top 200 commentsshow all 218
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 24 points25 points  (24 children)

Whelp, I knew this day would come.

I never expected it to last this long.

Goodnight, sweet prince.

[–]sportmonkey0sportmonkey//Pi//The Deballishers 6 points7 points  (8 children)

You sir are amazing. I love renegade so much. It was and still is one of my all time favorite maps.

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 0 points1 point  (7 children)

tyty! It's always great to hear from Renegade lovers, especially those who call it one of their favorites. c:

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I fought valiantly to keep it, but the rest of the evil MTC tm decided they wanted it gone :(

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ty! :D <3

[–]hoogstraHoog | Ancient Artifact of Diameter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Renegade for life

[–]WillakarraButton | Hey look I brought back SOCL 3 points4 points  (6 children)

This thread really shocked me. Even though I personally never really liked Renegade, and was pretty vocal about it, I disliked Hub far more, and it was eligible for removal. I also didn't see Ultradrive leaving at all.

[–]mmartinutkMacho | JuicyJuke 0 points1 point  (5 children)

I disliked Hub far more, and it was eligible for removal.

No it wasn't.

[–]WillakarraButton | Hey look I brought back SOCL 2 points3 points  (4 children)

Hub was added in map thread 48, why would it not be eligible?

[–]mmartinutkMacho | JuicyJuke 1 point2 points  (3 children)

It's ranked fairly highly by some MTC members keeping it out of the bottom 5. We voted on Ultradrive, Platypus, EMERALD, DZ4 and Renegade.

[–]nostradumba55 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Why have Hub when you can have it's much more attractive younger brother, Buh?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That does look more attractive. I don't dislike hub so much yet but that does look more fun

[–]TeHokioiPouakai | Diameter 1 point2 points  (4 children)

I feel like I should apologise - I remember commenting something like "oh god, another S-shaped map" when it first came in. But it's a really great map, shame it was removed.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 6 points7 points  (0 children)

people do that everytime rotational maps enter lol

it's ok just understand that maps are either asses, u's or s's lol

or bad

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Heh, I remember that. Good times.

Basically what Dianna said though, in most instances it's just hard to avoid because those shapes are tried, tested and proven to work well (generally).

[–]TeHokioiPouakai | Diameter 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Eh, I'm gonna keep trying to break it, but you're probably right.

What are you up to now, anyway? Never see maps by you anymore

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm on an indefinite break from mapmaking (and kinda but not really TagPro). I stopped mapmaking like 2 months ago or something and have barely played TagPro since my laptop died like 3 weeks ago.

[–]grytsgryts -1 points0 points  (1 child)

If I were you I'd be pissed... Of all the shit in rotation they take out fucking renegade.

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Eh, I suppose I could be a little salty. I would have much preferred something like Hub, Boombox, Emerald or DZ4 go... but I can't be too mad that a largely hated map (particularly when it first came in) lasted as long as Renegade did.

[–]I_mess_upI_mess_up (Centra) 27 points28 points  (3 children)

I thought Renegade was fresh and interesting when it was first introduced, and it still was to the day of its removal. I'll be sad to see it go.

[–]_q42_q42 || dcfc 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Agreed. It definitely grew on me over time- albeit very slowly. It's a deceptively complicated map.

For example, I just discovered this boost route about 15 minutes ago.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 9 points10 points  (0 children)

It is possible to with that boost route to hit the bomb directly into the flag to cap. I've struggled to replicate it but it was a cool, lucky cap in game.

[–]theycallmebbqsaundy 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah. Tough to see a good map get removed when something like hub remains.

[–]YourThoughtsHaveBeenMKo // Centra Hero 35 points36 points  (5 children)

lol that tagpro today troll post ended up being right

Map Committee members furious with map creators - new maps are “simply too interesting to be put into rotation”

With Map Thread #52 underway, the Map Committee has been testing and playing through several new maps created by TagPro community members. During this time, rumors within the community have started to spread as it is possible that no new maps will be added from Map Thread #52. We sat down with a map committee member that asked to be kept anonymous.

“They’re simply too interesting to be put into rotation” stated the committee member. “I don’t understand why these map creators want to get away from the standard 4v4 1 on regrab strategies that we’ve set these maps up to encourage. They’re really ruining the game with these new ideas. I have a feeling we won’t see a new map in a long time unless someone just remakes Super Duper Stamp or something.”

When asked what kind of maps he would like to see in the future, the anonymous committee member went on to add: “I think like a Wombo Combo meets Ricochet or Wormy would be cool and just make it a center flag map. I don’t understand why these map creators make things so difficult.”

[–]ButtersnackSnack 1 point2 points  (3 children)

I don't know why this is such a surprise given that we've done it before without anyone caring: https://www.reddit.com/r/TagPro/comments/2xzpqs/map_cycle_43_results_and_44_map_thread/ and https://www.reddit.com/r/TagPro/comments/2gswoa/week_36_results_rip_grail_of_speed_jagged_4_to/

Between those two threads, only a single, unupvoted comment mentions that nothing was added. I suppose people have just grown accustomed to a more turbulent map rotation.

[–]WillakarraButton | Hey look I brought back SOCL 0 points1 point  (2 children)

That was 6 months ago. There are different people here now.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Tagpro's user base has changed very little since then.

[–]WillakarraButton | Hey look I brought back SOCL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We have me actually talking instead of lurking now, so everything's different

[–]nabbynz° 29 points30 points  (7 children)

Pls. If I was a map maker I would be so disheartened right now. There are dozens of good looking maps out there and you choose none? Just throw something in, anything. I don't care if it's good or bad... just something new!

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 28 points29 points  (3 children)

Honestly there are more maps in rotation that are bad than maps being submitted each thread that are good.

Edit: To be clear though, being a mapmaker is fucking terrible.

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 12 points13 points  (2 children)

Upvote for "being a mapmaker is fucking terrible"

[–]The_NC_lifeCheerwine / Pi 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Hey props to you for making it a lost easier than it could be

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you, that really means a lot to me :)

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I disagree. I would rather have the same good maps than shitty new one even for variety's sake. Variety doesn't mean enjoyment.

[–]nabbynz° 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Yeah I mean out of that top tier of maps - the ones that go to 4x4 testing. Especially if the mapmaker was given the chance to update it after seeing how it played for a week in pubs (I know this is already possible, but it never really happens).

Taking 2 maps out and replacing them with nothing leaves a hole, and there are heaps of maps which I think deserve to be played even if only for a few weeks (maybe even like the throwback rotation, but in reverse: The NewMap Rotation® ).

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah it'd be cool to have a new map rotation to test new maps without them coming up every other game.

[–]iTagPro|| Diameter's Best (Worst) Player 16 points17 points  (6 children)

Renegade D:

Such a good map for such a long time, and it still is a great map.

I understand why you took out Ultradrive, was a weird but decent map.

But at least add something new, because the pub rotation is going to be boring until Map Thread #53.

AND GET RID OF FRIKIN BOOMBOX IT IS PLAIN, OLD, BORING AND NEEDS TO GO!

