Melee map approval has to be more strict

[MysteryMaze]

In my very humble opinion, Hive's approval has to be more strict. I'm saying this in a melee map maker's perspective, so don't get me wrong.

Since join, I have seen pretty many melee maps being submitted, and what I found is that more than 90percent of the maps end up being approved so far in most cases regardless of the quality. Sometimes even poorly executed maps (definitely below average) get aporovals too, which made me surprised.

I could have understood if that map was very very beautiful even if the map itself was imba, but it was not that. The aesthetic value was far below average (in my eyes), let alone balance. For example, creep setting was just a great deviation from standard melee maps. Despite all the facts, the map ended up being approved after the author shared some words with the moderator even though the problems were not fixed very much.

So after substandard category is gone, maps are mostly approved unless they are really really horrible. I think approval has to be something meaningful, not something just formal a procedure.

I remember when I first got my map approved by reviewer Kino. I was very happy because I thought that aporoval was something special; something not everyone can get! And what made me think it more special was Kino's comment. He wrote a long review about why my map is a good map. However, recently I see many approval comments that are just very short and formal which contains no much details about why the map 'has to be approved'

So even for mediocre map makers, approval seems to hold no much meanings. It's rather something you get everyday.

 

[Deleted member 219079]

I was under the impression that approved means not in violation of rules.

You could link the maps you want to be re-evaluated.

I've heard that not all creator's respond to review. So longer, throughout review might go in vain.

 

[MysteryMaze]

I was under the impression that approved means not in violation of rules.

You could link the maps you want to be re-evaluated.

I've heard that not all creator's respond to review. So longer, throughout review might go in vain.

Maybe you're right. Approval could mean that the posting is not in violation of rules.

Anyway, this is the kind of map that I regard not worth it. I feel sorry for the author. No offence!

The Crossroads


So this map is visually very soso and has a very critical error as a melee map(You simply cannot scout enemies main. This is simply not playable)

I pointed out this critical error and the author doesn't even seem to care. More than 3 months passed, still no updates even though the author is active.

 

[Eagle XI]

Ironforge
Looks nice yet not exactly "playable".
Southfury River
Discovered to have an pathing flaw that is inacceptable for an melee map that is supposed to be played competetively.

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

If a map is in the bounds of the rules, it will be approved.

However, there is a minimum quality rule. It's pretty much the rule that's always been debated the most, for both stepping up the standards or lowering it. It goes back and forth. Though we haven't got any of these debates recently, it's very helpful for you to give feedback on a specific issue you feel we have with the quality standards. Because there haven't been complaints, we saw no need to change it. We usually prefer to let the community decide the quality by collective ratings. Thus, a a good melee map should have a higher rating than a bad one.

So, balance. Some melee map makers aren't interested in making it as balanced as possible. Most actually seem to just want to place their vision of a cool looking design onto the map. Unless a map is horrendously imbalanced, we won't reject it. But the mod or community will their opinions and advice, by text feedback and or rating.

However, broken melee maps should not be approved. I believe @Eagle XI and @MysteryMaze are claiming that those three maps are broken to some sort of an extent. The map team can take a second look at them or voice their opinion on what they think about the current melee map approval standards.
@Rufus @Paillan @A Void

 

[Paillan]

As much as I miss the old times were reviews were long and felt like something rewarding (or very very punishing), long are gone the golden ages.
We are now in an old train that moves in old tracks, at a cliffside that becomes more and more narrow. In other words to keep the train going we basically throw away stuff. Like good, long reviews that take weeks to make (sometimes). Heck I sometimes just open the map and see if it does not have critical errors and then close it again. Most of the time authors won't even bother to fix their maps, so why should I care?
That being said, I totallt get your point and I would love to make longer and more in depth reviews, but for the time being, I simply can't give myself that luxury (both because of personal stuff, and community goals, like less pending maps).
With most map reviewers failing to even do the thing, it's no surprise you have seen a rush of approval (but mostly substandard and awaiting update) from myself, just to keep the map section clean. I used to take like 4 days to review a map (sorry, I am lazy).
Them there's melee maps. I don't play melee, so i'ts not my bread and butter (my first approach was quite harsh, @MysteryMaze can say so himself), and as such I basically don't check for map competivity, but other aspects wich melee doesn't even care so much about (mostly terrain).
If you really wish for new rules, we would need someone who knows about melee to review only melee. Like a melee reviewer.

