C3G Map Maker's Discussion Thread

[Griffin]

Velenne's map has been added to the front page.

[Griffin]

Just as a note to everyone, when you post your map thread, please convert the first post to match the format of the other Book Of threads that I have been converting. This will take a great deal of burden off of me. Thanks.

[A3n]

My next map is up:
Sewer Entrance (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1041159)

Cheers

[Griffin]

Front page updated.

[quozl]

What maps are waiting for votes?

[Griffin]

I know the Carnival needs one more.

[Griffin]

The Carnival passed.

I updated the front page with my newest map, Platforms 5 and 6 (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1046590#post1046590).

Also, please check in on the maps posted on the front page to see if you can help them out at all, or if we are waiting on you for something specifically. Thanks.

[A3n]

Oops, forgot to add my new map link here. Sorry.

Ruins of Heroes Past (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=29639).

Cheers

[Griffin]

Front page updated with A3n's map.

[Griffin]

I would like to add MrCrimson's map on the front page.... MrCrimson??

[Griffin]

I would like to add MrCrimson's map on the front page.... MrCrimson??
:bump: I need that link dude. I could do it... but we are suppose to link our own maps here. Yours has already passed, but I don't want to put it in the Books of Thread for everyone to view until I can record that link here first. Thanks. Also, I got your message, and I may call you Monday and see if we can set up a game. Peace.

[mrcrimson]

Sorry Griff, been kinda busy with movie stuff lately (filmed the Zatanna scene this morning). Heres the link for Aldridge Chemicals.
http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=29611
Game on monday sounds great. Have a good weekend!

[EternalThanos86]

Hey guys,

Your work looks really great! I am excited to see how far this project has developed and the great stuff you offer to the community.

With school winding down, I am looking to get more involved in this thread as well as being a C3G Ally. Hopefully, I can do my part in contributing to the C3G in maps and comic customs.

Looking forward to working with you all,
ET86

[IAmBatman]

I'd love to see you guys cook up and refine a scenario for Ala Carte one of these days. :-)

[EternalThanos86]

I'd love to see you guys cook up and refine a scenario for Ala Carte one of these days. :-)

Funny...I was just about to edit my post to ask what I could be doing in the short term, but you must be reading my mind, Bats. I didn't know you had telepathic skills? I thought Batman was the prime example of a superhero that isn't super (just rich). :p

[A3n]

I would also like to see us put together some competitive maps that go through the whole playtest process like the C3G units do. It would be nice to have our maps used for the playtesting of units.

Cheers

[Griffin]

I would also like to see us put together some competitive maps that go through the whole playtest process like the C3G units do. It would be nice to have our maps used for the playtesting of units.

Cheers
I agree. I bought these wonderful toys, and dangit, I want to play with them. :)

[quozl]

I would also like to see us put together some competitive maps that go through the whole playtest process like the C3G units do. It would be nice to have our maps used for the playtesting of units.

Cheers
I agree. I bought these wonderful toys, and dangit, I want to play with them. :)

What would playtesting the maps entail? Should we do that for our currently existing competitive map?

[Velenne]

How would a competitive Supers map differ from a competitive classic scape map? Smaller size?

[Taeblewalker]

I like the idea of using one of our maps for playtesting.

[IAmBatman]

How would a competitive Supers map differ from a competitive classic scape map? Smaller size?

Different designers. :-P Also, honestly, our quality probably wouldn't be accepted as quite as high - but that's OK. I don't think anyone here is trying to compete with BoV.

[GreyOwl]

Wait...so we're considering using our own maps for playtesting when I got shot down earlier for suggesting we could use official maps? :confused:

Don't get me wrong, I'm okay with it, just confused.

[IAmBatman]

We're trying to be a more open C3G. I think the official thing could still happen as well.

[GreyOwl]

Well, it would be kind of strange to allow BoV maps, our own maps, but not official maps. I'd be okay with all 3.

[IAmBatman]

Likewise ... for the initial playtest during the Design Phase. :-) I'd want to stick with playtested, "competitively balanced" maps for the cost-focused playtests.

[Hahma]

Wait...so we're considering using our own maps for playtesting when I got shot down earlier for suggesting we could use official maps? :confused:

Don't get me wrong, I'm okay with it, just confused.

We're trying to be a more open C3G. I think the official thing could still happen as well.

