Map rotation

[dedalos]

Originally posted by Atoon
All too often you get to choose from Ndisle OR Ndisle.

How hard would it be to list the EXACT requirements for a map to be accepted into LWA rotation, have a contest for map makers with winners getting 2-6 months paid subscription.  

Or we could just ignore it & pretend like all is well.

Its hard because they change.  You start a map today and by the time  you are done the reqs change and your work is junk. Almost as motivating as the tools used to create a map

[NHawk]

Originally posted by dedalos
Its hard because they change.  You start a map today and by the time  you are done the reqs change and your work is junk. Almost as motivating as the tools used to create a map

So far as I know, the only requirements that have changed in the past 3 years are that maps must be small maps and 3 uncapturable bases must be defined.

[Krusty]

No, there have been map rejections because the countries have been unbalanced, there are limits on how close fields can be, it must have a certain amount of strat (can't make a map with no strat, for example).


There are lots of "requirements" -- they're just unwritten. That's the problem, IMO. HTC needs to codify what they will and will not accept.

[NHawk]

Originally posted by Krusty
No, there have been map rejections because the countries have been unbalanced, there are limits on how close fields can be, it must have a certain amount of strat (can't make a map with no strat, for example).


There are lots of "requirements" -- they're just unwritten. That's the problem, IMO. HTC needs to codify what they will and will not accept.

All of those have been requirements for an MA map from day 1.

I've posted the general requirements in the TE forum and it is a sticky.

[Krusty]

I think I've seen that sticky, too. I'm just listing examples, is all. Recently all I've heard (mapping wise) is that so-and-so's map got rejected, followed by whats-his-name's map also getting rejected, etc.

What with the crappy TE tool as-is, you'd think that HTC would make things easier (unless..... they don't WANT more maps? )

[NHawk]

Originally posted by Krusty
I think I've seen that sticky, too. I'm just listing examples, is all. Recently all I've heard (mapping wise) is that so-and-so's map got rejected, followed by whats-his-name's map also getting rejected, etc.

What with the crappy TE tool as-is, you'd think that HTC would make things easier (unless..... they don't WANT more maps? )

I understand where you're coming from. It can be frustrating to hear that.

But, if there have been that many maps rejected it sounds like they either didn't take the time to ask what the requirements are or ignored them completely.

When I was doing my first map, all it took was an email and a phone call (my need for the phone call to clarify something) to find out what was required. And just recently I had to call again because I was adding something I'd never added before. I got an immediate answer and actually laughed because it was so simple.

[DadRabit]

I miss Calvin and Hobbes.............

[sgt203]

New maps would be a gift!!!!!

See Sig..

[Atoon]

Originally posted by Jackal1
HT is only here to make you miserable. That`s why he hired Skuzz.

I thought it was because it was more cost effective to have skuzzy as an employee than an internet service provider, or somthing to that effect-

[Tiger]

How many times have you logged into Blue and see a Map you hate, hit Orange, same map, check MW, same map, check EW... WTH, same map.

Good thing is EW averages a reset every 30 hours or so, so chances are it won't be there tomorrow.

[SFCHONDO]

Originally posted by Krusty
No, there have been map rejections because the countries have been unbalanced, there are limits on how close fields can be, it must have a certain amount of strat (can't make a map with no strat, for example).


There are lots of "requirements" -- they're just unwritten. That's the problem, IMO. HTC needs to codify what they will and will not accept.

How about HT makes some maps instead of the community. They spent time on a new plane (B-25) when we really don't need any more planes at the moment. More then half aren't used now. The priority on updating things should be maps before new planes IMO.

[Lusche]

Originally posted by SFCHONDO
They spent time on a new plane (B-25) when we really don't need any more planes at the moment. More then half aren't used now.  

This statement is utterly wrong. Because YOU do not use them doesn't mean no one else is using them.

[Simaril]

Originally posted by DadRabit
I miss Calvin and Hobbes.............

Me too.

There's just nothing like seeing snowmen inspired by H.R. Geiger. Or unexpected consequences of a Transmogrifier.

[SFCHONDO]

As usual taking things out of context. Intellegent person knows what I am getting at. 1 more plane should be a 2nd priority and maps should be #1 priority. Can't believe you didn't understand my post.

[Lusche]

Originally posted by SFCHONDO
As usual taking things out of context. Intellegent person knows what I am getting at. 1 more plane should be a 2nd priority and maps should be #1 priority. Can't believe you didn't understand my post.

There was no need to take something out nof context. I understood you want new maps, not new planes. But next time please dont try to bolster your point with facts that are just plain wrong. Intelligent persons do not do that.