Next map going beta?

[ViperOverLord]

Just wondering what map is expected to go beta next. I've been checking. Salem's Switch was listed as about to be beta for a time (if I'm remembering right) and then it wasn't. Anyways, just wondering what fresh new map I can look forward to playing soon. And maybe I'll get ahead of the curve for posting my Alpha Beta Tourney if I know something is about to come out.

[DiM]

Just wondering what map is expected to go beta next. I've been checking. Salem's Switch was listed as about to be beta for a time (if I'm remembering right) and then it wasn't. Anyways, just wondering what fresh new map I can look forward to playing soon. And maybe I'll get ahead of the curve for posting my Alpha Beta Tourney if I know something is about to come out.

i think island of doom is next. it's been beta ready for quite a while now.
however there might be several maps brought into beta all at once.

[ViperOverLord]

^^^

I know that initially I saw something listed as beta ready and then the title changed. I was thinking Salem's Switch, but maybe it was Island of Doom?

[koontz1973]

Doom should be the next one, but right now 6 maps have got xml stamps and as DiM said, we might get 2,3 or more going live at once. This may also be the reason why Doom is not live right now.

[Gillipig]

Doom should be the next one, but right now 6 maps have got xml stamps and as DiM said, we might get 2,3 or more going live at once. This may also be the reason why Doom is not live right now.

I understand that it's easier to launch several maps at once. But I don't like it! I think every new map should have it's own time as the newest map! That way you don't go look at the beta maps and see- oh cool 5 new maps.... which one should I play? New maps would get more plays if they weren't being launched at the same time. Some months there are no maps being put in beta, other months there can be 10 maps launched. That's not a smart way to introduce the public to our new maps!

[thenobodies80]

Sorry, but can you recall me when I put in Beta more than 2 maps (maybe 3 just once) in the same time? I have 4 spots in headlines and I've always said that I give to each map/mapmaker his "glory moment" using headlines. Please check headlines if you think i'm a liar. The fact Island of Doom wasn't uploaded is just that lackattack had to upload other things first and he took a life to do that! Probably he forgot my PM so I had to remember him that I was waiting. But it's not his fault, he has lot of things to think about, just it's the current system to upload maps that sucks.

[Gillipig]

Sorry, but can you recall me when I put in Beta more than 2 maps (maybe 3 just once) in the same time? I have 4 spots in headlines and I've always said that I give to each map/mapmaker his "glory moment" using headlines. Please check headlines if you think i'm a liar. The fact Island of Doom wasn't uploaded is just that lackattack had to upload other things first and he took a life to do that! Probably he forgot my PM so I had to remember him that I was waiting. But it's not his fault, he has lot of things to think about, just it's the current system to upload maps that sucks.

Yes I can recall a lot of maps being put up very close to each other not more than a few months ago! Maybe not everyone at the same time but too many too close to each other! There's one very busy month last year which I'm referring to in particular.
I said I can understand it though and by that I mean I can understand that sometimes a lot of maps are in the same stage. But I would prefer if you held on releasing them to beta longer than you currently do in those cases just to make sure there's a sufficient gap between each new release. What sufficient is is of course relative.
This may not be in most mapmakers taste because they want to get their map out there as quick as possible (of course), but I do believe that in the end that would be better for all new maps!

[thenobodies80]

Sorry I don't want to argue with you...really ....but I became Foundry Foreman in July...this it the list of maps added from that date:

Three Kingdoms of Korea (Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:01 am)
California (Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:49 am)
Fractured China (Sat Aug 27, 2011 2:12 pm)
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:42 pm)
Quad Cities (Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:44 pm)
BETA Trafalgar (Thu Sep 13, 2011 10:53 pm)
SteamWorks (Thu Sep 14, 2011 10:46 pm)
BETA Portland (Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:53 pm)
Conquer Rome (Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:55 pm)
BETA Rorke's Drift (Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:17 am)
BETA Tribal War - Florida (Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:53 am)
Colosseum - Limited Edition (Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:19 pm)
BETA All Your Base Are Belong To Us (Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:30 pm)
BETA Denmark (Tue Dec 27, 2011 4:25 pm )
BETA Istanbul (Tue Dec 27, 2011 4:34 pm)
BETA Cuban Missile Crisis (Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:15 am)
BETA Classic Cities: London (Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:17 am)
BETA Patch Wars (Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:17 am )

Now I read what your wrote:

Some months there are no maps being put in beta, other months there can be 10 maps launched.

Then I have to formulate the same question again:

can you recall me when I put in Beta more than 2 maps (maybe 3 just once) in the same time?

and I would add, in which month we didn't have a new map?