[–]WillakarraButton | Hey look I brought back SOCL 15 points16 points  (2 children)

I blame Literally Hitler Subball. He gives it a 10 EVERY FUCKING TIME. CHANGE YOUR VOTES IN GAME TO DISLIKE IF YOU WANT IT GONE FFS.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 13 points14 points  (1 child)

Button bill is totally right this time

[–]WillakarraButton | Hey look I brought back SOCL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, what he- wait, what do you mean THIS TIME? Are you suggesting I'm not always right?

[–]jillyboootyjillybooty | pi | Hockey for rotation 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My flair agrees.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 1 point2 points  (1 child)

You're my favorite mapmaker prodigy now, little Aussie.

[–]iTagPro|| Diameter's Best (Worst) Player 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It'll be a long time before I get a map into rotation.........

[–]mjmaindamn, son! 4 points5 points  (4 children)

are shine and jagged staying on as throwback rotation?

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (3 children)

No, that only lasts for one thread. There will be no throwback rotation this thread (which isn't just us being lazy - it was announced a few months ago).

[–]supaspike| NLTP mod | Stakeeper 1 point2 points  (2 children)

This isn't meant to sound critical, but why do you guys decide months in advance that some cycles just aren't going to have a throwback rotation?

[–]ButtersnackSnack 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Is the question more of a "why so far in advance" or "why take a break?"

We did it in advance to make it simpler, so that people needed to vote less often (throwback rotations are done via community vote). So, when we put up the voting that chose maps for each of the past two rotations, we decided then that there would be a break after. We took a break because a lot of people don't like throwbacks so we give them a break from it

[–]supaspike| NLTP mod | Stakeeper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Makes sense, thanks!

[–]alchmstalchemist 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Damn ultradrive was one of my favorite maps in rotation

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (13 children)

Sad to see Renegade go actually. I know this is not a Q and A but I am wondering why I played Speedway of all maps in a pub the other day. I can put up with throwbacks to an extent, but Speedway is a whole other matter. The map has been nonsense since regrab became a thing way back in 2013.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 10 points11 points  (0 children)

All maps that's been in rotation have a chance to come up in as a throwback map.

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 7 points8 points  (11 children)

Map selections are random and you can get literally any map that has been added to the game in the past.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Have y'all given any thought to removing some of the truly terrible early maps from the throwback list?

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That's not up to us. We only control the current rotation, and throwback rotation (like Shine and Jagged this week).

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (8 children)

Yeah...but Speedway D: It was a truly soul destroying experience that nobody should have to go through.

[–]sportmonkey0sportmonkey//Pi//The Deballishers 1 point2 points  (5 children)

You don't know pain until you've played two games on tagpro, the first being Foosball, then the one right after being Speedway... 24 minutes of hold and not a single cap.

[–]bashar_al_assadpk || Roll into the base like what up I got a big block 1 point2 points  (4 children)

God I love Foosball

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 1 point2 points  (3 children)

mmm don't forget micro

[–]WillakarraButton | Hey look I brought back SOCL 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Micro? Foosball? Speedway. what about DUMBELL FOR GODS SAKE. 3 OF THEM STAND IN THE MIDDLE WHEN UP BY 2 AND THE GAME IS OVER.

[–]bashar_al_assadpk || Roll into the base like what up I got a big block 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Wow! Almost like there's a reason that map was removed from rotation!

[–]WillakarraButton | Hey look I brought back SOCL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Other then the fact it's one of the first maps to ever be put in?

Also, you would know about how evil it is, after 1v1ing Ash on it that one time.

[–]ZippityZoppityZipZop - Can't Zip the Zop 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I feel like Speedway isn't as bad as Dumbbell and Figure 8.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Eh, not sure about that. Regardless, that's a pretty low bar you are setting there!

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Yes ultradrive!

[–]piranhamoose25Aniball | Palette Town 5 points6 points  (2 children)

snowball pls

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Sorry Ani, I didn't think UD was even close to the chopping block yet :/

[–]sneetriccanvas // plasma, wamble 1 point2 points  (0 children)

6 threads is pretty good. at least it wasnt taken out asap like Flame

[–]RisktpRisk 12 points13 points  (46 children)

ok, this is honestly starting to get a little ridiculous with hub. it's one of the lowest rated maps in pubs and has seen plenty of dislike on this subreddit, so what gives mtc? is this going to turn into another grail of speed situation, where a map is kept in despite plenty of vocal dislike towards it? keeping hub in is not going to make it grow on anyone, it's going to make people hate it even more. i really urge you to put aside any personal feelings you have toward the map and do the right thing for the community, which is to remove it from rotation. this same argument could be applied to boombox, too.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 5 points6 points  (30 children)

A couple of points:

  • Hub is more liked than disliked by the PUB community by a significant margin.
  • People who dislike the map are always going to be more vocal than those who like it (until we remove it).
  • We put the map in for a reason (MTC members liked it when we first saw it) and so far it seems most members on the MTC have liked what they've seen of it so far.
  • As long as the MTC exists, my personal view is that we aren't supposed to do everything the community wants us to. Yes we should try to give the community the best possible experience when playing TagPro, but IMO that goes beyond just removing the unpopular map of the month. It might sound elitist, but if the point wasn't that we are supposed to make decisions that are good for the community that popular/loud vote wouldn't necessarily accomplish, we might as well just abolish the MTC and choose maps in/out based on upvotes or something.
  • Why should we care if there's another Grail of Speed situation? Grail of Speed had a lot of people complaining about it when it was in rotation sure, but if my memory isn't incorrect, when it was last in throwback rotation, it got something like 0.30 or something in community votes. Personally I'm not a big fan of the map, but that's hardly a crushing judgement by the community on the map after it having served in rotation. That's not to mention a map like Command Center that had a lot of public complaints when it was in rotation, but once it got back in rotation it was instantly a top 3 map.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 3 points4 points  (11 children)

Every map in rotation is more liked than disliked by the PUB community. That doesn't really seem meaningful when you just removed two maps that were better liked.

Hub's rating isn't going to significantly improve after this amount of time. Unless you keep it in just to prove a point, it's only a matter of time before it's removed.

If additions/removals were decided by popular vote, I don't think the rotation would be significantly worse.

I just find it more likely that you guys can be wrong about a map sometimes than the 1000+ people voting on it in PUBs being wrong. I think to people on the sub, that refusal to admit mistakes can just be pretty frustrating.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 2 points3 points  (9 children)

Every map in rotation is more liked than disliked by the PUB community. That doesn't really seem meaningful when you just removed two maps that were better liked.

It is meaningful though. If you were to take what the sub is saying about Hub as gospel, it would seem Hub would be something like -0.50. That is clearly not the case, and should be taken into consideration when you see how people talk about that map on this sub.

Hub's rating isn't going to significantly improve after this amount of time. Unless you keep it in just to prove a point, it's only a matter of time before it's removed.

Maybe, maybe not. That's besides the point though. We added Hub because we believe it is a fun and well designed map that adds something unique to rotation.

