- Joined
- Nov 26, 2006
- Messages
- 11,136
Contest Theme: AOE Summon
Sorry about the extreme delay guys! D:
Contestant: Gamecrafter_DK
Spell: Arcane Frostshards
| Coding | 0/30 | Your code is a mess. You basically leak too much and make unnecessary calculations. You also use Unit Custom Value which is a bad choice. Hashtables would have been a lot better. You basically have not earned any score for coding, I'd say. (-30 for maaany leaks (location- / effectleaks); use of unit custom value instead of hashtables or else; unnecessary display of stuff; unnecessary calculations like +0.00 ; etc.) |
The big idea | 7/30 | I first thought this spell is bugged because it didn’t work … until I found out how it works. The spell itself has a nice concept, although this is not really unique. Btw, you wanted this spell to cause an instant kill I guess? Well, makes it really easy for me saying about balance here and since you did not put any information about how to configure it, I will just act like a user not knowing how to change it … “Hey! This spell causes an instant kill, I don’t want that!!!”. See my point? THIS is not useful in gameplay as it is now, with some more effort put into it would be capable of it. (-8 since it’s not a too unique idea) (-15 for imbalance) |
Visuals | 5/15 | The only visual here is how the blizzard thing falls off the sky into a circle of runes. Wow, how special. I also think this isn’t really much you got there, you really could’ve played around more with the effects. Just ask yourself, did you put a lot of effort and love into this? I don’t really think so. (-5 for the lack of adequate effects) (-5 for too less visuals) |
Presentation and Polish | 0/15 | Obviously nothing happens when the spell is on level three. The ice block appears but for the rest nothing happens. In addition to this, the iceblock never disappears. Your tooltip is PURE mess. Green icons, no descriptions… you also should have made the testing map some better to make judgers able to test the spell reasonably (this will not fall into the evaluation, though …). Well, I see no reason giving any score, you’re presentation is a good example of how it NOT should be. (-15 for messy icon, no description, “bugs”, … just read above >.<”) |
Legal | 0/10 | “Your final submission must be bug free.“ You did not follow this rule. You also should treat MPI / MUI in a better way … I doubt that this will work fluently. (-10 for breaking the rules) |
Total: 12/100
Contestant: Arcmage
Spell: Biomarcy
| Coding | 22/30 | You make a long IF/THEN/ELSE block, in all of the THEN parts you use the very same actions, just with different unit types. That’s very redundant. Better would have been to declare an array of unit types in an initializing function and check the unit types in a loop instead of a super long IF/THEN/ELSE block. That would make it more user-friendly as well since you can change the unit types and the amount of unit types more easily. (-8 due to big redundancy.) |
The big idea | 14/30 | The spell isn’t too imbalanced although you’re able to summon a small army. However, this is only possible when the map allows it (creeps, doodads, etc.)! I find the idea itself nice but not too unique since it more looks like an advanced “Force of Nature” to me. (-10 since it’s more an advanced “Force of Nature”.) (-6 for the big dependency to the map.) |
Visuals | 9/15 | In this type of spell you can’t really fail with visuals. You’ve imported a model here which fits pretty good. You also added default wc3 effects which fit as well. Anyways, I miss the big conviction because you just show the imported model itself. You could have played around with the effects some more to give the user the famous WOW!-feeling. (I know, since that nova effect-model looks awesome the feeling already exists, but the user would more think like “wow, cool model!” instead of “wow, cool effects!”) (-6 for the lack of persuasiveness) |
Presentation and Polish | 13/15 | You’re tooltip is nice, the jabbing blue color makes it pretty hard to read though. A lighter blue would have been better I guess. The icon you’ve taken looks nice and fits very well to the spell itself. Well, since it is more an advanced “Force of Nature” as I already said I have no doubts that this fits into WC3. (-2 for the jabbing blue color what makes it pretty hard for the user to read what the tooltip says.) |
Legal | 10/10 | You gave credits to the authors of the imported resources, you follow the contest theme “AoE Summon” pretty well, there are no noticeable bugs and the spell is MUI. Full score here. |
Total: 68/100
Contestant: White-Lion
Spell: Dark Ritual
| Coding | -/30 | |
The big idea | -/30 | |
Visuals | -/15 | |
Presentation and Polish | -/15 | |
Legal | -/10 |
Disqualified because the spell is not MUI or MPI.
