World Cities Contest: We have a winner!

[Bruceswar]

I would say everybody who meets the the requirements can move on to the next stage. With that said they might find a bonus value that needs fixing or anything else they deem before they release a map to the next stage.

[Industrial Helix]

We're reviewing all of them at the moment... expect a post in your thread with any adjustments that need to be made. I think that all 11 should be going through to the next stage.

[Riskismy]

Before you list the maps, I'd like to bring something up. Quoting from the first post:

Gameplay will run for one week, graphics will run for three weeks and each stage will be followed with a round of voting. No run offs.
[...]
Maps will be shortlisted by the cartography staff and posted up for the graphics contest.

You're contradicting yourself here, which is unfortunate. Now I understand why I was surprised there would be no voting on gameplay.

No biggie, you've made clear a while back that there would be a shortlist. But reading these posts, it looks like most every map is getting passed on to part II, which can hardly be considered a contest. This seems more like just a call for a boat-load of map suggestions for the Graphics to have a contest over.

No, if that achievement medal for gameplay is to mean anything, I think we should do it right. First and foremost, however it's done: There should be a drastic cut in the number of maps going on to round 2. At the very least in half. Otherwise, what's the point?
This part is about gameplay, so the entry should have innovative or otherwise extra-ordinary gameplay, which I don't feel most of the entries have, to be perfectly honest. Let's not leave it to the mapmakers what gameplay is the better, hm?

Secondly, I think that the cut should be done by voting, just like we voted for the cities and later will for the graphics. I don't see why the difference is made. The people frequenting the forum is quite capable of telling what kind of gameplay they like for themselves.

It's probably too late for consideration this time around, but I hope you'll take the above into account when you hopefully set up another round.

[Bruceswar]

You are misreading things... there is no vote mentioned for game play... only the graphics phase.

[kengyin]

no, he wants a vote. but i do agree that the number of maps going through should be cut in half otherwise its just one big contest and not one that has 2 sections

[Industrial Helix]

Heads up, I'm marking all titles with s [D] for draft to make it quicker to know which gamesplays have been reviewed.

Maybe I should clarify on who will get a medal for what in regards to gameplay... you get the medal if your gameplay is selected by an artist and taken into fruition and then it makes it through the vote. The bit about a short list applies if there are any drafts which do not meet specifications or are ridiculous in concept, ect. It's just a precaution should anything strange come through. Apologies for any confusion.

[kengyin]

but if it is determined purely by voting then wont there be bias from the popularity of some mapmakers over others. i mean most people arent exactly professional when it comes to this?

[Riskismy]

I guess they'll make the voting anonymous, and I still don't understand why this isn't done for the gameplay part? Why the difference?

@Bruceswar:
It clearly states: "each stage will be followed with a round of voting". No mis-reading there.

[Industrial Helix]

There will be some bias, i imagine. A gameplay is going to have to attract players, right? So wouldn't it have to attract artists as well? Not to mention, there isn't a rule against doing your own graphics. Nor is there a rule against soliciting artists. You should know who's made a map before, if you like their style, ask them to doing a version of your map.

[Riskismy]

There will be some bias, i imagine. A gameplay is going to have to attract players, right?

No more bias than in the other votes, I imagine.

So wouldn't it have to attract artists as well?

I'm sure he can comfortably come to artistic grasp with a choice of say, 3-5 options.

Not to mention, there isn't a rule against doing your own graphics. Nor is there a rule against soliciting artists. You should know who's made a map before, if you like their style, ask them to doing a version of your map.

Oh. So not only do I have to make the gameplay, I have to lobby for it too? That's quite frankly ridiculous, and has next to nothing to do with a competition - at the very most, that amounts to a popularity contest.
Wasn't there a rule against lobbying your map in the last map contest?

This looks more and more to me like some 'clever' ploy to get not just 6-7 almost done maps, but the gameplay to go with each of them as well.

You have still not been able to explain to me why the dstinction between graphics and gameplay is made.

[Industrial Helix]

I don't get what you want... do you want people to vote on which gameplays should be chosen? Do you want me to shortlist the maps and eliminate half of them?

What 'clever ploy' are you talking about? This isn't a conspiracy. MrBenn thought it would be cool to have more maps that corresponded with the classic map for tournament purposes. RedBaron has been suggesting more city maps could be a benefit. People who play conquerclub like new maps. It's straightforward. I thought a contest might be fun.

The reason we're doing it with two stages is because I want the gameplay to be solid and balanced before an artist puts his time into making the graphics portion of the map. I don't want to say to the artist, "hey, we totally rearranged the bonuses and we need you to fix them now." Does that make sense? When gameplay changes the graphics must change... so the logical conclusion to make things smoother is to make the gameplay sure and then do the graphics.