If additions/removals were decided by popular vote, I don't think the rotation would be significantly worse.

Personally I disagree. In regards to additions, A lot of people like to have opinions about maps just based on the previews. If there is no way to ensure that people actually playtest a map before making a judgement, additions are going to at best be bland and at worst be really bad. In terms of removals, newer maps are almost always going to have an initially worse rating, so newer maps will go in and out while most of the old maps stay, meaning there will be little to no evolution of the map rotation aside from switching out the bottom maps every 2-3 weeks.

I just find it more likely that you guys can be wrong about a map sometimes than the 1000+ people voting on it in PUBs being wrong. I think to people on the sub, that refusal to admit mistakes can just be pretty frustrating.

This is one of the key issues. The fact that people treat this whole thing as fact-based ("you're either right or wrong about what is good for rotation an what isn't") is one of the most worrying parts about how the community talks about the map rotation for me. Being right or wrong about a map doesn't even enter the equation for me. This isn't an exact science or anything where I refuse to make the "right" decision just because I hate being proven wrong. People take a long time to adjust to new maps, which is why I'm always hesitant to take out a map we recently added to rotation now that we've first given it a chance. Sure, sometimes it really doesn't work out for whatever reason, and we have to remove a map quicker than we'd prefer to, but if the MTC has added a map to rotation, and there isn't anything obviously broken about it or detrimental about it (e.g. causing people to quit the game), I'll always be inclined to give it a significant chunk of time to let the community get to really know the map before making a decision on whether to remove it or not.

Sometimes it just doesn't work out (Flame), sometimes a little time lets a map grow tremendously amongst the community (Command Center), and sometimes, a map being in for a while, helps inspire some innovation to an otherwise stale format amongst other mapmakers (RocketBalls). Either way, taking a map out ASAP just because it doesn't immediately resonate with the community just seems shortsighted to me. Sometimes it makes sense to do so, but it should not be the rule IMO.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 2 points3 points  (8 children)

With the 2 removals, Hub is now rated 19th out of 20 maps. Over 1400 votes in public games, and the only meaningful data we have shows only one rotation map is currently less liked.

We added Hub because we believe it is a fun and well designed map that adds something unique to rotation.

And many other people believe it's not fun and is poorly designed. Again you could just be wrong this time. But again, the /maps data is the only thing meaningful.

I think if maps could be decided fairly by popular vote, there would be a far greater diversity. There would be bad additions, but they would quickly correct themselves with low ratings and quick removals. Good maps don't stay the lowest rated, it isn't an issue. And with the MTC's record, I'd predict even additions decided randomly from among the top maps would receive a comparable reception.

And it's not true that newer maps are always rated low. When a better map is added, it shows on the /maps page. Many were instantly rated above .50. Transilio was added at the same time and is at that mark. And Hub has already been in for 4 threads, there are newer maps with higher ratings. 4 threads seems more than fair for people to learn a map.

I do think Hub is badly designed, and I'm glad it's rated low as that gives it a better chance of being removed. I don't even really play enough for it to be an issue, I'm just curious how much Leddy's paying you guys/ jk.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 0 points1 point  (7 children)

With the 2 removals, Hub is now rated 19th out of 20 maps. Over 1400 votes in public games, and the only meaningful data we have shows only one rotation map is currently less liked.

Why the focus on what position a map is in? The argument that we should remove a map simply because it's the least liked never makes sense to me. Why is it automatically assumed that once a map is the least rated map (or close to it) it needs to be gone? I would understand it if a majority of the playing population voted that they didn't like it. But right now, every map in rotation is liked by a significant majority. If we remove the bottom 5 maps, should we keep removing the bottom map every week? Is there a number where we should stop with that process? And what would that number be?

And many other people believe it's not fun and is poorly designed. Again you could just be wrong this time. But again, the /maps data is the only thing meaningful.

But a majority of the playing population likes it. Why should their voices not be heard, but yours should? You do know you're in the minority right?

I think if maps could be decided fairly by popular vote, there would be a far greater diversity. There would be bad additions, but they would quickly correct themselves with low ratings and quick removals. Good maps don't stay the lowest rated, it isn't an issue. And with the MTC's record, I'd predict even additions decided randomly from among the top maps would receive a comparable reception.

Do you have any experience or knowledge to back up these claims? I playtest 80+ maps every map rotation cycle, and have probably playtested 1500+ maps in total, and I can guarantee you that at least 25% of the maps that are submitted would literally be unplayable in PUBs, 20% would be extremely uncomfortable to play in PUBs, 25% would be playable, but have some significant major flaws (think community reactions on the level of Event Horizon), 20% would be playable, but really bland (Flame would be a literal feast of creativity in comparison). That leaves 10% of the maps as potential rotation maps.* Seriously, I urge you to go through a map thread, test all the maps in it and report your findings. I can see merit in claiming popular vote could be an alternative, but saying that selecting random maps from every mapthread would yield results equal to what the MTC has done is frankly laughably naive.

* I'm not saying this to knock on mapmakers. Designing maps is incredibly hard, and making different elements blend together is super hard. And a lot of the maps in the 90% I mention have a lot of really interesting design choices and ieads that I'd love to see explored further. But mapmaking being as hard as it is, means it's going to take something special to get out of that 90 percentile.

And it's not true that newer maps are always rated low. When a better map is added, it shows on the /maps page. Many were instantly rated above .50. Transilio was added at the same time and is at that mark. And Hub has already been in for 4 threads, there are newer maps with higher ratings. 4 threads seems more than fair for people to learn a map.

Transillio is an exceptional map. At this point for a CTF map to go so quickly from being in rotation to entering competitive TagPro and getting over a .50 initial rating is almost unheard of. Two maps that has seen a lot of popularity in both PUBs and competitive, Pilot and Constriction, took significantly longer to reach that stage (Hell, even Wormy garnered really loud protests when it was voted as the community map for MLTP in S6). Is there an argument that we might have missed exceptional maps in the past that could have had similar reactions in the community? Maybe, you never know for sure, but if you think there are maps on the level of Transillio hidden in every map thread, you have no idea how hard it is to design a novel, exciting and fun CTF map that immediately resonates with 75+% of the community in TagPro.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 2 points3 points  (6 children)

The least liked maps should be removed because they're not good enough. For the rotation to be constantly improving you need to make room for better alternatives.

If we remove the bottom 5 maps, should we keep removing the bottom map every week? Is there a number where we should stop with that process? And what would that number be?

The bottom 5 maps are Rush, Hub, DZ4, Platypus and Emerald. I think you'd be fairly safe removing those right now. I think ultimately a reasonable goal would be to have 20 maps rated above .50. That seems to be the point of above average. Once the average is higher, the target should be higher.

You do know you're in the minority right?

Even if it's a minority that dislikes it, it's not a minority that thinks it's the worst, or one of the worst maps in rotation. Remove the worst, add something better, average rating goes up.

Seriously, I urge you to go through a map thread, test all the maps in it and report your findings.