Contestant: Deaod
Spell: Magic Chains
| Coding | 30/30 | Looks good. Can’t see any flaws. It is MUI, multi level supporting, etc. Well, you could give the constant TICK the value 0.025 instead of 1/40 to maybe save 1 nanosecond, lol. |
The big idea | 26/30 | I like this spell! The idea is nice; I haven’t seen something like this before. It would have been better to set a limit of units being captured instead of just capturing them all though to keep it balanced. For the rest it’s all OK since you made range, damage, etc. configurable. (-4 for too less limitation which makes the spell imbalanced) |
Visuals | 13/15 | The effects in your spell consist out of the ropes so there is basically not much. However, I think you can’t add many more effects in this spell. It would look nicer if there would have been a little effect spawning on the enemies when they receive damage though. (-2 for “too less” visual effects) |
Presentation and Polish | 13/15 | The ward should have no soundset or at least not a soundset like that. I can’t find any other noticeable stuff like that. The tooltip looks very nice, no problems with grammar either. I can imagine this spell fitting to WC3 very well, too. (-2 for unfitting soundset) |
Legal | 10/10 | Proper credits are given ingame. Maybe adding the credits in your code wouldn’t be bad, but well, it’s nothing to give negative points for. Your spell follows the contest theme “AoE summon” and breaks no given rules. Full score. |
Total: 92/100
Contestant: ap0calypse
Spell: Descending Flames
| Coding | 29/30 | You are removing “FireLoc[3]” in the trigger “DF I Spell Loop” although its value constantly is null; This line is just unnecessary. For the rest I can’t see any flaws. You kinda separated the code with comments; that makes it easier to review the code. Your spell support multi-level and you made a hero stat have effect on the damage. Nothing wrong to say about here. (-1 for unnecessary action) |
The big idea | 26/30 | You made the spell configurable in the most important factors (damage, range, etc.). You shouldn’t have given Locust to the Lava Spawns, it’s really annoying being unable to order them to attack certain enemies. Anyways, I haven’t seen a spell like this before as far as I can remember so it looks pretty unique to me and I like it. (-4 for making the spawns unclickable) |
Visuals | 15/15 | I like the how you’ve worked with the effects. All the effects kinda “work together”; you make it look like it is one single effect at all. Well done, I see no reason to give you negative points here. |
Presentation and Polish | 12/15 | There are no bugs so far I can see; it works well. You have some grammatical errors in your tooltip are kind of annoying to read. There is no comma behind “who” or “which”. The Lava Spawns don’t come falling “out” the sky but “off” the sky, etc. For the rest you worked well with the tooltip. You used colors and an abbreviatory description. Anyways, I can imagine this being a good spell for e.g. RPGs. Nice! (-3 for the grammatical mistakes) |
Legal | 10/10 | Your spell follows the contest theme “AoE Summon”, the site rules and since you don’t use any third programs and/or systems made by others you don’t need to credit anybody else than yourself. No reason to not give full score. |
Total: 92/100
Contestant: Hemlock
Spell: Dimensional Influence
| Coding | 11/30 | In the trigger called “init” you set the Boolean array “DI_alive” to false with a loop. This is unnecessary since a Boolean always has the starting value false. You limit the multi-unit-instancability to 20 without any clue where to find and configure it. You could have made another configurable variable defining the maximal amount of units to cast this spell since you don’t know how many units the same time the user wants to cast this spell. In the trigger “spirit Location” you are leaking 4 locations, 2 each in the IF-blocks and this trigger runs each 0.05 seconds so your spell is pretty leaky. (Distance between Position of … and Position of …) (-14 for four location leaks in a trigger running each 0.05 seconds) (-2 for unnecessarily initializing Booleans) (-3 for limiting the MUI without any clue to configure this) |
The big idea | 25/30 | You made the attributes configurable with the array-position defining the level. The spell seems pretty new to me and I like the idea, too. It would have been nicer to make this spell castable e.g. like “Blizzard” or “Flamestrike”, though (I mean the way you cast it; an AoE within a certain distance to the caster). This spell could be useful; I can imagine this being a fifth spell for the dreadlord! (-5 for bad choice of the way to cast the spell) |
