve -> an overall smoother finish to the lines
• can you examine the placement of the 88 armies on Duck Cr. and Devil's Glen, i feel those text may need to be moved slightly to avoid number clashing
• the legend - good use of region placement there, but the background is of concern. in your software, are you able to place another layer over the image or reduce the opacity of the image some. the regions get lost on the bridge and in particular Arsenal Island. can you swap Coal Valley and Bettendorf with Arsenal Island and Moline - the reason is that the latter two would probably stand out better over those pylon towers.
• Fonts: how many have you used? 3 or 4? the title and region fonts are OK. but the instruction for the passable bridge seems out of place as do the region font used in the legend. I feel use of the Continent font under the title would suit the map better if it were used to replace the passable bridge instrustion (not italicised) and the region bonuses in the legend.
• PS...i have to ask about the background image that appears underneath some regions and seems absent from others...what is happending there?

I hope this won't be too much of an inconvenience if you want to improve things slightly within that scope of what you're able to achieve with the software.
Good work for your first map!

[ironsij0287]

finishing touches for me...

• the title is great, although i would have placed Davenport, Rock Island and Bettendorf on the top line and put East/Moline together on the line underneath, thereafter centering that slightly more in that real estate.
• the river where the white ridges are looks like it is a snake running through the map with high ridges (bevel) in those areas...are you able to flatten this somewhat or make it look like the river sinks into the map rather than sit over it.
• there is some major pixelation going on with the inner borders, and many a cartographer has been asked to fix this in the past. It seems to me you are using a vector program as this pixelation is caused by not having 1. continuous lines from end to end or 2. un-straight lines that are joined midway...
  is there anything you can do to go over these lines, straighten them, and remove the little notches like the one between Rockingham and Credit Island half way along the down curve -> an overall smoother finish to the lines
• can you examine the placement of the 88 armies on Duck Cr. and Devil's Glen, i feel those text may need to be moved slightly to avoid number clashing
• the legend - good use of region placement there, but the background is of concern. in your software, are you able to place another layer over the image or reduce the opacity of the image some. the regions get lost on the bridge and in particular Arsenal Island. can you swap Coal Valley and Bettendorf with Arsenal Island and Moline - the reason is that the latter two would probably stand out better over those pylon towers.
• Fonts: how many have you used? 3 or 4? the title and region fonts are OK. but the instruction for the passable bridge seems out of place as do the region font used in the legend. I feel use of the Continent font under the title would suit the map better if it were used to replace the passable bridge instrustion (not italicised) and the region bonuses in the legend.
• PS...i have to ask about the background image that appears underneath some regions and seems absent from others...what is happending there?

I hope this won't be too much of an inconvenience if you want to improve things slightly within that scope of what you're able to achieve with the software.
Good work for your first map!

This all looks to be pretty doable. Thank you. I'll work through this list and address each point accordingly.

[DiM]

I think you are only seeing things from your perspective, and not willing to see the beauty behind the simplicity that ironsij0287, MrBenn, I, and many others do. Each mapmaker brings a distinct graphical flavor to their maps, and ironsij's is one that seems to have been lost from CC's assortment. I think Charmin had some wisdom when they said "less is more"

i have nothing against simplicity. and i can always appreciate simple straightforward graphics as long as they're perfectly executed and they have style. what we have here is a begginner's work that should not meet foundry standards.

you want beauty in simplicity and less is more?
take a look at this or this. that is beauty. that is art.

now look at this map and tell me it's at the same standard. the river looks like plastic. it has no flow, no sense of direction and motion. the bevel makes every area look like a hill and the rivers like they're on the bottom of canyons. the borders are in some places pixelated and in other places blurry. the background is way too strong. the legend is totally broken away from the map, it's like some totally random image.

As ironsij has said, he will be taking everyone's comments into consideration for his next project,

so basically if i don't like what somebody comments about my map i can simply say i'll take it into consideration for my next project. i wish this poor excuse worked a few years ago when we had to carefully place each and every pixel and fulfil every single demand the community had. it would have saved me a lot of hours.
a map of this quality only takes ~1 hour to create. and that's with research time included. i guess the joke is on the people that bother working more to provide quality.

so let's chill and enjoy the map for what it is - a work of art

at first i was really bugged that you considered this a work of art. then i remembered that nowadays you can take dog poo, seamen and blood, smear it with a mop on a canvas and sell it for thousands of dollars (true story). so yeah, if you take that into consideration this could be considered a work of art.
that idiot da Vinci spent 15 years working on monalisa. if he only knew he could use poo...

i'm upset. i'll go watch rango. be back later hopefully in a better mood.

