Custom Map #3567: map 91 BIG CHESS. By: yum234

[yum-forum]

Could Karsten75 or somebody else move this talk into other thread maybe?  ???

Will be good! Because fair rating system will make CW3 game better!  :)

And submitting score in end is optional in CW3.  8)

Yes. Optional submitting score is fair, but rate map without playing is very easy and unfair!

If system will be changed as I suggested, rate map "1" (after playing untill end) will be too heavy for haters.
Or after playing they maybe will enjoy  ( :) ) and not rate "1"...  ;)

[GoodMorning]

We do need to be able to rate without finishing, because there is a need for feedback on overly difficult maps.

I favour two things:
1) A split score scale: Difficulty and Quality. Quality here meaning effort, balancing, terrain... Thus a 10/2 map isbadly made and almost impossible. A 5/8 would be a not-too-hard fight, but with good design or content.
2) A score distribution: Ratings to be colour-coded, and placed in a bar. Mostly green, red stripe: 1s and 9/10s. Mostly yellow/orange/red: Bad map.

Thoughts?

[yum-forum]

We do need to be able to rate without finishing, because there is a need for feedback on overly difficult maps.

Sorry, but not reasonable...  If difficult - rate "1"?  8) No logic.
Indicator of difficulty is time! More median time - more big or difficult game. Exception is small puzzle.

[GoodMorning]

I refer you to some maps by Kalek or Sorrontis.

I don't mean that difficult maps will be rated 1.

I do mean that difficult maps can be low-rated if they are not enjoyable. Requiring victory means that only those who can (and do) finish a map can rate it. This is a self-selecting group of the better players, or those who are more patient (stubborn). Therefore, the group who finish the game are more likely to have enjoyed it, simply because they finished, whereas those who are less skilled or stubborn are unable to express their displeasure.

Consider an all-void map that ends only after 100 min, whatever is done, even nothing.
Difficult? No. Likely to be finished? No. Bad? Yes. Rated? Unlikely.

Consider a slog map that takes 10h (somehow). Also unlikely to be rated by more than a handful.

These are hyperbolic examples, to demonstrate. The equivalent turns up for people who aren't good enough to win a map, as losing is frustrating. It is easy to forget that this happens to less experienced players, for those who have played a lot/long time.

[D0m0nik]

The creator of this game is soon to release a new game and is no doubt spending a ridiculous amount of time on it. this is now an old game with a small following, the rating system will not change, let it go! Be grateful of the good feedback and forget the idiots who rate one. If you care what idiots think you may as well join them!

[Sorrontis]

... Be grateful of the good feedback and forget the idiots who rate one. ...

I really only make maps for a dozen or so players. I've stopped caring about the rating system a long time ago.

[GoodMorning]

I agree with D0m0nik.

Discussion here might help with a balanced system for PF, though...

[toolforger]

Mmm... solid map, but a bit too dispersed.
And too easy once ore is available.