| BWMN Time |
| 02/06/2026 |
| 05:42 |
| News |
| new account |
| list users |
| Login: |
| Replays |
| Map DB |
| ICCup |
| Map Access |
| New map |
| Edit map |
 |
Forum - feedback
island maps should be seperate category page: 1 2 3 | ||
| what the topic says. island maps should be a separate category. for people that either want to look at island maps as a whole (no easy way to do that now) before they make theirs, or for people who are uninterested in them (no easy way to skip over them right now). both occurances are important for the site, so the separation of them would be a helpful improvement. | ||
| 2007, 09, 11 14:00 | ||
| yeah, that would be something to discuss. as final/experimental, island is definetly some sort of category, too. | ||
| 2007, 09, 11 16:11 | ||
| True. ^^ | ||
| 2007, 09, 11 16:51 | ||
| Semi-Island ftw? An additional category would be useful there. Options: Island Semi-Island Ground Undefined (the default for all the old maps until fixed manually) | ||
| 2007, 09, 11 17:51 | ||
| Good idea | ||
| 2007, 09, 11 21:23 | ||
| And for each category, it has to be precised the version of the map (beta, final) | ||
| 2007, 09, 11 21:34 | ||
| lol complicated, but if panschk is willing to try it, good idea. Two ways of doing it, adding an island/semi island/ground category (which would require going through the whole database and making all maps ground or island or semi island, or add user final island, user final semi island, user beta island, user final semi island, league island, league semi island, maybe even experimental island or semi island, etc. The latter is less efficient, but only requires island or semi island maps to be recategorized, whereas the former would require (if you wanted to retain accuracy for the whole database) every single map to be categorized under island, semi island, and ground seperately from user final, beta, etc. Up to panshck :) Instead of doing it spines way with 'undefined' we can divide and conquer, give out admin power to a few more people, and break up the database between all admins and get the entire database covered. Also, if while doing that, an admin finds a map worth deleting, they can submit it to trash. The problem with this? Every edit bumps a map. Over 2000 maps would suddenly be on top of eachother, ie new maps could possibly be at the very bottom of the list. The most recently bumped map list would be out of wack, killing a bit of history, but nothing terrible. | ||
| 2007, 09, 11 23:10 | ||
| Maybe add a 'doodad' section as well? http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=1932 for stuff like this and wide bridges, upward ramps etc. modified by SpoR | ||
| 2007, 09, 11 23:23 | ||
| nah (0)works fine for that imo. | ||
| 2007, 09, 12 03:53 | ||
| Most of this stuff is pretty hard-coded, so it won't simply be giving DB-access to some people :/ idk, this would be really a lot of work. Changing the 3 or 4 PHP files is the easy part, categorizing 2300 maps is what makes this hard. Also the clear distinctions are not that easy to make. Consider maps like 815 or all those maps where you have to mine minerals to make it a ground map. 2000 categories is not useful neither. I prefer not touching it ;) | ||
| 2007, 09, 12 10:47 | ||
| well, maps like 815 or neutral-building-makes-it-island can still be experimental. for the categorisation, set standard to "ground". so you'd only need to edit a few island maps - which arent many, and you need only to make the changes with important ones you remember. | ||
| 2007, 09, 12 16:03 | ||
| Well, if you add the "undefined", you could use that for maps that really are hard to categorize. Anyways, Island once were only maps that are like Dire Straits: Several closed-off islands. Semi-Island were all the maps that had the main as one island and the rest of the map more or less connected - a few lone islands more or less. Today, I think of maps like Arkanoid, Coulee, Monty Hall etc as semi-island maps, while all the others with real island-mains imo are island maps. What do you think about this? I'd say you could add in another category for this, panschk. "ground" as the standard would indeed make the number of maps to change fairly slow. That together with the small image display and the next map thing you added in recently would allow us to easily fix the few island maps. The bumping issue is the most problematic thing imo ;) | ||
| 2007, 09, 12 18:34 | ||
| Just to clarify, I would put anything but normal ground into the island category (valhalla, fz, dire straights, w/e, even those maps with the gay little ramps like 914). All air or semi-air if you ask me. Should be seperated out so they can be ignored or emphasized accordingly. IMO those types of maps are way too common and very few of them are different or very good. They are easy to make and there is no good balance for any of them, and for those reasons I think they should be seperated: so either ppl can stop making so many average ones (useless), or try to make one that is actually good. Right now the DB makes it diff to do either of those. | ||
| 2007, 09, 12 21:48 | ||
| your current categories are as follows: final beta league classic experimental LEAGUE: league makes sense, keep as-is. anything that has been recognized in organized play should be a separate category. you might want to differentiate between pro and whatever is below that (ladder/tourney/blizz event maps). EXPERIMENTAL: makes sense, keep it for misc. and openly strange ideas and notes. * BETA/FINAL: HERE is where my suggestion applies. What we should have is, USER BETA, USER FINAL (GROUND), AND USER FINAL (AIR). simple as that. AIR includes everything that is not normal ground at a basically normal rate (a map where you can bust out through a neutral building at almost the normal time could still be ground, but if strategy lends towards air, double halling, etc. then it is air). when in doubt, make it "air". we know what normal ground is, it's distances like luna or so, and anything quicker. * CLASSIC. this category is as outdated as "classic" maps are. here we have, retired "pro" maps, as well as blizzard crap. IMO rename this to RETIRED maps, for pro maps that are no longer in vogue. let blizzard maps be posted under USER FINAL, as that is all they are for today's player. so you can see, it's not complicated. add 1 category, and rename a couple. wham bam thank you mam. | ||
| 2007, 09, 12 21:55 | ||
| nah, I really dont want to add another value to that list. If you really want to have "island map" somewhere, I'd prefer just adding another dimension where we have "island, semi-island, ground". we could even have "rush map", "hungry map" or something like that in that list. You could then search for "semi-island" + "classic" maps. What would the name for that dimension be though? | ||
| 2007, 09, 12 22:40 | ||
| detailed type (optional)? specific type (optional)? | ||
| 2007, 09, 12 23:02 | ||
| maybe "gameplay-type" ? | ||
| 2007, 09, 12 23:18 | ||
| sure :) | ||
| 2007, 09, 12 23:27 | ||
| fantastic | ||
| 2007, 09, 13 07:38 | ||
| a seperate dimension is okay with me too, it accomplishes what is needed. "play-type" is fine. we have island, hybrid, ground, and "weird." for everything else (like 915) | ||
| 2007, 09, 13 15:25 | ||
| "Type2" ftw^^ Maybe "Style" :p @ the dentist: How many wrong names for 815 do you have up your sleeves? Also, you do agree with me that lt is a classic map, don't you? Now lt certainly has not "retired" yet... | ||
| 2007, 09, 13 17:05 | ||
| page: 1 2 3 | ||
Reply:
You have to be logged in to post
 |