Lets talk about maps.

[dq]

can this have a TL; DR, I dont have time to read it now.

TL;DR Map Committee, y u do dis

 

[Tree_TheBigKind]

my bad, i skimmed. Also, i feel that MCSG should start veering away from PMC Maps, and stick to maps submitted to MCSG.

Although I see why you think this, there is a somewhat harsh reality here- there aren't a plethora of quality maps..... Now, don't immediately flip out and start naming maps, we're saying there are a huge expanse of maps on Planet Minecraft. Even with this being saying, we are still trying to get more maps from the forums here than from PMC.

 

[chockadlad]

A pretty big thing about maps is that it's impossible to please everyone, some people want bigger maps, with survival type gameplay (PvE + Some pvp) while others want ridiculously small maps with a lot of quick action. Most people don't want a fancy map, they just seem to care about gameplay, whether or not it's survival oriented


EDIT: Another thing I'd like the map committee to do if they haven't, is requesting to "revamp" peoples builds for MCGamer

 

[dq]

Although I see why you think this, there is a somewhat harsh reality here- there aren't a plethora of quality maps..... Now, don't immediately flip out and start naming maps, we're saying there are a huge expanse of maps on Planet Minecraft. Even with this being saying, we are still trying to get more maps from the forums here than from PMC.

Well, do you think that MCSG could involve the Community more in its map decisions?

 

[Nebulousity]

Though this may be a bit unrelated to the main point of discussion I feel like I might as well give a suggestion that I've been thinking of for quite some time now..

I always felt that they could parody what they did with the PMC contest, by this I mean have test servers in which they can put in maps that has received a lot of good feedback, this in my opinion would be a win-win as players can get maps that they prefer and they know for a fact are good and the staff team would get praise for making the effort to get users' opinions on a map before implementing it.
Though I may not have that much knowledge of how the map committee works nor do I know how great of a plan this could end up being in the long run I just felt like I might as well..
(I know I didn't go into much detail but w/e)

 

[EvermoreHD]

Actually, a majority of the community wanted them removed. The forum community heavily wanted Freeze Island removed but the in-game poll showed that the in-game community wanted Demons Breeze removed. Now, I know there are a group of people saying the poll wasn't written correctly and that is was misunderstood. Personally, I knew exactly what the poll was asking even though I had no part in making it or even choosing for a poll to be made. However the matter, this issue is already being worked on.

The problem is both the forum poll and the misleading in-game poll didn't have neither options. These polls essentially picked two extremely popular maps on the server and asked the community to get rid of one. It's like asking the community to remove SG4 or Teweran SG2 and then saying the community wanted that map removed.

On the subject of how well the Map Committee is doing: let's take a look at the maps the committee has chosen:

Vida Cova: Rarely voted
Remnant: Rarely voted
Origins: Sometimes voted
Lobby Games: Voted pretty often, but not incredibly popular
Fallen Haven: Rarely voted
Boombeard's Battle: Voted pretty often, but not incredibly popular

From this, I can say the Map Committee hasn't done that bad of a job, but not that good of one either. They haven't added an incredibly popular map, but some of the maps are voted if the other map choices aren't popular.

 

[Tree_TheBigKind]

Well, do you think that MCSG could involve the Community more in its map decisions?

We have. Quite a lot of our decisions are based solely on the community (i.e. Hungry Hills being added back, Fallen Colossi and Destiny's Shiver being removed). The community pushed for these changes so we listened.

 

[Claps]

Though this may be a bit unrelated to the main point of discussion I feel like I might as well give a suggestion that I've been thinking of for quite some time now..

I always felt that they could parody what they did with the PMC contest, by this I mean have test servers in which they can put in maps that has received a lot of good feedback, this in my opinion would be a win-win as players can get maps that they prefer and they know for a fact are good and the staff team would get praise for making the effort to get users' opinions on a map before implementing it.
Though I may not have that much knowledge of how the map committee works nor do I know how great of a plan this could end up being in the long run I just felt like I might as well..
(I know I didn't go into much detail but w/e)

I really really like this idea. The PMC contest servers were the most fun I've ever had playing MCSG, plus i helped decide the new maps. This would be amazing.

 

[jonnysurvives]

This also isn't exactly related to the OP, but...

Another thing I think ought to change is who decides the tiering of a map. Since the tiering has such a great bearing on the eventual popularity of a map (just look at Holiday Resort- I doubt it would be so popular without the ridiculous number of tier 2s), I think the map maker(s) should be able to denote what they think should be tier 2s, which can then be moderated by a staff member to check they make some sort of sense. Imagine going through all the effort of making a map just for it to be let down by poor tiering- it'd be pretty disappointing.

 

[ScrewYouGumby2]

Perhaps what the community wants is more transparency. The only time that we hear about the choices that the committee makes is when someone makes a thread like this.

 

[Tree_TheBigKind]

The problem is both the forum poll and the misleading in-game poll didn't have neither options. These polls essentially picked two extremely popular maps on the server and asked the community to get rid of one. It's like asking the community to remove SG4 or Teweran SG2 and then saying the community wanted that map removed.

On the subject of how well the Map Committee is doing: let's take a look at the maps the committee has chosen:

Vida Cova: Rarely voted
Remnant: Rarely voted
Origins: Sometimes voted
Lobby Games: Voted pretty often, but not incredibly popular
Fallen Haven: Rarely voted
Boombeard's Battle: Voted pretty often, but not incredibly popular

From this, I can say the Map Committee hasn't done that bad of a job, but not that good of one either. They haven't added an incredibly popular map, but some of the maps are voted if the other map choices aren't popular.

I've seen you respond to similar threads in which I've already explained reasoning for a few of those. It doesn't really seem that you remember.... Nonetheless, I'll go over it again.

Vida Cova- Attempt to bring back the survival aspect of MCSG. There were threads made with petitions to bring back the survival aspect. So, excuse us for attempting to please everyone.

Remnant- This one added mainly because of it's looks to be honest. Also, it was built by FyreUK who, as everyone knows, are very beneficial to these servers.

Origins- It's actually quite popular. It may not be the most voted but it's definitely one of the favored ones so I don't see where you're coming from there.

Lobby Games- "Voted pretty often, but not incredibly popular" .....uh, so what you're saying is that a map that is voted often (Usually people vote for maps because they want to play them) isn't liked.... I'll leave that at that since I believe it's self-explanatory.

Fallen Haven- There's an issue with the map that causes it to crash in pre-game. People don't vote it because they literally cannot play it if it's over 18 players (It does't crash if it's in the narrow range of 12-18 players). Most players don't know that it doesn't crash with under 19 players though so they automatically assume that it crashed all the time. We're currently working on fixing the crashing issue.

Boombeard's Battle- Same as Lobby Games, your argument is not valid.

 

[chockadlad]

Honestly, I don't think we should at all judge maps by how much they're voted, just because they're voted more or less than others don't mean they're better / worse, as an example I personally LOVE Futuristic City, while most players couldn't care less, and would vote for the popular Holiday Resort. I don't mean that Futuristic City is better than Holiday resort, I just don't think that MCSG is about playing SG4/Breeze/MB9/HR etc all over all day. I personally find MCSG extremely dull without map variety, and I love every second I play a map I rarely play ( TSG3, TSG1, Treacherous etc)