[Gillipig]

Sorry I don't want to argue with you...really ....but I became Foundry Foreman in July...this it the list of maps added from that date:

Three Kingdoms of Korea (Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:01 am)
California (Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:49 am)
Fractured China (Sat Aug 27, 2011 2:12 pm)
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:42 pm)
Quad Cities (Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:44 pm)
BETA Trafalgar (Thu Sep 13, 2011 10:53 pm)
SteamWorks (Thu Sep 14, 2011 10:46 pm)
BETA Portland (Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:53 pm)
Conquer Rome (Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:55 pm)
BETA Rorke's Drift (Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:17 am)
BETA Tribal War - Florida (Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:53 am)
Colosseum - Limited Edition (Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:19 pm)
BETA All Your Base Are Belong To Us (Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:30 pm)
BETA Denmark (Tue Dec 27, 2011 4:25 pm )
BETA Istanbul (Tue Dec 27, 2011 4:34 pm)
BETA Cuban Missile Crisis (Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:15 am)
BETA Classic Cities: London (Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:17 am)
BETA Patch Wars (Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:17 am )

Now I read what your wrote:

Some months there are no maps being put in beta, other months there can be 10 maps launched.

Then I have to formulate the same question again:

can you recall me when I put in Beta more than 2 maps (maybe 3 just once) in the same time?

and I would add, in which month we didn't have a new map?

I don't mind an argument as long as it's a sensible one .
Clearly I was thinking of the month of September! Between September 08- Oktober 03 (less than a month) 7 maps were put into beta. That is too many for such a short period of time! Not quite 10 but still, 2 new maps per week gives very little time for each map to shine. Months like that is what I'd like to avoid! There are 52 weeks in a year so for us to release about a fourth of all maps made in a calendar year in less than 4 weeks is pretty crazy!
There was a month and a half between the 08 November and 27 December map update. It wasn't a calender month but still more than a month of waiting for a new map to be released.
We are thinking of different things. You are thinking of maps sent to beta exactly the same day while I'm thinking of maps sent to beta close to each other. And like I said some of it is hard to do anything about due to maps being in the same stages simultaneously. But in a month like that you could hold on maps longer than usual to make sure we don't have a fourth of all maps produced in a year published in a single month. I hope this clears out what I'm trying to get at.

[natty dread]

But in a month like that you could hold on maps longer than usual

Yeah, because everyone just loves waiting for maps to be put in beta.

[Gillipig]

But in a month like that you could hold on maps longer than usual

Yeah, because everyone just loves waiting for maps to be put in beta.

It would be for the greater good! Most mapmakers wouldn't like it because they want their map to be put on beta as fast as possible and the people who follows certain maps wants it to be put there even faster than possible. Still, if we have that many maps ready at the same time again it's not good for anyone if we just pump them all out at roughly the same time!

[natty dread]

it's not good for anyone if we just pump them all out at roughly the same time!

How do you know that? Are there lots of people somewhere complaining that we shouldn't "pump out maps" at the same time, that I'm not aware of?

Frankly, you're the first person I've heard to complain about this. Either way, only few people actively play all the beta maps that come out, and those people usually have no problem with playing lots of them at once. Most people just pick those maps they like, or find interesting, and then play them. Which is also fine.

The argument seems similar to the one that some people make that we should limit the amount of new maps or take down some old maps. In both cases the idea seems to be that there's some inherent value in scarcity, like if there's less of some thing it makes it more valuable... which may be true about gold and other such commodities. However, when it comes to abstract things like maps, this just isn't the case - in fact, there's more value in diversity: everyone gets to choose what they like, which is the best thing about CC - it caters something for everyone.

Artificial scarcity is never a good long-time strategy.

[DiM]

which is the best thing about CC - it caters something for everyone.

these words are almost the same as desau's words in the landgrab foundry (desau is the owner)

[natty dread]

which is the best thing about CC - it caters something for everyone.

these words are almost the same as desau's words in the landgrab foundry (desau is the owner)

I bet he means them in a different context though.

[DiM]

which is the best thing about CC - it caters something for everyone.

these words are almost the same as desau's words in the landgrab foundry (desau is the owner)

I bet he means them in a different context though.

you're saying that the great thing about CC having 200+ maps is that it caters something for everyone.
desau says the best thing about landgrab is that it allows any map cause it caters something for everyone.


PS: i was just looking around on luxdelux and i saw they have some really nice looking maps. nicer than many of our recent productions. never thought i'd see the day. then again i never thought i'd see the day when a cow map is endorsed by lackattack so i guess anything can happen. even CC becoming the new landgrab, which is actually not that far fetched. sadly.