[ironsij0287]

I think you are only seeing things from your perspective, and not willing to see the beauty behind the simplicity that ironsij0287, MrBenn, I, and many others do. Each mapmaker brings a distinct graphical flavor to their maps, and ironsij's is one that seems to have been lost from CC's assortment. I think Charmin had some wisdom when they said "less is more"

i have nothing against simplicity. and i can always appreciate simple straightforward graphics as long as they're perfectly executed and they have style. what we have here is a begginner's work that should not meet foundry standards.

you want beauty in simplicity and less is more?
take a look at this or this. that is beauty. that is art.

now look at this map and tell me it's at the same standard. the river looks like plastic. it has no flow, no sense of direction and motion. the bevel makes every area look like a hill and the rivers like they're on the bottom of canyons. the borders are in some places pixelated and in other places blurry. the background is way too strong. the legend is totally broken away from the map, it's like some totally random image.

As ironsij has said, he will be taking everyone's comments into consideration for his next project,

so basically if i don't like what somebody comments about my map i can simply say i'll take it into consideration for my next project. i wish this poor excuse worked a few years ago when we had to carefully place each and every pixel and fulfil every single demand the community had. it would have saved me a lot of hours.
a map of this quality only takes ~1 hour to create. and that's with research time included. i guess the joke is on the people that bother working more to provide quality.

so let's chill and enjoy the map for what it is - a work of art

at first i was really bugged that you considered this a work of art. then i remembered that nowadays you can take dog poo, seamen and blood, smear it with a mop on a canvas and sell it for thousands of dollars (true story). so yeah, if you take that into consideration this could be considered a work of art.
that idiot da Vinci spent 15 years working on monalisa. if he only knew he could use poo...

i'm upset. i'll go watch rango. be back later hopefully in a better mood.

Good lord, you're talking about da Vinci in context to maps on CC? Jesus get a grip dude. Clearly you don't like the style I tried to use. I didn't want to make everything look like it was created by hand or have a worn or vintage/old-timey look to it. Not that I have anything against it, but with this I wanted a cleaner more contemporary look. I make maps for very utilitarian purposes everyday. They need to be clear and concise. This is the school of thought I'm coming from. I'm not a graphic designer dabbling in mapmaking. I'm a mapmaker dabbling in graphic design here.

[codeblue1018]

I think you are only seeing things from your perspective, and not willing to see the beauty behind the simplicity that ironsij0287, MrBenn, I, and many others do. Each mapmaker brings a distinct graphical flavor to their maps, and ironsij's is one that seems to have been lost from CC's assortment. I think Charmin had some wisdom when they said "less is more"

i have nothing against simplicity. and i can always appreciate simple straightforward graphics as long as they're perfectly executed and they have style. what we have here is a begginner's work that should not meet foundry standards.

you want beauty in simplicity and less is more?
take a look at this or this. that is beauty. that is art.

now look at this map and tell me it's at the same standard. the river looks like plastic. it has no flow, no sense of direction and motion. the bevel makes every area look like a hill and the rivers like they're on the bottom of canyons. the borders are in some places pixelated and in other places blurry. the background is way too strong. the legend is totally broken away from the map, it's like some totally random image.

As ironsij has said, he will be taking everyone's comments into consideration for his next project,

so basically if i don't like what somebody comments about my map i can simply say i'll take it into consideration for my next project. i wish this poor excuse worked a few years ago when we had to carefully place each and every pixel and fulfil every single demand the community had. it would have saved me a lot of hours.
a map of this quality only takes ~1 hour to create. and that's with research time included. i guess the joke is on the people that bother working more to provide quality.

so let's chill and enjoy the map for what it is - a work of art

at first i was really bugged that you considered this a work of art. then i remembered that nowadays you can take dog poo, seamen and blood, smear it with a mop on a canvas and sell it for thousands of dollars (true story). so yeah, if you take that into consideration this could be considered a work of art.
that idiot da Vinci spent 15 years working on monalisa. if he only knew he could use poo...

i'm upset. i'll go watch rango. be back later hopefully in a better mood.

Dim,

Welcome back btw; not sure i'd want you to be my boss, lol. I don't mind the map as a whole; simplicity? Absolutely. You've been around and involved with some really cool maps Dim, Instead get with this guy and mentor him so that he can transform this idea into a gem of a map. Everyone started with their first map and I agree, in order for something to turn from somewhat bland to great is from community critique in many cases, ideas from others. Although, some players want the easy, non complicated maps others, not so much. Delivery, delivery, delivery, Dim; I'd probably take your comments personal also but aside from that, I understand what you meant by your delivery.