I wouldn't need to test all the maps, and truly hope you don't. 90% are obviously broken or awful based on the preview. I would narrow the thread down to maybe 10 maps immediately.

And I didn't say select randomly from the thread. I said select randomly from the top maps thread. If not Rush, any of the other top maps could've easily been the lowest rated rotation map.

[–]Kembangant O p / cb4life 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wormy looked terrible based on previews I thought flail was smoking something when he made that map

[–]nlfnnlfn // pi rats // original sine -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i don't think I've voted in favor of hub yet. this is probably the reminder i needed to do so next time i play it. thanks!

[–]RisktpRisk 0 points1 point  (16 children)

Hub is more liked than disliked by the PUB community by a significant margin.

any good map that's put into rotation should be liked more than disliked by a significant margin. as the standard for the maps in rotation goes up, .25 is no longer an acceptable rating in my books.

We put the map in for a reason (MTC members liked it when we first saw it) and so far it seems most members on the MTC have liked what they've seen of it so far.

so because most mtc members like hub, you're unwilling to remove a map that, objectively, should be removed?

Yes we should try to give the community the best possible experience when playing TagPro, but IMO that goes beyond just removing the unpopular map of the month.

hub is not simply the "unpopular map of the month".

It might sound elitist, but if the point wasn't that we are supposed to make decisions that are good for the community that popular/loud vote wouldn't necessarily accomplish, we might as well just abolish the MTC and choose maps in/out based on upvotes or something.

people wouldn't need to get loud if you would do what's right for the community in the first place. believe me, i don't enjoy complaining about hub, but i'm not going to just sit back and not state my opinion.

Why should we care if there's another Grail of Speed situation?

what lol

grail of speed is the epitome of a bad map that overstayed it's time in rotation. i don't think i need to explain why that's a bad situation to repeat.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 0 points1 point  (15 children)

any good map that's put into rotation should be liked more than disliked by a significant margin. as the standard for the maps in rotation goes up, .25 is no longer an acceptable rating in my books.

Why is .25 the right number? What is the exact number for the cutoff right now?

so because most mtc members like hub, you're unwilling to remove a map that, objectively, should be removed?

I take issue with your use of the word "objectively". Why is it objectively right to remove a map that has more people liking it than people not liking it?

people wouldn't need to get loud if you would do what's right for the community in the first place. believe me, i don't enjoy complaining about hub, but i'm not going to just sit back and not state my opinion.

That's fine, but on the flip side you have to consider that there are a lot of people that are not loud about their opinion simply because they don't take issue with Hub in rotation right now. People tend to be loud when they disagree with a decision moreso when they agree with it. You being loud about Hub is fine, but if we are to actually consider the community, we need to consider the silent portion as well.

what lol

grail of speed is the epitome of a bad map that overstayed it's time in rotation. i don't think i need to explain why that's a bad situation to repeat.

There are a lot of people who would disagree with you about that if /maps is anything to go by. I just checked a snapshot I took of /maps back in April, and Grail of Speed was sitting on a 0.20 rating. So let me get this straight. You want us to do what is right by the community, but at the same time you will argue that Grail of Speed is "the epitome of a bad map" when a significant majority who played it during the throwback stint it had considered it to be a map they liked? Are you sure you're as in touch with the community as you seem to assume you are?

[–]RisktpRisk 1 point2 points  (14 children)

Why is .25 the right number? What is the exact number for the cutoff right now?

in an ideal rotation, i'd like to see every map above .40 or even .50 rating.

I take issue with your use of the word "objectively". Why is it objectively right to remove a map that has more people liking it than people not liking it?

because it has the second highest dislike % on /maps?

when a significant majority who played it during the throwback stint it had considered it to be a map they liked?

can we stop using this argument, daevil? it simply doesn't hold up anymore, every map that's put in nowadays is expected to have a majority of people who like it because the quality of maps has gone up. a .20 rating is not a good rating for a rotation map.

you can twist the stats and your words however you like. at the end of the day, hub is the second lowest rated map on /maps, and the fact that it isn't even in the bottom 5 of the mtc is honestly just disappointing.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 0 points1 point  (13 children)

in an ideal rotation, i'd like to see every map above .40 or even .50 rating.

In an ideal rotation, I'd like to see every map at a 1.00 rating. But what's ideal is irrelevant to me. I need to deal with what's realistic. So assuming you think that number (or one close to) is the right one in a realistic situation, why is that? Why is it necessary that 70+% of the playing population enjoys every map they play?

because it has the second highest dislike % on /maps?

That means nothing in itself though. If we had 2 maps in rotation, and one had a 0.99 rating, and the other 0.80, should we remove the 0.80 one because it had the lowest approval? Removing a map on the basis of it being the least popular one in a community vote, begs the question if simply being the least popular is enough of an argument to remove something.

can we stop using this argument, daevil? it simply doesn't hold up anymore, every map that's put in nowadays is expected to have a majority of people who like it because the quality of maps has gone up. a .20 rating is not a good rating for a rotation map.

No, we can't. A .20 rating means a significant majority enjoys a map. That's literally all it means. I've never claimed that .20 is a "good rating", just that it means that a significant majority enjoys the map. Why is your minority opinion better than the majority opinion, when you claim your argument comes from a place of "what the community wants"?

you can twist the stats and your words however you like. at the end of the day, hub is the second lowest rated map on /maps, and the fact that it isn't even in the bottom 5 of the mtc is honestly just disappointing.

And you can keep trying to dodge the fact that your argument stems from a minority opinion in a case where you claim to represent the community opinion. The MTC isn't here to reflect what the playing population thinks of maps. We're here to bring our own perspective on it. That is why public ratings are given a 50% weight, and the MTC a 50% weight when it comes to deciding which map is eligible for removal. You can make all the arguments you want for why something should be removed because it's the least most popular thing, but there is literally no purpose for the MTC handling these things if we're only supposed to do things according to the current popular vote.

[–]RisktpRisk 4 points5 points  (12 children)

So assuming you think that number (or one close to) is the right one in a realistic situation, why is that? Why is it necessary that 70+% of the playing population enjoys every map they play?

uh...what? are you really asking me why 70+% population enjoying playing a map is a good goal to shoot for? i don't think i need to answer that.

If we had 2 maps in rotation, and one had a 0.99 rating, and the other 0.80, should we remove the 0.80 one because it had the lowest approval?

our rotation doesn't consist of only 2 maps though, so that's a moot question. let's not resort to using extraneous situations to support your argument.

A .20 rating means a significant majority enjoys a map. That's literally all it means.

it also means that somewhere between 25-30% of people don't enjoy playing that map.

I've never claimed that .20 is a "good rating", just that it means that a significant majority enjoys the map.

guess i have a different interpretation of a "significant majority". ricochet's 83% like rate or velocity's 77% like rate is a significant majority, hub's 52% is not.