Edit: after reading throught he first post like nine times, I see that I have both stated there will be a vote and that we will shortlist the gameplays. What I meant to say was that we will shortlist the gameplays and not vote on them. I think it would be best to give the artists the widest possible choice in gameplays, because who knows what will inspire them.

So i'm going to edit the rules a tad so that its clear no voting will follow the gameplay stage. Sorry about the confusion!

[Teflon Kris]

How does anyone win the gameplay contest?

[Riskismy]

I don't get what you want... do you want people to vote on which gameplays should be chosen? Do you want me to shortlist the maps and eliminate half of them?

I'd be satisfied if you cut them in half yourselves, happy if you did a vote and let the forum do it for you.

What 'clever ploy' are you talking about? This isn't a conspiracy. MrBenn thought it would be cool to have more maps that corresponded with the classic map for tournament purposes. RedBaron has been suggesting more city maps could be a benefit. People who play conquerclub like new maps. It's straightforward. I thought a contest might be fun.

Well, it was fun making the map.
Not so much finding out that there's no contest on gameplay at all.

What I see us getting from this contest scheme, when all is said and done, is that we'll have a handful of nearly-done maps which are simple and bland in gameplay, but very nice in graphics. It'll be another nice, normal map - nothing setting it truly apart from the rest.
I think Natty's notion to pick the simplest map (i.e. bland gameplay) is what most of the mapmakers will do - and why shouldn't they? Their job is to make cool graphics, nevermind what those graphics represent (that is, gameplay!).
We'll end up with 2-3 choices from each of the 2 simplest maps, perhaps a couple from the less complex - but sure as hell we won't see any new or unusual gameplay.
Those who don't quite make the vote will probably stick with it and complete their maps, which leaves us with another handful of the same old thing.
That all good and well, if it wasn't for the fact that there was suppose to be a contest about gameplay, which would provide the winning map not only with cool graphics, but cool gameplay as well.

The reason we're doing it with two stages is because I want the gameplay to be solid and balanced before an artist puts his time into making the graphics portion of the map. I don't want to say to the artist, "hey, we totally rearranged the bonuses and we need you to fix them now." Does that make sense? When gameplay changes the graphics must change... so the logical conclusion to make things smoother is to make the gameplay sure and then do the graphics.

I haven't questioned the order of gameplay before graphics - I simply want there to be a gameplay part at all!

Edit: after reading throught he first post like nine times, I see that I have both stated there will be a vote and that we will shortlist the gameplays. What I meant to say was that we will shortlist the gameplays and not vote on them. I think it would be best to give the artists the widest possible choice in gameplays, because who knows what will inspire them.

Nine times? Remind me not to waste time quoting you again

I repeat, once again: Why is there no voting on gameplay?

[Bruceswar]

@ dj you will get a gameplay contest winning medal if a graphic artist takes your idea and then makes it to the voting stage. In other words it is final forge ready. The graphic contest will be held and more medals given out then. Maybe we can get a few maps out of this for CC.

[Teflon Kris]

@ dj you will get a gameplay contest winning medal if a graphic artist takes your idea and then makes it to the voting stage. In other words it is final forge ready. The graphic contest will be held and more medals given out then. Maybe we can get a few maps out of this for CC.

I see - doesn't that mean the maps reviewed first are most likely to progress as an artist would have more time to work on them?

I agree creating more maps is the objective, although I can also see how contenstants takibng the contest mega-seriously might be annoyed.

Lets move on ... fast

[Riskismy]

I agree creating more maps is the objective, although I can also see how contenstants takibng the contest mega-seriously might be annoyed.

I wasn't aware that was the objective. I thought the point was to get a map out there with innovative gameplay and outstanding graphics.
I guess I'm the only one seeing it like this.

...and you're damned right I'm annoyed. But my annoyance has to do whether there's a contest in the first place or not!

[MrBenn]

@ dj you will get a gameplay contest winning medal if a graphic artist takes your idea and then makes it to the voting stage. In other words it is final forge ready. The graphic contest will be held and more medals given out then. Maybe we can get a few maps out of this for CC.

I see - doesn't that mean the maps reviewed first are most likely to progress as an artist would have more time to work on them?

I agree creating more maps is the objective, although I can also see how contenstants takibng the contest mega-seriously might be annoyed.

Lets move on ... fast

In the name of equality I have just moved the map entries into the back-office until we've reviewed them all.

Apologies to anybody who was confused about how the two phases of this contest are being run - to be honest we weren't really too sure how things would go, so please bear with us. I anticipate that the CAs will create a shortlist of entries submitted so far, and decide which entries will be rewarded at this stage. Once that has been done we'll announce the next stage, and make it a lot clearer how things will progress from here.