[DiM]

Clearly you don't like the style I tried to use. I didn't want to make everything look like it was created by hand or have a worn or vintage/old-timey look to it. Not that I have anything against it, but with this I wanted a cleaner more contemporary look. I make maps for very utilitarian purposes everyday. They need to be clear and concise. This is the school of thought I'm coming from. I'm not a graphic designer dabbling in mapmaking. I'm a mapmaker dabbling in graphic design here.

you say clean, contemporary, simple. i'm fine with that. and if this map would be like that i'd have absolutely nothing against it. but the problem is it's not simple and it sure as hell is not clean.
if you want simple clean and crisp look at australia or portugal.

your map is a mixture of effects that don't mix very well at all. as i said: "the river looks like plastic. it has no flow, no sense of direction and motion. the bevel makes every area look like a hill and the rivers like they're on the bottom of canyons. the borders are in some places pixelated and in other places blurry. the background is way too strong. the legend is totally broken away from the map, it's like some totally random image"
you want simple and clean? fix the problems i mentioned. get rid of the bevel or at least reduce it drastically (1px). tone down the background by muting both the colour and the texture. work on the rivers, integrate the legend into the big picture. do that and maybe we could see something clean and simple. until then it's a mess.

as for being a graphic designer, i'll let you in on a little secret: very few map makers are. in fact most of the map makers started learning photoshop after they came to conquerclub. if you have the time and curiosity to search my earliest posts you'll see the horrendous maps i used to create at first when all i had was paint. then i slowly started learning and improving solely because i listend to critics took advice and applied it. yes sometimes people seemed harsh and believe me, 3-4 years ago the map foundry was a ruthless place. but looking in retrospective each and every post that i considered harsh only motivated me and drove me forward.

too bad you take it personally and linger in the same state with little to no improvement instead of working hard to get better graphics.

as i said before, i maintain my belief that had this map been created in 2007-2008 it would have died a quick death and it would have never reached final forge without massive improvement. also back then CAs used to punish stubborn map makers not encourage them.

[ironsij0287]

Clearly you don't like the style I tried to use. I didn't want to make everything look like it was created by hand or have a worn or vintage/old-timey look to it. Not that I have anything against it, but with this I wanted a cleaner more contemporary look. I make maps for very utilitarian purposes everyday. They need to be clear and concise. This is the school of thought I'm coming from. I'm not a graphic designer dabbling in mapmaking. I'm a mapmaker dabbling in graphic design here.

you say clean, contemporary, simple. i'm fine with that. and if this map would be like that i'd have absolutely nothing against it. but the problem is it's not simple and it sure as hell is not clean.
if you want simple clean and crisp look at australia or portugal.

your map is a mixture of effects that don't mix very well at all. as i said: "the river looks like plastic. it has no flow, no sense of direction and motion. the bevel makes every area look like a hill and the rivers like they're on the bottom of canyons. the borders are in some places pixelated and in other places blurry. the background is way too strong. the legend is totally broken away from the map, it's like some totally random image"
you want simple and clean? fix the problems i mentioned. get rid of the bevel or at least reduce it drastically (1px). tone down the background by muting both the colour and the texture. work on the rivers, integrate the legend into the big picture. do that and maybe we could see something clean and simple. until then it's a mess.

as for being a graphic designer, i'll let you in on a little secret: very few map makers are. in fact most of the map makers started learning photoshop after they came to conquerclub. if you have the time and curiosity to search my earliest posts you'll see the horrendous maps i used to create at first when all i had was paint. then i slowly started learning and improving solely because i listend to critics took advice and applied it. yes sometimes people seemed harsh and believe me, 3-4 years ago the map foundry was a ruthless place. but looking in retrospective each and every post that i considered harsh only motivated me and drove me forward.

too bad you take it personally and linger in the same state with little to no improvement instead of working hard to get better graphics.

as i said before, i maintain my belief that had this map been created in 2007-2008 it would have died a quick death and it would have never reached final forge without massive improvement. also back then CAs used to punish stubborn map makers not encourage them.

I'm not trying to be stubborn. DiM this is the first post you made with some real advice. I've already gone back and forth with Beals and in the end he did offer some suggestions that I listened to. I'll admit that I'm still trying to grow thicker skin but your first posts weren't real constructive as much as they were just a rant against the current state of the Foundry.

I could lessen the bevels, certainly. As far as the river looking "plastic" I'm not sure what to do there. And I agree that the pixelated boundaries could be improved.

It looks like I have some time to tinker with things for a while before this map has a chance to go Beta. I'll see what I can do.