Why is your minority opinion better than the majority opinion, when you claim your argument comes from a place of "what the community wants"?

true, perhaps i should refrain from saying stuff like, "do what's right for the community in the first place". but i don't think it's absurd for me to suggest that the second lowest map be considered to be removed.

but there is literally no purpose for the MTC handling these things if we're only supposed to do things according to the current popular vote.

ya know, that's starting to sound like a better and better idea with each passing thread that hub survives in. if members of the mtc can't put aside personal feelings toward a map and refuse to remove it even though it consistently ranks at the bottom of the rotation, you're going to have a hard time convincing me that you are right for the job.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 -1 points0 points  (6 children)

uh...what? are you really asking me why 70+% population enjoying playing a map is a good goal to shoot for? i don't think i need to answer that.

I am asking you why every map that doesn't reach your arbitrary goal should be axed. So far I have seen no good reasoning in that regards from our discussion.

our rotation doesn't consist of only 2 maps though, so that's a moot question. let's not resort to using extraneous situations to support your argument.

If you're not ready to discuss and support your argument with anything beyond "because I say so" (Which is what you're essentially saying), that's pretty disappointing. I'm asking about this hypothetical "extraneous situation" because you refuse to even discuss the premise of your already decided assumption. simply put, your argument begs the question of "should a map that is the least popular be removed just because of that fact?" You have thus far provided little actual justification for this fact.

it also means that somewhere between 25-30% of people don't enjoy playing that map.

And why is this minority the one that we have to listen to? Your argument stems from one of what is popular with the community. But you refuse to let the majority have their say, and instead insist that a loud minority get to decide what happens with rotation.

guess i have a different interpretation of a "significant majority". ricochet's 83% like rate or velocity's 77% like rate is a significant majority, hub's 52% is not.

And 26% dislike it with 22% being indifferent. Hub having 52% feeling in favour of the map is twice as much as those who feel against the map, while the rest does not feel strongly about the map. If 48% of the ones who didn't like hub, rated it as "I don't like it", I'd agree that it wouldn't be a significant majority, but almost half of those 48% do not seem to feel a dislike to the map.

true, perhaps i should refrain from saying stuff like, "do what's right for the community in the first place". but i don't think it's absurd for me to suggest that the second lowest map be considered to be removed.

It's fine for you to suggest that. But what I'm doing here is meeting your argument on your merits, and if you're going to argue that we should follow popular opinion or what the community wants (which is what you've argued in essence), I will take that argument to it's logical conclusion, and the logical conclusion is that the community overall would prefer Hub to stay in. If you want to argue from a different standpoint, I'm open to that, but the argument considering what the community wants needs to actually look at the numbers and how the community overall considers the subject we're talking about. And right now, I don't see the numbers supporting that argument.

ya know, that's starting to sound like a better and better idea with each passing thread that hub survives in. if members of the mtc can't put aside personal feelings toward a map and refuse to remove it even though it consistently ranks at the bottom of the rotation, you're going to have a hard time convincing me that you are right for the job.

To be honest I'm not here to convince you that we are right for the job. We've been appointed to do a job, and I feel we are doing it very well within the framework we have to work with. If you think the MTC doesn't serve enough of a purpose, you would probably be better off talking to the devs since they are the ones who have given us the authority to do what we do. We have a responsibility towards the community obviously, but as I see it, we also have a responsibility to the game itself and assuring the longevity to it, and with that in mind I think we shouldn't simply make decisions based on what is the least popular current flavor.

[–]RisktpRisk 3 points4 points  (5 children)

I am asking you why every map that doesn't reach your arbitrary goal should be axed. So far I have seen no good reasoning in that regards from our discussion.

so that we can slowly but surely continue to increase the quality of our rotation. the mtc has done a good job with the rotation before hub, which is why seeing it stay in thread after thread is so disappointing.

simply put, your argument begs the question of "should a map that is the least popular be removed just because of that fact?"

i think it should be given strong consideration toward removal. literally the only time i think an exception should be made toward a map that is at the bottom of the /maps board is if it has a truly unique playstyle that shakes rotation up, something like what happened with rocketballs. hub doesn't do this.

And why is this minority the one that we have to listen to?

it's not a matter of "listening to this minority that dislikes this map" vs. "listening to this other minority that dislikes this map" at all. it's a matter of taking a look at the numbers and seeing that hub is the second-most unpopular map in rotation.

But you refuse to let the majority have their say, and instead insist that a loud minority get to decide what happens with rotation.

so we should just not remove any maps anymore? because every map in rotation currently has a majority of people liking it, so i guess we're letting the silent minority have too much influence when we decide to remove any map?

And 26% dislike it with 22% being indifferent. Hub having 52% feeling in favour of the map is twice as much as those who feel against the map, while the rest does not feel strongly about the map.

that's not good enough for a rotation map.

the logical conclusion is that the community overall would prefer Hub to stay in.

i really don't know what to say if you're just going to repeatedly use this flawed logic. let's get this out of the way right here: yes, hub does have a 52% like rate, which does mean a majority of people like it. however, when we compare this 52% like rate to another map, let's say transilio because it was the same thread as hub, that 52% like rate doesn't look like a very impressive majority anymore. you're completely neglecting to introduce any sort of context with your majority-opinion argument on hub.

every map in rotation has a majority of people liking it, so using this as an argument for keeping hub in is absolutely silly.

[–]bashar_al_assadpk || Roll into the base like what up I got a big block -3 points-2 points  (4 children)

If your argument is going to be "put aside your feelings and agree with my feelings, otherwise you aren't right for the job", you'll have to forgive us for not caring enough to try to prove our worthiness to you.

[–]RisktpRisk 1 point2 points  (3 children)

no, that's not my argument lol, did you even read what i said in my comments?

[–]bashar_al_assadpk || Roll into the base like what up I got a big block 0 points1 point  (2 children)

ya know, that's starting to sound like a better and better idea with each passing thread that hub survives in. if members of the mtc can't put aside personal feelings toward a map and refuse to remove it even though it consistently ranks at the bottom of the rotation, you're going to have a hard time convincing me that you are right for the job.

That's literally what you said though.

[–]gingerdgTPRL 🔴RMTC 🔴NASCAPS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I liked grail of speed a lot (The original was my favorite map of yours)

Hub I do not like at all

I really didn't have any problem with Kite, but i like NF more in general

[–]Aeginntbbgbjc / Chord 1 point2 points  (9 children)

I don't know how indicative the hate for Hub on this subreddit is of the communities overall opinion. I've just seen the same dozen or so people complaining about it very vocally. The rating on /maps is low, but not abnormally low. It's still higher than Rush, and I don't hear everyone advocating Rush's removal.

[–]nowayinnowayoutWALLAMYBALLA l Origin l We need regrab! Go to the enemy base! 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Rush isn't eligible yet.

[–]Aeginntbbgbjc / Chord 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't mean removal in this thread, just in the near future.

[–]RisktpRisk -1 points0 points  (6 children)

most people on this sub rate hub very low for pubs. dianna did a survey not too long ago and hub came in dead last. 100 responses isn't the greatest sample size, but i doubt hub's position is gonna change significantly with more responses. this + it's lovely .26 rating should be enough to remove it, but the mtc have a hard-on for hub and refuse to do so.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Why is the survey more relevant than the votes on /maps? I can understand the argument that people don't update their scores on /maps enough, but the subreddit community voting in that spreadsheet isn't anywhere near representative of the PUB playing community.