Visuals | 5/15 | You don’t make a big use of effects at all. The “effects” you use are the vampiric aura-model, trueshot aura-model and when casting the teleport model. That’s it! They don’t even fit to each other – the only model fitting in this case is the vampiric aura. (-10 for the great lack of effects) |
Presentation and Polish | 12/15 | I haven’t noticed any bugs in this spell and it seems to work properly. I like your tooltip; you make use of colors and you give all needed information. However, you give wrong information. You say the movement reduction is 70% all the time, though, it is 75% on level 2 and 80% at level 3. Anyways, as I already said, the spell fits very well to the dreadlord, so basically this fits to WC3 as well! (-3 for giving wrong information) |
Legal | 10/10 | No rules broken ergo no negative points given. |
Total: 53/100
Contestant: TriggerHappy
Spell: Dune Worm
| Coding | 30/30 | Your code is absolutely clean. I can’t see a single flaw in efficiency! Your spell is easily configurable and organized. You support multi-levels, bla bla bla etc. Full score. |
The big idea | 30/30 | The idea itself is awesome, haven’t seen something like this before. This should answer the question if it’s unique as well. Since everything is configurable it is balanced as well. I wouldn’t say this spell fits very good into the WC3 standard … it fits definitely better into a campaign or a RPG, I think. Well, it is useful so there is nothing wrong about it, actually. |
Visuals | 14/15 | This spell looks realistic in a desert-like map; it would look weird when casting this in a forest, though. The circle of sand looks nice, I like it! You used effects where they fit best, although there aren’t too many possibilities of using effects. It looks very nice altogether! (-1 since it only looks really good when casting it in a desert!) |
Presentation and Polish | 13/15 | There are no noticeable bugs and it works just fine. The tooltip looks nice, the icon you’ve chosen fits just perfectly. There are no spelling or grammatical mistakes in your tooltip, you made use of colors – that’s how we like it. I don’t think this fits into the general WC3 as I already said. This would be something for campaigns or matching RPGs. (-2 since this does not fit that much into the WC3 standard) |
Legal | 10/10 | You haven’t credited the resources made which weren’t made by yourself. This includes the dune worm model and the systems/scripts like TimerUtils, AutoIndex, UnitStatus, etc. Anyways, you said they are required so this counts as a credit. |
Total: 97/100
Contestant: Eccho
Spell: Goblin Airstrike
| Coding | 30/30 | You’ve made a static method called “getParabolicZ”, you never used it though! I bet you forgot to remove this method since you made another method. Well, this is nothing to slow down the code! Anyways, the code itself is clean. I couldn’t find any leaks. Full score so far. |
The big idea | 22/30 | I have seen spells like this one before so it is not kicking me outta my socks, though I like the idea. Also, it would have been better to make the damage the mines deal configurable for each level instead of constantly doing the same damage. At least you’ve made the amount of mines being spawned configurable, GJ for that. A spell like this is definitely useful in a survival map/modern warfare map I’d say. (-3 for not making the damage configurable per level) (-5 since it is not too unique) |
Visuals | 15/15 | I can’t say anything bad about the visuality of your spell. The airship flies upon the target point and drops a certain amount of mines in a very realistically made way! I’ll make it short – full score. |
Presentation and Polish | 15/15 | I must say your map is the best testing map of all, just to mention it! Ok, your spell looks bugless to me and works fine. You have chosen a very fitting icon for the spell and the tooltip looks very good as well! I wouldn’t say this spell does not fit into WC3. This is an amazing spell for a goblin hero! I can’t see any reason to give negative points. |
Legal | 10/10 | All credits were given. The spell follows all given rules, too. I wouldn’t say this is “Area of Effect”, it is more “Thick line of effects”, lol. Just kidding, full score  |
Total: 92/100
Contestant: Tukki
Spell: Molten Strike
| Coding | -/30 | |
The big idea | -/30 | |
Visuals | -/15 | |
Presentation and Polish | -/15 | |
Legal | -/10 |
Disqualified because the spell does not work.