[natty dread]

you're saying that the great thing about CC having 200+ maps is that it caters something for everyone.
desau says the best thing about landgrab is that it allows any map cause it caters something for everyone.

Yeah that's not really the same thing...

[Gillipig]

it's not good for anyone if we just pump them all out at roughly the same time!

How do you know that? Are there lots of people somewhere complaining that we shouldn't "pump out maps" at the same time, that I'm not aware of?

Frankly, you're the first person I've heard to complain about this. Either way, only few people actively play all the beta maps that come out, and those people usually have no problem with playing lots of them at once. Most people just pick those maps they like, or find interesting, and then play them. Which is also fine.

The argument seems similar to the one that some people make that we should limit the amount of new maps or take down some old maps. In both cases the idea seems to be that there's some inherent value in scarcity, like if there's less of some thing it makes it more valuable... which may be true about gold and other such commodities. However, when it comes to abstract things like maps, this just isn't the case - in fact, there's more value in diversity: everyone gets to choose what they like, which is the best thing about CC - it caters something for everyone.

Artificial scarcity is never a good long-time strategy.

You're basically saying that it doesn't matter when maps are released to beta just as long as they do get released to beta. So if we released all maps that are created in a year during a period of two months you don't think that would have any negative effects? And yes I'm saying the opposite. When you release maps to beta matters a lot!

[DiM]

when lack is going to implement a system that allows the foreman to upload the maps himself, then we'll get faster uploads and shorter waiting times.
sometimes a map is finished and waits for a whole month before it's uploaded and sometimes it takes 1 week.
and that's not the biggest problem.
the thing that annoys me the most is what happens in beta. let's say a map gets released and it has a mistake in the xml that screws over all the games. the mapmaker might actually fix that within a couple of hours from the release but it can take 2 or more weeks before lack uploads the updated file.
and in that whole time the players get frustrated, the mapmakers get frustrated and the map is hurt because for 2 weeks very few people will play it and those that do will only do it once.

[natty dread]

let's say a map gets released and it has a mistake in the xml

Well, you get what you pay for... if you get a drunken hobo to write your XML, you can't expect a dazzling quality of work

[DiM]

let's say a map gets released and it has a mistake in the xml

Well, you get what you pay for... if you get a drunken hobo to write your XML, you can't expect a dazzling quality of work

a drunken hobo writes the xml and then another drunken hobo pretends to check it and this is how the map is released with a mistake.

then the first hobo is bribed with a six-pack by the map maker to fix the problem so he does it withing the first hours of the release. but for what? the new xml won't be uploaded for weeks.

[natty dread]

Well to the drunken hobo's defense, neutrals weren't checked at that point, and in fact the drunken hobo suggested the change to the xml checking routine (that you have to provide an image with neutrals) for this very reason...

Anyway, I agree that maps should be uploaded faster, and it's been asked for a long time from lackattack to implement a system that lets the CA:s or foreman upload them himself, but then, when has lackattack ever given a shit about the mapmakers? It's apparently much more important to create money-making tournaments and focus on advertising rather than actually improving the site...

[koontz1973]

lackattack to implement a system that lets the CA:s or foreman upload them himself,

Problem with this is what happens when the drunken hobo becomes the foreman and uploads last month playboy for us to play on. It is not surprising that he keeps this for himself but a tad quicker would be nice and even implement beta changes at the weekend.

[DiM]

lackattack to implement a system that lets the CA:s or foreman upload them himself,

Problem with this is what happens when the drunken hobo becomes the foreman and uploads last month playboy for us to play on. It is not surprising that he keeps this for himself but a tad quicker would be nice and even implement beta changes at the weekend.

that's precisely the kind of thought that made CC stagnate for all these years while the competition improves more and more.

[koontz1973]

All sites have there ups and downs. At some point when the competition gets better, we will see a flurry of improvements to get us ahead again. So many things have been asked for that lack is more than likely wondering which to give us first. It is just the nature of things. We all sit back and rest on our laurels when things are good. But I am sure the turtle will give us more toys this year to play with.

[natty dread]

lackattack to implement a system that lets the CA:s or foreman upload them himself,

Problem with this is what happens when the drunken hobo becomes the foreman and uploads last month playboy for us to play on. It is not surprising that he keeps this for himself but a tad quicker would be nice and even implement beta changes at the weekend.

That's a piss-poor excuse. If lackattack didn't trust his foreman to do the job he does then why put him in that position in the first place.

At some point when the competition gets better, we will see a flurry of improvements to get us ahead again.

You'd think...