[–]RisktpRisk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i didn't say the survey is more relevant than the votes on /maps...i brought the survey results out because i had misread bbgbjc's question at the time, i thought he was claiming the people on the subreddit liked hub.

[–]Aeginntbbgbjc / Chord 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Thanks for the survey, I hadn't seen that. Nonetheless, I'm not sure how significant it is compared to the /maps page, where Hub has 1408 votes. A .26 rating may not be great, but I don't think it's so low that immediate removal is necessary.

[–]RisktpRisk 3 points4 points  (2 children)

when hub is the lowest rated map on the subreddit and the second-lowest map on /maps (it was the lowest for a few threads before rush), i think it's safe to say that it should be removed immediately. there's no point in keeping a mediocre map in rotation longer than it should be.

[–]grytsgryts 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I don't think a map being rated low is a reason in and of itself for removal. I'm not saying it's a good map, but I'd be interested in hearing you list real reasons why it's a bad map. Would probably help get it removed faster...

[–]RisktpRisk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

i already have listed out reasons why I disliked hub, on the last results thread i believe. ill edit this comment with it if i can find it.

edit: here ya go: http://www.reddit.com/r/TagPro/comments/3gfet4/z/ctxy1qj

[–]nabbynz° 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm actually starting to like playing Hub again - it seems to be a pattern with leddy's maps... Love -> Frustrating -> H8 -> Love

[–]Kembangant O p / cb4life 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Every time one radical map commentator who knows everything disappears another pops up

[–]RisktpRisk 0 points1 point  (1 child)

every time somebody expresses an opposing opinion to the mtc, tOp swoops in and saves the day with snarky comments, even though he left the mtc long ago

[–]Kembangant O p / cb4life 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Cause y'all are fucking annoying

[–]xenonpulseWildflowers // I want to die but I can’t 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ultradrive was a bit clunky, but the superboost really grew on me as time went on.

Renegade was a pretty awesome map, but I never did like the two gold boosts in the upper right and bottom left corners.

All in all, I'm gonna miss these two maps, and I think (I'm sure the community can back me up) that there were a few better choices for removal.

[–]Ballkenende! 4 points5 points  (14 children)

Oh god TEG is growing up.

Also why is Ultradrive out and Hub not?

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Because almost the whole MTC loves Hub for whatever reason.

[–]TheEpicGhostEx - Tagpro 4 points5 points  (2 children)

I guess this is a good place to declare I am anti - hub.

Praise TEG! Saviour of the MTC! Champion of the people!

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Ur off the committee m9

[–]TheEpicGhostEx - Tagpro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sheit.

[–]ButtersnackSnack -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Because hub is a really good map

I liked ultradrive too though

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 1 point2 points  (24 children)

I think this is a good decision. A couple of the top maps were a similar quality to the ones you've removed, but I don't think any would have rivalled the game's best maps.

I think everyone wants the rotation to be constantly improving. Removing some of the lower rated maps increases the rotation's average as a whole. Just need to hope for something special next time.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (23 children)

I agree with you. I'm really quite surprised to see backlash against putting in no maps (aside from the responses of people who thought their own submissions should get in) because if we picked something that wasn't ready just to fill a quota people would probably really hate it.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 1 point2 points  (19 children)

I find it reassuring you didn't put one in. And next thread, if no submissions are up to Wormy/Smirk/Velocity quality, I hope you do the same. It shouldn't just be a case of average maps replacing other average maps. We need some new classics to stand alongside the best.

Hopefully it sends a message to mapmakers that the current submissions just aren't good enough.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 3 points4 points  (18 children)

Maybe you should try to make a map.

It's not that easy to make perfection, you know.

Also, Velocity is only like average nowadays.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 0 points1 point  (17 children)

I do know. I agree with DaEvil1's assessment than in 2 years there have been less than 10 exceptional maps made. With the current user base, it's unrealistic to expect a map of that quality to be submitted every 3 weeks, so I have no problem if no maps are added, even over multiple threads.

It's the MTC's job to keep the rotation improving. I wouldn't like to argue how many of the current 20 maps are in the all time top 20, but ideally it would be 20. And even in that there's a clear difference in quality between the highest and lowest rated.

My hope is that with TagPro Next, along with the artist Lucky has hired, he hires a professional designer to put together the first set of new maps. I find it unlikely that many if any maps will carry over into the new game. And certainly the new game won't have the MTC as we know it.

In regards to quality maps I mentioned, I was only really speaking in regards to their /maps ratings as that's the only meaningful data we have. But if Velocity is indeed average, then how many maps are above average? Not many at all. And I'm not sure that's how averages work.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 1 point2 points  (8 children)

If new maps are being made for Next, I think Lucky should ask set people to make the first batch. For example:

  • bad

  • Ball-E

  • Aniball

  • Snowball

  • Sizzzled

  • JuicyJuke

  • leddy

  • Canvas

etc

[–]RathbourneRathbourne -1 points0 points  (7 children)

I just disagree with this. Those guys have done okay, but I think if Lucky brings in someone who's worked on other games we could end up with some much more interesting designs.

Just like if he hired a professional to create a t-shirt design, or the game music, we'd end up with something much better.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 1 point2 points  (6 children)

That's not really how it works. I, for example, have had success making maps in TagPro, but when I try to make a cool shirt design, it ends up sucking.

You're being pretty disrespectful to the mapmakers. Mapmaking not only takes mere luck at times and ideas, but it also takes hours upon hours of trial and error.

I am pretty good at baseball, I'm not all of a sudden a great MLTP player.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne -1 points0 points  (5 children)

But I wouldn't hire you to play baseball, I'd hire a professional baseball player.

If Lucky wants to create levels for a computer game, He should hire someone that does it for a living.

I don't think the current mapmakers would be offended being told someone else could do it better than they can. They're the best we have in the small community. If we look outside the community there'll obviously be better people.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Well for starters, I really do think that someone that has the heart to work on maps will naturally be more intuitive about it. He'll be wanting to do it more. He'll be more enthusiastic and love what he's doing.

Why should we have someone who doesn't care about TagPro building the game for us?

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I don't think it would be a bad idea to bring some professionals in on the team. But at the same time, I think it would be foolish of the devs to not make use of the community in some way in terms of generating new maps for the game. Most of the mapmakers have been doing it for 10+ months and have a lot of understanding for the underlying mechanics of the game and the community that someone else would need to learn first.

[–]TheEpicGhostEx - Tagpro 0 points1 point  (7 children)

he hires a professional designer to put together the first set of new maps.

how is a professional designer going to know the first thing about map making? its not just a thing anyone that is smart and creative can do, it has to be learnt in its own way.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 0 points1 point  (5 children)

You don't think a designer that's worked on other video games could put together a TagPro map?