[Orwell]

@ironsij0287:
Considering all of the good work you have put into this map, you are gracious to consider this unfounded criticism you have received - that said, I can't wait to play this map and I see no reason you should delay it's release to satisfy someone's subjective and persnickety standards.

[Incandenza]

@ironsij0287:
Considering all of the good work you have put into this map, you are gracious to consider this unfounded criticism you have received - that said, I can't wait to play this map and I see no reason you should delay it's release to satisfy someone's subjective and persnickety standards.

Just for the record, "unfounded criticism" would be something like "this map sucks, don't make it", not hundreds of words worth of specific problems, pointers, and suggestions from one of the most accomplished mapmakers in the history of the site. DiM didn't post here just 'cause he wanted to kill some time and f*ck with a noob, y'know. The whole point of the foundry is that standards should be high, otherwise we're just landgrab and we might as well let every person with a copy of Paint make their own quicky maps.

[Orwell]

@ironsij0287:
Considering all of the good work you have put into this map, you are gracious to consider this unfounded criticism you have received - that said, I can't wait to play this map and I see no reason you should delay it's release to satisfy someone's subjective and persnickety standards.

Just for the record, "unfounded criticism" would be something like "this map sucks, don't make it", not hundreds of words worth of specific problems, pointers, and suggestions from one of the most accomplished mapmakers in the history of the site. DiM didn't post here just 'cause he wanted to kill some time and f*ck with a noob, y'know. The whole point of the foundry is that standards should be high, otherwise we're just landgrab and we might as well let every person with a copy of Paint make their own quicky maps.

I can consider the criticism unfounded even if there is constructive criticism within it - my point is that it comes late and I think was unnecessarily harsh. So, while you may have your reasons for defending DiM, I think ironsij0287 deserves some credit.

[zimmah]

@ironsij0287:
Considering all of the good work you have put into this map, you are gracious to consider this unfounded criticism you have received - that said, I can't wait to play this map and I see no reason you should delay it's release to satisfy someone's subjective and persnickety standards.

right, so you actually like CC being flooded by poorly created maps?

at this rate, even i can drawn maps in paint and expect them to be quenched.

i might even post this as a map

Click image to enlarge.

(i did not draw it myself, but f i do draw maps myself, they'd be very simular)


I mean face it, if you are bad at making jewels, you wouldn't sell jewels either, would you? or do you really expect people to buy rings from you, if you made them square? think about it.

[zimmah]

@ironsij0287:
Considering all of the good work you have put into this map, you are gracious to consider this unfounded criticism you have received - that said, I can't wait to play this map and I see no reason you should delay it's release to satisfy someone's subjective and persnickety standards.

Just for the record, "unfounded criticism" would be something like "this map sucks, don't make it", not hundreds of words worth of specific problems, pointers, and suggestions from one of the most accomplished mapmakers in the history of the site. DiM didn't post here just 'cause he wanted to kill some time and f*ck with a noob, y'know. The whole point of the foundry is that standards should be high, otherwise we're just landgrab and we might as well let every person with a copy of Paint make their own quicky maps.

I can consider the criticism unfounded even if there is constructive criticism within it - my point is that it comes late and I think was unnecessarily harsh. So, while you may have your reasons for defending DiM, I think ironsij0287 deserves some credit.

it's NEVER too late to improve a map, even AFTER it went live.

[Orwell]

@ironsij0287:
Considering all of the good work you have put into this map, you are gracious to consider this unfounded criticism you have received - that said, I can't wait to play this map and I see no reason you should delay it's release to satisfy someone's subjective and persnickety standards.

right, so you actually like CC being flooded by poorly created maps?

A fallacious argument and a bad assumption - and since the rest of your post is predicated on it, it's not worth further response.

What I like is the Quad Cities map. I am showing support to ironsij0287 and those who have put good work into this map.

[zimmah]

@ironsij0287:
Considering all of the good work you have put into this map, you are gracious to consider this unfounded criticism you have received - that said, I can't wait to play this map and I see no reason you should delay it's release to satisfy someone's subjective and persnickety standards.

right, so you actually like CC being flooded by poorly created maps?

A fallacious argument and a bad assumption - and since the rest of your post is predicated on it, it's not worth further response.