 

[Rufus]

The reason for the very short reviews is mainly because of me.
I have been alone in the maps section for a long time now, pulling the weight of it on my own. Longer reviews was impossible, unless I wanted to spend all my free time on checking through maps, which I don't; It is not always fun.

One of the problems is angry authors, that does not understand the site rules, and you have to spend time and energy on making them understand, while getting nothing but angry messages in return. Also, the other main problem is that on about 40% of all the maps I have reviewed ever, I never recieved a reply back. That just sucks. In average, I spent about 30 minutes on each review from when I became a reviewer, till I became a map moderator. I realized later, especially as more people stopped reviewing maps, that I couldn't possibly continue like that. The reviews have grown shorter and shorter, until I just one day, sat down and read the rules as carefully as I could, and started making reviews that needed as little effort as possible, in order to clear all maps in the maps section, and to be able to do other things with my free time.

This is also one of the reasons I created the Grand Review Exchange.
It is a system where people can get good reviews from other people, by reviewing other peopls work. People always respond to the reviews here too. It was also rewarding for me, as I could actually be more interested in reviewing someone elses project, since I knew I would get something back for doing it.
You can call that "greedy" in a way, but on the other hand I have been gifting away reviews for a really long time now, without getting anything back. When I work within the GRE, I feel like things are fair.

I will be absolutely honest with all of you here, I do not like being a map moderator a lot right now. There are other things on the site I have been doing which are much more interesting, but I do the maps section anyway, because without me, it would be clogged as hell. I have been looking for a suitable replacement, but I can not find anyone that is active enough yet.

Only now later, when we talked in the staff about requiring increased activity from the reviewers, I got Paillan back to reviewing. So, right now it is at least two of us doing something there. But, another problem is that the activity in the maps section has actually increased by lately; a bigger number of new maps are rolling in each day.

We are running short on reviewers right now, as two of them just resigned, and one is not doing anything and not answering at the time. That leaves us with one active reviewer and me.
No promises, MysteryMaze, but you are no doubt a skilled melee map maker, and a very active member.
Would you like to become a melee map reviewer? As I said, no promises. Just checking if you would be interested.


Answers to previous posts:

Despite all the facts, the map ended up being approved after the author shared some words with the moderator even though the problems were not fixed very much.

I can't recall this. Can you give a few examples?

So after substandard category is gone, maps are mostly approved unless they are really really horrible.

It still exist actually. I still send maps there occasionally, and I don't think the maps I have approved is that bad, but I have missed a few things about them that made them bad, appearantly.

I think approval has to be something meaningful, not something just formal a procedure.

I understand what you are saying, but it is simply not so.
Approval is nothing but a formal procedure. It needs to be like that too, since otherwise I would be stuck with loads (LOADS) of more work of people searching for my approval. Additionally, authors of maps should not satisfy my vision of a good map, but rather the people who will actually play the map actively.

I was under the impression that approved means not in violation of rules.

That is pretty much my impression aswell.

So this map is visually very soso and has a very critical error as a melee map

Visually, the standard blizzard melee maps aren't good either, I'd say.
As for the critical error, those are things I can miss, since I'm not a very good melee player. I guess a few of those must have slipped through my judgement, but then it can be up to you, the players to give it a low rating?

I pointed out this critical error and the author doesn't even seem to care. More than 3 months passed, still no updates even though the author is active.

Now you know how we feel when people does not respond to our reviews.

It's pretty much the rule that's always been debated the most, for both stepping up the standards or lowering it. It goes back and forth. Though we haven't got any of these debates recently, it's very helpful for you to give feedback on a specific issue you feel we have with the quality standards. Because there haven't been complaints, we saw no need to change it. We usually prefer to let the community decide the quality by collective ratings. Thus, a a good melee map should have a higher rating than a bad one.

Very true.
All other rules are straight-forward and easy to follow. This one rule is the one that 90% of our work lies within.
I've decided to put the bar pretty low, because I think it is mostly the players job to give it a fair rating anyway.