Contestant: Maker
Spell: Nudgeballs
| Coding | 30/30 | Looks clean to me. Be careful with powering though. Remember, powering a number with whole numbers like 3 or 7 or 23875423 is fine. Though, powering values with 4.24 or 1.233 or 3.14159265 (duuh <.<) is slow. I won’t give minus points here since the way you used it is fine (The powering number is a whole number as far I can see) and this point about efficiency is just a matter of person … one says this, the other say that. You didn’t lack using comments. I can’t see any leaks which aren’t killed either. No reason to give minus points. Very well done since it is made with GUI! |
The big idea | 25/30 | I think the spell is pretty imba (even if it is configurable in damage, lifespan and knockback speed). Knockbacked units can’t walk; they are chased by the nudgeballs and have no chance to avoid them. I think adding a variable defining the amount of hits the nudgeballs can make would have been better. So much for the balance. About the idea: It is a missile chasing and hitting its targets. There are a lot of spells like this. The idea itself is not unique, it is rather common BUT this doesn’t mean it is bad. The way you’ve put it altogether, the way you’ve played it out is nice. I especially like the part you can combine the single missiles to become a bigger missile. You’ve brought something new to this rather common idea therefore I won’t see giving minus points for “lack of originality” or something like that. About usefulness – hard to say to which hero this spell could fit best. I wouldn’t say this fits nicely into the general WC3 game but there is surely use for it in certain custom maps. (-5 for making the amount of times the missiles hits the target not configurable) |
Visuals | 15/15 | It works everything nicely together. I’ll make it short – full score. |
Presentation and Polish | 10/15 | I don’t think it was your intention but the caster himself can be a target of his own missiles, allies as well! I’m not sure if you wanted it to be like that, I suggest making this point configurable though. As I already said in the point “The Big Idea” this isn’t really fitting into the WC3 standard. It is deviating from it, somehow. Anyways, these two points are the only I can tell. Your tooltip is great, the icon fits very well, etc. (-3 for allowing the missiles to attack allies as well without any configurability) (-2 since it doesn’t fit that much into the WC3 standard) |
Legal | 10/10 | No rules broken – no minus points. The contest theme “AoE summon” is satisfied with this spell. |
Total: 90/100
Contestant: scorpion182
Spell: Pentagram
| Coding | 24/30 | You haven’t nullified the attributes “acolyte” and “lg” which both are handles. It’s being discussed a lot about nullifying attribute handles, the one says this and the other says that … I belong to the people saying you gotta nullify them. This is why I give you minuspoints here. (-3 for not nullifying a unit handle) (-3 for not nullifying a lightning handle) |
The big idea | 20/30 | The “pentagram” (which actually is named “pentacle” so far I know) isn’t kicking me outta my socks. It is used quite often in many different ways. Combining it with mana health is also nothing unique. What I dislike in this spell: You recover a certain amount of mana. It probably could have better recovered a percentual amount of mana. You could at least have added a global Boolean like HEAL_PERCENTUAL or something and – as the name says – add the option to heal mana percentually. Also, the “drain-HP-when-all-mana-is-gone”-effect on enemies makes it a little bit overpowered. Same here – adding the option with a global variable for easy configuration would have been better. (-5 for not adding the option for percentual healing and the ”drain-HP-instead”-effect) (-5 for the not too unique pentacle) |