What I like is the Quad Cities map. I am showing support to ironsij0287 and those who have put good work into this map.

look, i understand that he is doing his best for the map, and i also appriciate his work, but you can't just deny the overall quality of the maps in the foundry has drasticly deteriorated. we just want to avoid the quality of the maps on CC going down to the point where CC has 1000 maps that have almost no revolutionary gameplay and poor graphics

[DiM]

I can consider the criticism unfounded even if there is constructive criticism within it - my point is that it comes late and I think was unnecessarily harsh. So, while you may have your reasons for defending DiM, I think ironsij0287 deserves some credit.

there's no such thing as too late. there are cases in the history of the foundry where a map that was close to final forge was actually taken back to the graphics section for an overhaul when such an action was needed. heck i know a poor fellow that spent months working on just some pixelated borders while many other kept insisting the map is done. and indeed the map was perfect except for those borders. in fact the map was even better looking than this one and yet it wasn't allowed to move forward until the borders were solved.
tight rules and standards are the key to improving quality. i'm looking at this map and even at some other already quenched maps and i see a visible drop in quality from what i was used to seeing 3 years ago. maybe that's why i was so harsh. i was gone for a long time and i came back imagining a better foundry with more people, fantastic maps, hundreds of daily posts of feedback only to realise there has been a decrease in all aspects: some poorer maps, no xml improvements, some of the best map makers gone to work for another site, few people commenting on maps and seeing this in final forge close to quenching made me snap. to be honest i would advise ironsij to take this map scratch it and start over. use everything he learned in this time, put all the feedback to good use on a fresh piece of canvas and create something beautiful.

[Orwell]

Dim, your surprise at the state of the Foundry should be separated from the efforts of ironsij.
Seems like the focus of a different broader thread.

One thing: I completely disagree about there being no too late. As I see it, one should not let perfect stand in the way of good.

This map has gone through due process, and it is what it is. There is no reason to hold it up because of a thousand things it isn't ever going to be or because the perception of quality in the foundry doesn't meet the expectations of some.

Anyway, I am not trying to convince you, I have no allusions you will agree with me, and I am not interested in an argument - but I, like you, am giving my opinion - which is I am here to have fun and I can't wait to play the Quad Cities Map. I think ironsij should be commended for his efforts.

[AndyDufresne]

I think this map's simple design and aesthetic is pretty good. The only thing that I dislike, and have continued to dislike, is the legend. If there is any part of the map that is weak, I'd say it is that area. But the rest of the map I think is on par with other simply designed maps.


--Andy

[DiM]

This map has gone through due process, and it is what it is.

it is my opinion that this map does not deserve it's graphics badge. and i'm not the only one to think so. the fact that it got it's badge can only mean a mistake was made somewhere and that mistake must be corrected. if there's room for improvement than that improvement must be done regardless of what stage the map finds itself in.
i don't know if many people remember the puget sound "drama". the thread had 14 pages people were yelling quench and then some problems were spotter. some nasty things were said people were upset but 20 pages later the map looked much better. i don't think anybody regrets that the map had to undergo some reconstruction, not even tisha. the map looked like this: http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c282/Tisha1276/largenumbers.jpg
but after the reconstruction it looked way better: http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c282/Tisha1276/c1b1ac3a.jpg

edit// my bad. posted the same image twice.

[zimmah]

This map has gone through due process, and it is what it is.

it is my opinion that this map does not deserve it's graphics badge. and i'm not the only one to think so. the fact that it got it's badge can only mean a mistake was made somewhere and that mistake must be corrected. if there's room for improvement than that improvement must be done regardless of what stage the map finds itself in.
i don't know if many people remember the puget sound "drama". the thread had 14 pages people were yelling quench and then some problems were spotter. some nasty things were said people were upset but 20 pages later the map looked much better. i don't think anybody regrets that the map had to undergo some reconstruction, not even tisha. the map looked like this: http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c282/Tisha1276/largenumbers.jpg
but after the reconstruction it looked way better: http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c282/Tisha1276/largenumbers.jpg

you posted the same picture twice

[MrBenn]

This map has gone through due process, and it is what it is.

it is my opinion that this map does not deserve it's graphics badge. and i'm not the only one to think so. the fact that it got it's badge can only mean a mistake was made somewhere and that mistake must be corrected. if there's room for improvement than that improvement must be done regardless of what stage the map finds itself in.
i don't know if many people remember the puget sound "drama". the thread had 14 pages people were yelling quench and then some problems were spotter. some nasty things were said people were upset but 20 pages later the map looked much better. i don't think anybody regrets that the map had to undergo some reconstruction, not even tisha. the map looked like this: http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c282/Tisha1276/largenumbers.jpg
but after the reconstruction it looked way better: http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c282/Tisha1276/largenumbers.jpg

Aside from the fact you posted the same link twice (here's the final image: http://maps.conquerclub.com/Puget_Sound.L.jpg), I know that things are being worked on behind-the scenes and further updates will be given in due course