However, broken melee maps should not be approved.

Agreed.
However, I hope you can understand that a few slips through anyway as mentioned earlier, and then it is perfect that you point it out like this, or perhaps via reports, or tagging one of the map team members in a comment on the map.

Hope I don't sound too edgy.
I just tried to write my honest opinion about how things are.

 

[MysteryMaze]

Thanks everyone for sharing your hearts. As I read through your replies, I began to think that I was being so self-centered; not careful about reviewers positions. I was only thinking in a map maker's point of view, not knowing what it was like to be a reviewer who has to deal with massive submissions flooding in. Also haven't considered the amount of time it will take to make a review of a single map. I deeply agree with what Rufus said, "Additionally, authors of maps should not satisfy my vision of a good map, but rather the people who will actually play the map actively."

I also looked back at myself to think what kind of author i have been, and I remember a couple things. I remember arguing with Paillan with his(her) ratings and I also remember not giving Rufus an unprotected version of my melee map when he(she) said doing so would make his (her) job much easier.

After thinking I wanted to become a good member and here is the list of the things I came up with in order to help reviewers and moderators job easier

1) When a reviewer needs an uprotected version of my melee map for easier review, I will gladly provide it.

2) I will respond more to reviewers' replies

3) When I find a melee map which is broken, I will report it to the reviewer with the details of why.


As for Rufus's question, I am very honoured to be suggested with such a position. A reviewer at Hive is such a position that is coveted by everyone! However, due to real life schedules and personal projects (I have joined W3Arena recently) I think I won't be able to handle that. Also not sure if I could review maps properly.

Thanks to everyone's precious opinions, now I understand more about the site's policy and reviewers' circumstances that they are currently in. Hope everyone have a good weekend!

 

[Rufus]

As for Rufus's question, I am very honoured to be suggested with such a position. A reviewer at Hive is such a position that is coveted by everyone! However, due to real life schedules and personal projects (I have joined W3Arena recently) I think I won't be able to handle that. Also not sure if I could review maps properly.

Ah, too bad.
If you do review melee maps sometime though, you can tag me, and I can check your review and maybe approve the map based on it.

I think I will start to hunt a melee map reviewer down though. I think it would be very healthy for the map team to have people that specializes in certain areas.
If you know someone who could fit the position, let me know!

After thinking I wanted to become a good member and here is the list of the things I came up with in order to help reviewers and moderators job easier

1) When a reviewer needs an uprotected version of my melee map for easier review, I will gladly provide it.

2) I will respond more to reviewers' replies

3) When I find a melee map which is broken, I will report it to the reviewer with the details of why.

Nice!
If only everyone thought like this.

 

[MysteryMaze]

Ah, too bad.
If you do review melee maps sometime though, you can tag me, and I can check your review and maybe approve the map based on it.

I think I will start to hunt a melee map reviewer down though. I think it would be very healthy for the map team to have people that specializes in certain areas.
If you know someone who could fit the position, let me know!

Nice!
If only everyone thought like this.

Is there anything that a reviewer should know? Like the least amount of activity required?
I did think more, and maybe I can handle it if a reviewer is not much compelled to reviewing.

 

[Rufus]

We can talk in PM.
I'm sending a message.

 

[Daffa]

Actually, this is an interesting thread. Given the fact it also extend to every genre of maps out there.

Just for a record, cleaning the clogging mess of Map Section took quite some years. I recall someone mentions back in the old days, map section was like the abyss where you will have to destroy as fast as possible, despite any consequences (1000+ maps or something, as memory preserves).

Some recommendations for authors to help reviewers and moderators :
1. Provide an unprotected version to the team when requested. It HELPS A LOT.
2. Don't bash the team. If you disagree with a review, show a civil attitude and explain your opinion.
3. If you have extra time and like to play new maps, you can help by reviewing them. Make it at least generally well-explained, allowing the team to take it into consideration.
4. If you see an uncooperative author, help the team explain things to them. But don't bash the author.

There are more ways to help like not uploading pack of different type of maps into short time span.

Just a few nickel from me.