Visuals | 8/15 | Well, the pentacle isn’t too unique as I already mentioned. However, it looks pretty cool with the acolytes. Haven’t seen this before so far I remember. There are just two things which make it look worse. The first thing is that the effect and the acolytes disappear too sudden, that makes it look weird! The other point is that units which already have full mana still get the effects casted on them. This makes it look too effect-spamy. For the rest, nice work. (-4 for too sudden disappearing) (-3 for little effect spam) |
Presentation and Polish | 12/15 | This spell fits definitely well to WC3. Nice icon, nice tooltip. Some grammatical flaws though. You use too many different tenses for this little description (-3 for the use of too many different tenses) |
Legal | 10/10 | All credits given. Nothing wrong to say about. |
Total: 74/100
Contestant: EMPerror
Spell: Pudger
| Coding | 4/30 | There is nearly no code. You messed everything throughout, attacking with the Pudger causes an instant kill, just for info. Don’t you think this is imba? This is absolute mess, just think about it yourself! And before you give a location a new value use RemoveLocation before. (-10 for the pure mess) (-16 for not removing plenty of locations and effects) |
The big idea | 10/30 | Can’t really say if this is a big idea. “Feeding until explode” would be the idea I guess. Nice idea but far from unique. You didn’t work much on the summon itself (except for the effects). Thus this spell isn‘t kicking, especially not with this contest theme. (-15 for the non-uniqueness) (-5 for the lack of work on the summon itself) |
Visuals | 10/15 | The summon looks weird, though it looks pretty unique to me. You made use of too many or unnecessary effects at some places though. (-5 for a bigger bit of effect-spam) |
Presentation and Polish | 3/15 | Horrible tooltip, seriously. You could at least have made it WC3 tooltip-style. I wouldn’t say this fits to WC3. Well, probably for a minigame-map but not in the way you made it. (-6 for the bad tooltip quality) (-6 for no big usability) |
Legal | 10/10 | This spell fits the contest theme and there is nothing wrong here about legality. |
Total: 37/100
Contestant: xD.Schurke
Spell: Ritual of Vengeance
| Coding | 24/30 | Very structured, very userfriendly. This is definitely the best example of how a structured code should look like. There are no (big) flaws in the code here. A few things though: - PreloadStart() is unnecessary. - Using IsUnitType(…) without “== true” may mess around. Better put that suffix to it. - You initialize attributes in the structs although you change their value in the constructor instantly. Ergo – no need to inizialize them (well, some of them should better be initialized there as you already did) - No need to nullify triggers, that would be like nulling an integer. Yupyup, that’s all I can say about the code. GJ. (-2 for unnecessary actions and initializations) (-1 for unnecessarily nulling a trigger variable) (-3 for adding no == true/false to the filter) |
The big idea | 30/30 | Great idea. Summoning a unit draining the hitpoints of surrounded enemies which become a lifeshield for the caster when the summoned unit dies. I like it very much, especially since you include the caster with the spell effect, not only the summoned unit. This spell is perfectly balanced since your code is just lovely structured and configurable. This spell fits pretty good into the WC3 standard, I’d say. Can’t see any reason to give you minus points. |
Visuals | 12/15 | This spell is more an effective spell instead of a visual spell. I don’t really like the effect appearing when you summon the spirit. It disappears to sudden and doesn’t fit too well at it. The missiles are not bad, I would have taken another model but that’s just me, this looks good as well. (-3 for unfitting effect) |
Presentation and Polish | 15/15 | Couldn’t find any bugs and the spell works fine for me. Your tooltip looks great, just how I love it. Full score, really. |
Legal | 10/10 | This fits perfectly into the contest theme. And, let’s say, you combined the credits with the requirements so it’s all OK. Full score, no doubt. |
Total: 91/100
Contestant: Xiliger
Spell: Apocalypse