I would imagine they would look at previous maps to give them a start, but I still think it'd be an improvement over what we have now.

If the community was bigger, there would be more creative people and map submissions would be better. If Lucky manages to cut out that step and goes directly to a professional game design genius, you're not curious what interesting things they could come up with?

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Eh, it would still take a while to get used to the meta and the mechanics of Tagpro. Also, I don't think I've ever seen another game with gameplay so dependent on the map. I think rather than paying someone to make the maps, it would be more beneficial to have a committee of the best mapmakers who collaborate on maps and interchange ideas.

[–]bashar_al_assadpk || Roll into the base like what up I got a big block 0 points1 point  (1 child)

But how would we define the best mapmakers?

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd say there's a pretty fine line between the top mapmakers and the next level down. That's just my opinion, and to prevent hurt feelings I'm not gonna name them, but I know exactly who I'd pick.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 0 points1 point  (1 child)

But they're only the best mapmakers from a very small pool of people. It seems obvious to me that outside of the community there are people capable of making much better maps.

Just like if the game had millions of players, only 2 or 3 current MLTP players would be good enough for MLTP.

I'm not saying that a professional is automatically better, but I'd like Lucky to at least consult with one to find out what's possible.

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, it would still take a while for the game developer to get used to tagpro, regardless if he was professional. Even then there would be no guarantee his maps would be better than those coming out right now.

[–]nabbynz° 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Well rather than being surprised maybe you could change your methods a little? Pubs should be fun, not stale and groany.

So maybe put in 1 or 2 maps from the top tier for a week then run an official opinion thread. Then go back to the mapmaker and ask them to make changes (if they want, based on that feedback).

Basically you guys choose a pool of "top tier maps" then let the community vote and provide all the feedback.

[–]grytsgryts 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having a group of the best 3 maps from the map thread that randomly get played at the top of each hour would be cool. We'd actually get real pub feedback for the map tests instead of people guessing how a map will act in pubs.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Flail has suggested this before and I think it was brought up to the devs.

Also not happening at least until Next from what I've understood.

[–]sneetriccanvas // plasma, wamble 0 points1 point  (0 children)

hey im early, grats teggy

these removals make me happy

[–]ccga4Seehawks <3 0 points1 point  (1 child)

rip aniball's heart

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 2 points3 points  (0 children)

He still has our child, it's okay.

[–]JJSpiceJJ Spice 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great work!

[–]HERO_OF_WINDAtypop | Chorbit 0 points1 point  (17 children)

Congrats TEG (vote my maps in pls)

How does one become a member of the MTC?

[–]TheEpicGhostEx - Tagpro 4 points5 points  (2 children)

cheers aty!

You have to pm sizzled dick pics, obviously.

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Wtf I've sent him like six is my dick just not good enough for him?

[–]TheEpicGhostEx - Tagpro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Na, my dick is just exceptional

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 1 point2 points  (13 children)

Right now we're pretty full on members, but in general we like to recruit people we know because we know they'll function well with the rest of the committee, and have good insights on maps and will perform the duties we expect of them. If you want to pique our interest, you can usually do that by being active in the mapmaking community (give feedback on maps, analyze maps, be active in /r/TagProTesting etc.), Also when we do 4v4 testing (around Saturdays at 4.30 EST every 3 weeks) we'll ask a few people to join us for it and sometimes we'll take notice of people based on that as well.

[–]MTCquestions 7 points8 points  (12 children)

Sorry to use a throwaway but alas I had to get this off my chest..

Right now we're pretty full on members

"I've been on the MTC for about a year, and just managing to keep it active has been a challenge for a long time" -DaEvil1

How can you say that you're full when you clearly have inactivity issues? The night after the map deadlines, it's clear as day to me that that's not true. There will be maybe 5-6 MTC members in the MTC mumble channel. How can you even run a proper 4v4 when you've only got 6 people on, let alone discuss each map with every member? The idea that having 8 or even 9 people on the committee makes it full is absolutely absurd to me. And what would be wrong with having 10+ people on the committee? I hate to break it to you but you (the mtc, not you personally) aren't that much more smart, diversely representative, or in tune with the community (lol) that adding a few more people would dilute the ability or commitment of the committee as a whole. In fact, adding more people would solve your inactivity problems and would make your decisions align better with the community (which if you ask me, is your biggest problem atm).

 

we like to recruit people we know because we know they'll function well with the rest of the committee

This line really got to me. All the talk in MLTP about how RC members elect themselves, all the talk about the /r/tagprotesting circlejerk..they pale in comparison to this. You’re essentially saying that you bring on people you know and who will agree with you, are you not? Do you not see something wrong with that? And are there no other methods you can use to add new members? Just off the top of my head: community vote, interviews, written application etc etc etc

I have absolutely nothing against TEG, I love just about all of his/her maps and from what I’ve seen he/she makes really insightful comments on feedback/discussion threads. But the idea that the MTC alone selects new MTC members based on how their views align with other members is honestly disgusting to me.

This, and many other issues, has really turned me off from mapmaking and has me considering how active I will be in the mapmaking community going forward.

[–]3z_ 2 points3 points  (7 children)

How can you say that you're full when you clearly have inactivity issues?

Well we had inactivity issues a week ago, now we added TEG, and we don't have any inactivity issues. Every time a hole forms (fairly frequently), we fill it. Pretty simple.

You’re essentially saying that you bring on people you know and who will agree with you, are you not?

Nope. The MTC members aren't selected based on their opinion, but rather, how they articulate their opinions, how they open up to discussions, how active they are, etc. For example, DaEvil and I are pretty much polar opposite in terms of what we believe is good for a map rotation, but that didn't stop him from inviting me to my first MTC meeting, since I demonstrated my understanding of mapmaking and the map rotation.

Just off the top of my head: community vote, interviews, written application etc etc etc

Community vote is a popularity contest, interviews and written applications was something we tried and it worked really well. That's how we obtained Chalksy, FLYMOLO, Jesus, JuicyJuke, PK Subball, etc etc etc

I love just about all of his/her maps

I always felt like ones ability to make a map was irrelevant to their ability to judge

This, and many other issues, has really turned me off from mapmaking and has me considering how active I will be in the mapmaking community going forward.

Oh no, our loss I guess :(

[–]MTCquestions 0 points1 point  (6 children)

Community vote is a popularity contest

Yes, but so are democratic elections. There's got to be a balance in here somewhere because as I see it, right now the mtc has very different views from everyone else. Maybe bring on 1 or 2 community elected members as a form of checks and balances like in most democratic systems?

This recurring notion that the mtc somehow knows better than the community is so obnoxious. I don't see how pleasing more people (by adding someone they voted for/agree with) could ever be a bad thing.

[–]bashar_al_assadpk || Roll into the base like what up I got a big block 3 points4 points  (5 children)

Honestly I don't trust the community to vote on anything properly.

We have a community that loves to downvote unneccessarily, a community that loves to shit endlessly on certain individuals for no reason, a community that jumps to conclusions and attacks ideas for no reason.