[natty dread]

A thing everyone would do well to understand is, there's no clear precedent for two-part competitions of this sort... there have been some gameplay contests, some graphics contests, but I don't think there has been a 2-part gp/gfx contest before this one (at least I can't remember one...) so the cartography team is forced to sort of wing it as they go along - not to insinuate that they haven't thought this through, just that it's hard to anticipate possible problems on a type of contest that hasn't really been held before...

My advice is to not take things too seriously, just have fun participating in a foundry contest. I'm sure the next contest of this type will go a lot more smoothly

[phantomzero]

It looks like the powers that be are getting this all sorted. I just wanted to post that I thought from the original first post that this was a contest for gameplay, followed for a contest for graphics. I figured I map would be chosen for each city and that map would advance to graphics.

For example. 5 different versions of a Mexico City map are entered in the gameplay contest. 1 is voted winner. then the winning gameplay is used for the graphics portion of the contest. 6 people enter the graphics portion and a winner is decided by a vote.

This is what I had expected to happen but I'm sure everything will all work out in the end.

[ender516]

I agree. That is roughly the way I recall reading it.

[MrBenn]

After much deliberation, the CAs have shortlisted five maps to from the first phase of the Classic Cities contest.

Congratulations to Bruceswar, DJ Teflon, isaiah40, ISN2, and sannemanrobinson

The winning gameplay designs are contained within the spoilers below:

show: Map 1 - London Boroughs

show: Map 2 - War on the Streets of London

show: Map 3 - Tourist London

show: Map 4 - Istanbul

show: Map 5 - Dubai

The graphics phase of the World Cities Contest continues in this thread

[MrBenn]

World Cities Contest: Phase 2

The first phase of the World Cities Contest has now concluded, and the basic gameplay and territory layout of five different maps have been put through to this, the second and final phase of the contest.

show: Map 1 - London Boroughs

show: Map 2 - War on the Streets of London

show: Map 3 - Tourist London

show: Map 4 - Istanbul

show: Map 5 - Dubai

To take part in this phase of the contest, simply pick one of the above draft maps and apply your artistic talents and vision and create Final Forge quality images (for the large and small versions of the map), which are complete with all territory labels and gameplay instructions. During this phase of the contest, you should not change the gameplay of the map - connections between regions/territories, bonuses, and territory/region names should stay the same (although you can certainly lobby for any desired amendments should your map win). You CAN change everything else - Colour choices, typefaces, the legend and title, textures, map perspective - basically any and all graphic elements of this map. The look and feel of the map is entirely yours to create - give it some flavour!

Competition rules:

1. It is the mapmaker's responsibility to understand and comply with all Foundry standards, including those regarding image size, use of copyright-free images, leaving required space for army counts, etc. See the How to Make a Map Handbook for specific expectations.
2. The standard size limits on the maps (630x600 px for a small map and 840x800 px for a large map) apply to the entries, but otherwise exact dimensions are up to the mapmaker. Please note that Supersize exceptions may be made, although your map shouldn't be unnecessarily big)
   
3. Host your map files (one entry per contestant please) using Photobucket, imageshack or some other file sharing program, and provide a link to Industrial Helix by CC Time: 2011-05-10 18:59:59.
4. In order to maintain anonymity during the competition, please do not post your own maps or solicit feedback publicly. Entries with signatures will be rejected (this can be done later should your map win)
   
5. A one-week voting period will be held to determine the Finalists (one for each map listed above).
   
6. Finalists will then have an additional period of one week to make minor changes to their image before a second round of voting to determine an overall winner for the Premium Prize.
   
7. Each of the chosen Finalists will be eligible to complete development of their winning map in the Foundry, although will be required to go through the standard Foundry process required to receive a Graphics stamp; we reserve the right to require gameplay/territory name changes should such concerns come up as a result of continued gameplay discussion on this map.

Standard Conquer Club copyright principles apply: The author retains copyright on their work, and gives Conquer Club permission to use the imagery free of charge, for as long as Conquer Club sees fit on the Conquer Club website. Conquer Club cannot sell, lease, or lend the right to use the images to anyone else. The author swears that their map is their own work, or a legal derivative work and by submitting it, do hereby claim all responsibility for that being true.

[MrBenn]

In order to help gauge the competition, I have added a poll to the thread to give an indication of which map(s) people may (or may not) be working on

edit: and here are the results of the sampler poll:

I'm thinking about / am working on the following map(s):
You may select up to 4 options

Map 1 - London Boroughs... 12... 20%
Map 2 - War on the Streets of London... 6... 10%
Map 3 - Tourist London... 6... 10%
Map 4 - Istanbul... 12... 20%
Map 5 - Dubai... 6... 10%
None of the above... 19... 31%

[phantomzero]

I must say that the way this has been conducted has grossly misrepresented how the original contest was described. There was no voting after the first round. Why bother when the rules are changed midstream.

[phantomzero]

Will there really be a vote after this round of competition or will the rules be changed after the fact again?