| Coding | 24/30 | It’s not userfriendly, you lack in structure in the code. You should define some more constants to make it easily configurable. This falls into balance and therefore in the category “The Big Idea” so this is nothing to give you minus points here. You also use TSA (TriggerSleepActions) which could mess it all up. There are some alternatives you could have used. You also use locations to find out the coordinates from the target area. There are natives for that: GetSpellTargetX() GetSpellTargetY() for if you didn’t know. (-5 for the use of TSA) (-1 for using locations instead of GetSpellTargetX() etc.) |
The big idea | 19/30 | This is kinda a brute. This idea is not unique, I have seen spells with this concept before. This spell can be pretty imba in some cases. I would suggest this to be the ultimate spell if used like this. As I mentioned in the “Coding” category, this is not easily configurable. (-9 for not making it easily configurable -> probable lack of balance) (-2 since this idea is not too unique) |
Visuals | 9/15 | The fire missiles spinning around the firelord appear and disappear too sudden. It would definitely have looked better if you e.g. made them fade in and out (with transparency and stuff…). Also the firelord appears too sudden. For the rest it looks very nice. (-4 since the spinning missiles (dis)appear way too sudden) (-2 since the firelord is spawned way too sudden) |
Presentation and Polish | 15/15 | Your tooltip is nice, the text is cool, sounds very medieval and nice for WC3. This spell fits well into WC3, I think even in a non-playable map (like a cinematic). |
Legal | 10/10 | The library you used was obviously made by yourself. Therefore you don’t need to give credits. Also, this spell fits to the contest theme. Full score. |
Total: 77/100
Contestant: Duragon
Spell: The Fade
| Coding | 30/30 | There’s nothing wrong about the code. |
The big idea | 5/30 | This is nothing special nor kicking. You just summon units, that's all. Besides the uniqueness I also doubt that this is balanced. You decrease the timeout with each level and the units become stroner with each level as well. Don't you think this is too imba? Well, your spell is slightly configurable (although there isn't much to configure) so … (-20 for extreme lack of persuasiveness) (-5 for imbalance) |
Visuals | 3/15 | There isn't much to say about visuals since there is nearly nothing to say about. The two effects you got there are nice and I like them but this can't be all, really. (-12 for lacking adequate effects) |
Presentation and Polish | 11/15 | I like your tooltip, it sounds nice. The icon doesn't fit very well to the spell, though! This spell isn't much of a spell, it is more a spawn system for an AoS map. Well, this doesn't fall into this category so whatever. (-4 for bad icon choice) |
Legal | 10/10 | You didn’t break any rules and the “spell” follows the contest theme. Full score. |
Total: 59/100
Contestant: Mage_Goo
Spell: Thunder Bird
| Coding | 10/30 | Ok, there is some stuff I noticed so I make it short. You created a location to get the coordinates of the target location. There are natives for that ( GetSpellTargetX() , GetSpellTargetY() ). Your unit filter is redundant and weird. Just return everything at once and don’t check every property separately. You also make use of local boolexpr’s in a looping method instead of making a global one. You also didn’t nullify some handle-attributes (effects and units). Another thing is that your timeout is pretty low. Better use 0.03 instead of 0.01. You also used PreloadStart() in the initialization function which is just unnecessary. The last point is that you made use of SetUnitSpeed. For temporarily decreasing certain units’ movement speed, this is a bad choice (at least how you did it). If the units die when they’re slowed they will permanently have decreased movespeed since they don’t get their movespeed recovered when they’re dead. (-1 for using locations instead of GetSpellTargetX() etc.) (-1 for stupid unit filter) (-7 for local boolexpr’s in a looping method) (-4 for not nullifying several attribute-handles) (-1 for too low timeout) (-1 for unnecessary action) (-5 for SetUnitSpeed) |