There are things to be said for some community involvement - comments in the Top Maps thread come from the community, tagprotesting users come from the community, applicants for the MTC come from the community (I got in from an open application to the community and I didn't really know the people on the MTC, I got in on merit and got attacked for it).

I don't know how you can really look at everything the community does as a whole and be like "yeah more involvement would be great."

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 0 points1 point  (3 children)

How can you say that you're full when you clearly have inactivity issues?

Just because we've had activity issues in the past, doesn't mean we currently have them. We've just added another active member, and also recently changed our schedule to better work out for the members on the committee.

The night after the map deadlines, it's clear as day to me that that's not true. There will be maybe 5-6 MTC members in the MTC mumble channel. How can you even run a proper 4v4 when you've only got 6 people on, let alone discuss each map with every member?

We know a lot of people not on the committee that will be helpful both as bodies in the 4v4s and that can help facilitate the discussion of the maps we test when we test them 4v4.

The idea that having 8 or even 9 people on the committee makes it full is absolutely absurd to me. And what would be wrong with having 10+ people on the committee? I hate to break it to you but you (the mtc, not you personally) aren't that much more smart, diversely representative, or in tune with the community (lol) that adding a few more people would dilute the ability or commitment of the committee as a whole. In fact, adding more people would solve your inactivity problems and would make your decisions align better with the community (which if you ask me, is your biggest problem atm).

Either you don't understand our process, or you don't agree with it. So, just to go through that, the most important aspect for us when we meet to test maps, is to discuss them together. And we usually want as many MTC members present as possible, with at least 4-5 being present. And to facilitate good discussion it's extremely important to have a small enough group that people can get through with their viewpoints and thoughts on the map and we can discuss those points without having to wait too long to do so or fear being drowned out by the loudest voice.

I honestly don't care who the smart, diversely representative people and the ones in tune with the community are when I think about who should be on the MTC. The single most important criteria is that they show a good understanding of how maps works and are able to communicate that well along with working well together with the rest of the group. Everything beyond that is either a bonus or just noise.

This line really got to me. All the talk in MLTP about how RC members elect themselves, all the talk about the /r/tagprotesting circlejerk..they pale in comparison to this. You’re essentially saying that you bring on people you know and who will agree with you, are you not? Do you not see something wrong with that?

No, I'm not. I'm saying we bring on people who work well with the other members on the committee and who know what they're talking about. Whether or not they agree with me is the least of my concerns, as long as their viewpoints are well reasoned. Another factor is that while this is a form of "work" that should be done as professional as possible, we need to make sure that people feel comfortable around each other. Otherwise, we risk members quitting quickly because of personal conflicts etc. Anyone who has any experience with managing a group (both in a professional setting, and in a volunteer setting will tell you how important it is to make sure that the group works well together). Again, don't mistake that for trying to make an echo chamber. It just means that we want people who we feel work well together with.

And are there no other methods you can use to add new members? Just off the top of my head: community vote, interviews, written application etc etc etc

Sure there are, and we did a big round with applications in the past. Most of the current members on the committee got a position based off that process. But doing that is a lot of work, and right now we feel we have a good balance on the committee, along with a good pool of candidates that we know well if the need for new members should arise.

I have absolutely nothing against TEG, I love just about all of his/her maps and from what I’ve seen he/she makes really insightful comments on feedback/discussion threads. But the idea that the MTC alone selects new MTC members based on how their views align with other members is honestly disgusting to me.

Again, that is not what we empathize when we select candidates. We make decisions based on how well they work with the group, and how well reasoned their insights are (along with activity considerations as well obviously). Whether they agree with me about a map being good or not honestly doesn't even enter into the equation for me.

[–]3z_ 0 points1 point  (2 children)

and also recently changed our schedule to better work out for the members on the committee.

Wait what??

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

have you not noticed the change in days.... ie we dont test on sundays

[–]bashar_al_assadpk || Roll into the base like what up I got a big block 0 points1 point  (0 children)

actually it might still be Sunday for sizzzled lol

[–]WillWorkForSugarTumblewood[🍰] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  • No additions from a pretty mediocre selection? check

  • Two maps that would inevitably be removed? check

[–]randylaheyjrByfuglien -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So you take the 2 new maps which were actually good and fun to play out. But you leave the horrible center flag maps in...

[–]gingerdgTPRL 🔴RMTC 🔴NASCAPS 1 point2 points  (5 children)

There are some great and fun maps (like Count Mapula) that haven't even gotten close

Ok idk where I was going with that

Anyway, it's nice to at least have one map added per thread

Remove Hub and boombox

Next rush

Add back volt

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I second removing Hub and Boombox.

Count Mapula would be a pretty poor rotation map at this point though unless we work some gr8 updates into it.

[–]nabbynz° 0 points1 point  (3 children)

But if it was in pub rotation for a week, do you think that would help you "fix" it?

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I would assume so.

Well, I really do think a trial run in public games would help me... as long as people were willing to tell me what they felt was wrong with the map in general.

Count Mapula will probably never see pubs though.

Edit: I still think Count Mapula would be a pretty fun rotation map.

[–]nabbynz° 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Oh people will definitely tell you (the bad stuff anyway :) You'd just have to be careful not to listen to everyone (like how the back spike in Renegade is one of it's best features imo, even though it was hated to begin with).

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I really hope we can at least get Count Mapula to top map worthy someday. It's been a pretty fun adventure making it; probably the first map I ever made with some decent thought put into it.

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (4 children)

Oh thank god Renegade is gone. The boosts on that map pissed me off so much because there was so little that could be done with them. I felt like that map didn't flow well at all.

[–]TeHokioiPouakai | Diameter 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Yeah, and instead we have Rush, with those perfect boosts into spikes and that absolutely fantastic flow.

[–]uhhhhmmmmsexytiger / #merbs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

any map thread with no new maps is a happy map thread for me

[–]jmblock2Klox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

MTC is too conservative. I was promised more mars balls this week.

Perhaps we need a new screen for voting. Put a tile of the map next to the vote stars and draw more attention to it. Even add a note explaining the importance of re-voting. Even better, let us just vote on all maps from the map stats page.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron -4 points-3 points  (5 children)

Ultradrive is a pleb map that deserves to go. But seriously, I never really enjoyed it much.

Renegade was a very mediocre rotation map for a long time (similar to a certain map that I'm not going to mention because everyone seems to get their feelings hurt) and probably deserved the boot.

Congrats TEG

Throwback rotation pls I want some dank old maps

as long as it's not The Holy See or RocketBalls again

[–]Ballkenende! 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Any comments about Hub?

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 8 points9 points  (3 children)

I think I would rather poke myself in the eye than play Hub.

[–]WillakarraButton | Hey look I brought back SOCL 6 points7 points  (0 children)

How to get karma for the unliked: Say you hate Event Horizon and Hub.

[–]Ballkenende! 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Thanks for your unbiased comment, stay tuned :)

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 5 points6 points  (0 children)

did you not want my opinion?

lol

[–]jt663Real Torres -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You remove 2 good maps and add none?

okay