[ATTENTION] Approve map would be throughly check.

[Septimus]

First of all, I congratulate every effort by map reviewer in their effort to purge the pending map and it was indeed a wise decision to do it since majority of the pending map was blatantly submitted and ignore by the author itself.

As for now, we would going to check all approve map and wrote a full fledged review about approve map.

Why approve map must be check? As everybody know, some approve map was check rather hastily (Whether it was past or present and of course, the purge. ) and we neglect to wrote review about the map as we trying to speed up the purge.

I could wrote a whole long list of reasons of why we must do it, but I would keep it short without mention it.

 

[Septimus]

What are we going to check?

Compability -Does the map compatible with version 1.24?

Permission -Is the map edited or upload by someone else? If so, do they have permission?

Multiple approve map -Is there 2 same approve map (Different version or rename the map are still consider the same)?

Rules -Is the map follow the rules? Some map are automatically at approve stage cause they are submitted at the time where moderator team does not exist yet.

Bug - Does the approve map have bug? If so, does it effect the game heavily?

Genre - Is the map are using the correct genre? If it isn't, then we would inform mod to set it to the correct place.

Section - Is it the approve map was actually spells or model pack map? If it was, we just reject it.

 

[Septimus]

What are we going to ignore?

Replayability values - No matter how boring the map could be, we cannot reject it cause the fun values are different according to individual.

Quality - Low quality can be exempted for approve map as some map was approve during the times where quality control was much lighter. An example of low quality I am referring to was poor terrain.

 

[Septimus]

You don't need to rush such as checking 20-50 approve map per days. All you need to do was check 2-3 map per days unless you have more free time to do so.

Of course, we are going to check according to genre. Some genre have the least approve map and easier to check and we would begin from there. If there is 2 map reviewer already gives a full fledged review about the approve map recently, it could be ignore from your reviewing list.

The first genre we going to start with are cinematic since cinematic are the easiest to review.

Don't check other approve genre map as I am trying to avoid confusion/mess up, we going to clear it according to the genre list I show here and of course, we would start from the eldest map to the newest.

 

[Septimus]

If you encounter any locked map thread, feel free to inform moderator so they could unlock it for you to review it. If you are the first person to review the map, do remember to mention the actual status of the map thread was locked in your post cause thread are not locked without reason.

If you are the second person who review the locked thread (which are also the last person to review it), do remember to notify moderator to locked back the thread.

 

[Septimus]

As for genre reviewing arrangement, here it was.

Green = Indicate all approve map of this genre have been review.

Cinematic: Kael & Septimus
Template/Terrain: -Kobas-
CTF
LOAP
Footmen
Melee: Barathrum

I would complete the genre list soons.

 

[Vengeancekael]

I'll do cinematics :3

 

[Septimus]

everybody would focus 1 genre together... 1 map only need 2 detail review by 2 different user (unless 1 approve it and 1 reject it).

or 2 reviewer focus 1 genre?

 

[-Kobas-]

I will check Tempalte/Terrain
And ofc everything after that

btw I do it this way: Click

P.S. in this case version didn't worked so I didn't checked triggers and stuff just description and well if it works

 

[Septimus]

i think 2 reviewer focus at 1 genre would be much safer, considering the possible risk of some map been neglected if too many map reviewer focus at the same genre.

 

[Ironside]

Probably Melee 1st from my side, I do best at those >D

 

[ap0calypse]

This is the list of genre's I prefer to review (1 = I like it the most).

1. TD's
2. Escapes
3. RPG's

I give multiple genre's because we'll be reviewing each genre with 2 people, so if no-one else would like TD's, then I can still do the next etc

Note:
These reviews will all be official reviews.
Please try not to use any point-based systems (as the final score doesn't always fit with what it should be).
Try to add as much information in your review as possible, be polite, take your time.
If you cannot review a single map, that's fine: as long as you don't force yourself to review just because 'others tell you to'.

 

[Vengeancekael]

Can we at least use the -/5 point system?

 

[Ironside]

Kael, why woulden't we? If it's approved it still deserves a real Rating

 

[Vengeancekael]

Well he said don't use any point-based systems...

 

[Ironside]

Ugh that's kinda... weird then

 

[Septimus]

we just want to check it... read the list of what we gonna check again

 

[Vengeancekael]

I'm still against the idea of 2 users moderating one type, because I mean like... don't you trust us? We're all experienced reviewers.
But if you want 2 reviewers to see how much the reviews differ, then... well.

 

[Ironside]

Actually, it is true, that sometimes we make different reviews from other...

For example when we were purging the maps, I vote rejection for maps with like no description, while many people, I don't know if anybody from this group aswell said that it shoulden't be rejected for description... While clearly it must be because of rules violation.

 

[Septimus]

the main reason why 2 user for each type of map was to avoid a possible mess up.

i am quite bad in explain this issues, maybe apo would be better in explain it since i already told him about it.

 

[ap0calypse]

1) Of course you still use the -/5 score at the end, the hive has that system for a reason.
Point-based reviews are reviewing which state something like "Terrain: 8/10 (ok, could be better", this gives us very little information about the terrain.
A text-based review however does NOT give points for each individual section (I'll explain it later on) and this gives us a lot more info about the actual status of the map.

Another main reason is that the result of point-based reviews are not always what it needs to be, a map can have an awesome terrain (10/10) but a gameplay of 1/10, if the rest is avarage then the review tells you to approve the map based on points only, while it should actually be rejected.
This is why I want you all to use text-based reviews, with a final score based on your thoughts.

 

[ap0calypse]

(Too long, yay)

We're also reviewing a map with two reviewers because the author of the map might disagree with a certain statement.
If the two reviewers have that same statement, it's probably true, but if one of them has it but the other doesn't, then he could've made a mistake (it's possible! Everyone makes mistakes, don't feel bad about that).
It's not that we do not trust you, we want certainty.

Also, if one of the reviewers skip a map of the genre (let's say cinematics), then the other reviewer has it covered and we don't skip any maps while we're at it.

Also, there is a "Reviewed" status as well (like approved/rejected), so if you could store all your reviews somewhere: that'd be great.
(You don't have to directly send it, that would drain too much of your previous time, a little url CnP in notepad and saving it is good enough for a while).

 

[Vengeancekael]

Hmm if we've reviewed a map with a final rating, would you take the 2 ratings and rate the map? Or just leave it approved/reject it.

 

[ap0calypse]

Good question.

If the avarage of the rating is an integer (e.g.: rating 2 and rating 4, avarage = 3), then I pick the avarage.
If it is a real (e.g.: rating 2 and 3, avarage = 2.5) I round down to the nearest integer (so in case of 2.75/5 and 3/5 it'll still be 3, but 2.5 will become 2).
I will note the avarage rating in the mod message though.

edit: the map will be set to "Reviewed", obviously.