The big idea | 30/30 | Nice, this is something I haven’t seen before. It is easily configurable in most aspects, it seems pretty unique to me and is definitely useful in certain WC3 maps, especially in RPGs and DotA-like maps. I see no reason giving neg-points. |
Visuals | 11/15 | The spell looks cool. Everything works together fluently BUT you have made a bad choice about the model. A phoenix for a thunder spell is kinda weird. I changed the model to netherdragon once and I have to say it looks way much better like that. The phoenix eggs look better when being thunder lizard eggs as well. Well, that’s all to say here. (-2 for weird choice of the bird model) (-2 for weird choice of the egg model) |
Presentation and Polish | 12/15 | Very nice icon, it fits good to the spell. I like this spell, it has a certain WC3-touch! Thus it fits well to it. The only problem I got here is the tooltip. There are some grammatical errors which make the tooltip sound weird. (-3 for making the tooltip sound weird) |
Legal | 10/10 | I’ll make it short – full score. |
Total: 73/100
Contestant: Kingz
Spell: Flames of Ruin
| Coding | 28/30 | Except of two things, there is nothing wrong about the code. One thing is that you use Locations to get the coordinates of the spell target. There are natives for that ( GetSpellTargetX() Get SpellTargetY() ). The other thing is that you unnecessarily nullify globals. Oh, and one thing about style – decide whether to write constants’ names with CAPSLOCK or not, but please, don’t use both ways! Makes it kinda look messy. (-1 for using locations instead of GetSpellTargetX() etc.) (-1 for unnecessarily nullifying globals) |
The big idea | 25/30 | This is a pretty easy spell, though kinda decent. I like the idea itself, although it is nothing too new and unique. I killed the enemies in your testing map way too easily and fast with this spell which may be a sign of imbalance! Anyways, It is configurable and has a WC3 touch – nothing wrong to say about here. (-3 since it is not too unique) (-2 for imbalance) |
Visuals | 15/15 | Not too much, not too less, the spell looks fine like this. |
Presentation and Polish | 12/15 | The tooltip sounds weird due to the grammatical errors it has. Other than that, the presentation is nice. As I already mentioned – this spell fits pretty well to WC3 and I like it so good job. (-3 for making the tooltip sound weird) |
Legal | 10/10 | Full score. |
Total: 90/100
Contestant: Rain.
Spell: ?
| Coding | -/30 | |
The big idea | -/30 | |
Visuals | -/15 | |
Presentation and Polish | -/15 | |
Legal | -/10 |
Disqualified because the map cannot be opened with JNGP.
((xxdingo93xx's judging) * 0.7) + ((Number of votes / Total voters) * 30) = Total Score
Gamecrafter_DK: (12 * 0.7) + ((10 / 99) * 30) = 11.430303
Arcmage: (68 * 0.7) + ((8 / 99) * 30) = 50.0242424
White-Lion: Disqualified
Deaod: (92 * 0.7) + ((17 / 99) * 30) = 69.5515152
ap0calypse: (92 * 0.7) + ((8 / 99) * 30) = 66.8242424
Hemlock: (53 * 0.7) + ((12 / 99) * 30) = 40.7363636
TriggerHappy: (97 * 0.7) + ((42 / 99) * 30) = 80.6272727
Eccho: (92 * 0.7) + ((23 / 99) * 30) = 71.369697
Tukki: Disqualified
Maker: (90 * 0.7) + ((14 / 99) * 30) = 67.2424242
scorpion182: (74 * 0.7) + ((10 / 99) * 30) = 54.830303
EMPerror: (37 * 0.7) + ((8 / 99) * 30) = 28.3242424
xD.Schurke: (94*.7)+((8/99)*30) = 68.224242
Xiliger: (77 * 0.7) + ((8 / 99) * 30) = 56.3242424
Duragon: (59 * 0.7) + ((9 / 99) * 30) = 44.0272727
Mage_Goo: (73 * 0.7) + ((9 / 99) * 30) = 53.8272727
Kingz: (90 * 0.7) + ((11 / 99) * 30) = 66.3333333
Rain.: Disqualified
4th - xD.Schurke
5th - Maker
6th - ap0calypse
7th - Kingz
8th - Xiliger
9th - scorpion182
10th - Mage_Goo
11th - Arcmage
12th - Duragon
13th - Hemlock
14th - EMPerror
15th - Gamecrafter_DK
16th - White-Lion / Tukki / Rain.
5th - Maker
6th - ap0calypse
7th - Kingz
8th - Xiliger
9th - scorpion182
10th - Mage_Goo
11th - Arcmage
12th - Duragon
13th - Hemlock
14th - EMPerror
15th - Gamecrafter_DK
16th - White-Lion / Tukki / Rain.
Contest | Poll (Click here to see the original entries)
Last edited:
