Move away terrain template from map section.

[Callahan]

I hate this trend.
Technicaly these are none playable map.It's a ressource for other map maker and they are crowding the map section when I'm looking for a good sp map to play.
Even though they are good terraining they could be considered substandard/WIP.
Obviously their approval criteria are different from a playable map.
A half finished RPG could be considered a full finished terrain template.

Also I'm dubious about their actual usefulness.Imo when making a map you adapt the terrain to your need for gameplay and not the opposite around.When making a map, starting from a terrain template and working around to make something out of it is the wrong way to proceed.
Each terrain template has to luckily coincide with the gameplay needs of the map maker as well as his personal taste/artistic direction.

What about making a 3rd section?
Submission
Substandard
Template

 

[Chaosy]

A half finished RPG could be considered a full finished terrain template.

Very true.

When making a map, starting from a terrain template and working around to make something out of it is the wrong way to proceed.

Perhaps.
But a template is not something static, it can be changed.

So, I can use a somewhat small terrain template change it a bit to fit my gameplay/story needs and then expand the terrain from there and try to replicate the existing theme.

I would basically view it as a guideline as I go. It would save me the trouble of finding fitting models and importing them at the very least even if you use 0% of the pre-made terrain.

 

[Rufus]

I kinda agree with you here.
As a map moderator, I come across those maps now and then, and I usually approve them after the have made a few changes. Lately, more and more templates have been rolling in, and they are not all of high quality, but they do not break any rules, so therefore I approve them.

Perhaps map templates should be posted within the Terrain Board instead? Within a "template" subforum?
The people there are better at judging the terrain than me anyway, since people in those parts create some really awesome stuff, and a have a few tricks up their sleeve.
The authors will also get more feedback, and featured in a forum where everybody loves the kind of craft you are doing.

I also question the usefulness with templates sometimes, but I have also seen a few being used in actual playable maps that turns up in the maps section.

I'll follow this discussion. It might be interesting.

 

[IcemanBo]

As long as they have this category ticked, it should be valid:

It has it's own special type of gameplay: none
The focus lies on map design/aesthetics.

Other categories also ask the author to follow the certain type of gameplay which were ticked when uploading the submission.
Therefore it can't be truely compared to, for example, a RPG map.

The other question is I think if we really want to have such category in Maps, or as was suggested, rather move it to TerrainBoard.
From this sticky A Guideline to Terraining and the Hive's Terraining Section
we read that Terraining has 2 categories:

1. PlayableMaps (would be a Template)
2. Artistic Screenshots (a certain perspective/view from your map as an image)

... So basicly the first point supports already to upload Templates at TerrainBoard forum.
But the Maps section also supports upload Templates, due matching category.

I'm not deep into artist threads and activity, so I do hard to give a good suggestion, but I would say:

Allow to upload Templates in TerrainBoard.
Allow to upload Templates in Maps Section.

The difference is, when uploading in Maps section, they will still have the same category, yes, but they will be reviewed/judged by staff/reviewers before they will get officially approved.
When submitting my work in TerreinBoard I may receive critiques as well, though I am not binded to certain artist rules or standards.

If it makes sense to create subforums at TerrainBoard for Playable/Artistic-only... maybe, I don't know.

 

[Ralle]

We could also expand the spells section to contain this sort of thing. It just wouldn't be called spells anymore.

 

[IcemanBo]

But both, MapSections and TerrainBoard, already can be currently used for Templates by current definitions/guidelines?

edit: example Doshnolger Kingdom

 

[Callahan]

I already know templates are allowed to be uploaded to map section.
The point of the thread is that I'm asking to change that.
Playable map are made for players and terrain template for map maker.They don't serve the same purpose and should have separate section.
And don't say the gameplay type is "none" as if it was a valid gameplay.A terrain template is obviously not meant to be played.
When you look to eat a sandwich you need the bread and the ham, the thing with terrain template is that it's a fork and you don't need that when looking for a sandwich.

 

[IcemanBo]

Playable map are made for players and terrain template for map maker.

And "MapsSection" is made for people looking for maps. A terrain template map without gameplay is a map, also. It's a small category, but it is one.

And don't say the gameplay type is "none" as if it was a valid gameplay

What do you think is the gameplay type of a Terrain Template map? That's nothing about guessing, it is "none". That does not make the map less a "map" than a RPG map. It is a map.

The metaphor with bread & ham is invalid. This implies that no single person is looking for a template map. And the "terrain template" would not be a "fork" in the metaphor.
It would rather be like baking a bread alone (terrain) and then covering/filling it with your codes and units (gameplay) vs. taking a already baked bread (template) with then putting your own ingredients on it.

I'm also not sure abour your opinion towards my view, why I think both places are valid to allow templates.

 

[Archian]

What about making a 3rd section?
Submission
Substandard
Template

Good idea, this can be arranged.

 

[Ralle]

I have created the repository now. We just need a map moderator to fill it up . @Rufus, get in here .

EDIT: Added a few bundles there now.

 

[IcemanBo]

I'm curious if Cinematics also would fall under a special category, since it's also not for "players", but for "watchers".

 

[Chaosy]

@IcemanBo
Seems logical since they are judged differently.

 

[Rufus]

Woah, this happened really quickly!
To be honest, I'm not quite sure I like the idea, but I might as well test it now.

What IcemanBo is saying totally makes sense too, but if we are having yet another subcategory in the maps section, it will get messy real fast.
Then it makes sense to make a category for melee maps aswell, since they are also judged pretty differently from most other maps.
We could use some more discussion here.

EDIT:
All templates have been moved to the new subforum.

 

[Ralle]

Then it makes sense to make a category for melee maps aswell, since they are also judged pretty differently from most other maps.

I disagree.

Right now we are splitting at maps meant for playing and maps meant for using.

We can always move them back, it's not much trouble. I am not sure I want to create more areas than this.

 

[Callahan]

What do you think is the gameplay type of a Terrain Template map? That's nothing about guessing, it is "none". That does not make the map less a "map" than a RPG map. It is a map.

I think a terrain template has no gameplay because "none" is not a "special type of gameplay".Saying a map has no gameplay is different than considering "none" as a type of gameplay, basic sementic.
And I already know that terrain template are maps and can be uploaded to map section duh.?That's why I ask to separate playable map from template map.
It is still the map section but different subsection.Template are still considered map.Don't call SOS map racism.

About your opinion you're stating what's already in place which is template and playable map being mixed together and the whole point of this thread is to change that.So obviously I don't agree with your opinion because I made this thread.

 

[IcemanBo]

I don't really suggest to create a new subforum for cinematics, as well, I just wanted to imply indirectly, that it's not so necessary to categorize maps from new again, when we anyways already have categories to tick: "template / cinematic / melee / rpg" , when uploading maps.

But it's okay as it is now, I just wanted to explain I'm not suggesting more subforums.

 

[deepstrasz]

Sweet but what about the maps that users upload with either all tags or not the proper ones? Some template maps do not have that tag. Would it not be a good idea for moderators to also modify tags of maps appropriately?

 

[Rufus]

That is just loads of work going through all maps and changing them.
Ultimately, the fault is their own since they failed to categorize their map correctly.

Of course, if there is a map that is categorized wrong, and they choose to update it, I would have no trouble moving it to its proper section.