Well, it would be kind of strange to allow BoV maps, our own maps, but not official maps. I'd be okay with all 3.

Likewise ... for the initial playtest during the Design Phase. :-) I'd want to stick with playtested, "competitively balanced" maps for the cost-focused playtests.


I think in the previous discussion on this matter, some of our concerns regarding "official" maps was that they were more built for scenarios and that for testing units, the map wouldn't likely be fair to both teams, where in a kill 'em all type setting of playtesting, if one team had easier access to height or cover because the map wasn't designed to be fair to both teams, then it might skew the results. There are more variables in some of the "official" maps than would be in a map that gave both teams pretty much the same chance for success or failure.

I agree with Bats that for the initial playtest, it's fine to put the unit through their paces on perhaps different maps. That's fine for mechanical and theme concerns in the design phase. But for trying to pinpoint or at least narrow the cost, it's better to test on a map that wouldn't give one team an advantage over the other. If one non-flying melee hero keeps getting killed because he's tested on a map that allows a ranged flying opponent very easy access to height clost to its starting zone, then that unit might be priced lower because the results say he lost to x amount of points worth of opponent. Conversely, if he was the ranged flying unit that had easy acces to height near his starting zone on a non-balanced map and killed a ton of points worth of opponents, then he'd be likely priced higher to reflect that. Then after he's released and gets his ass handed to him on a balanced map, we'd hear that he was way overcosted.

I mentioned something about using some different maps in Doomsday's thread, but I figured it was more about the C3G mapmakers putting together some fairly balanced maps more than using unbalanced official maps.

[A3n]

GO, I was meaning only our competitive maps not our casual maps, & only after they have been playtested to certainty themselves. Maybe if somebody knows the guys in BoV they could discuss with them their process so we can come up with a cut down version of the process to certify our maps.

Cheers

[Hahma]

I wonder if the maps from:

Undead Alliance and A World in Chaos scenarios from Worlds Finest can be used for something. At least they are symmetrical if I recall correctly.

Sorry for not linking the maps, but I have to get out of here (work) in about 2 minutes. :D

[Griffin]

I wonder if the maps from:

Undead Alliance and A World in Chaos scenarios from Worlds Finest can be used for something. At least they are symmetrical if I recall correctly.

Sorry for not linking the maps, but I have to get out of here (work) in about 2 minutes. :D
and they should also be added to the casual map list.

[quozl]

GO, I was meaning only our competitive maps not our casual maps, & only after they have been playtested to certainty themselves. Maybe if somebody knows the guys in BoV they could discuss with them their process so we can come up with a cut down version of the process to certify our maps.

Cheers

A starting point:

By-laws for the Battlefields of Valhalla:

SECTION 1: Submission guidelines and tips
1. Maps shall contain exactly 24 hexes of start zone for each player. Start zones must be identified in the build instructions and must accommodate the Marro Hive in some capacity.
2. Maps should be balanced for 1-on-1 competition between two (2) 400-600 point armies
3. Maps are generally not to exceed 1 MS and up to 3 terrain expansions. No more than 2 expansions of the same type may be used in a map.
4. Use of the Marvel Warehouse Ruin is prohibited. Use of the Marro Hive as a line-of-sight blocker is allowed with the SotM set. Keep in mind the fewer expansions a map includes the more likely it is to be used. Submitted maps must state what sets are needed.
5. Anyone can nominate a map for consideration, but it will not go through the judging process without a majority vote of the Council.
6. Submitted maps must include build instructions.
7. Glyphs are not required, but any number may be used to enhance a map.
8. Nominations should be in .pdf format. Special circumstances may warrant exception.
9. Maps should not heavily favor any one special ability to the point that it makes the map non-competitive if an army does not contain that ability (i.e. range, flying, etc.).
10. Do NOT slap a map together and nominate it for consideration. Nominated maps must have some games played by more than one person. Additional game play experiences and observations are encouraged.

SECTION 2: How maps are judged
Maps nominated for consideration will go through the following process after a majority of acceptance votes by the judges:
1. Maps will be playtested competitively at least once by all judges, using 400-600 point armies. Candidates for approval will be playtested more than once.
2. Consideration for approved maps will be given, generally, based on the following criteria and in this order: balance, interesting play, and aesthetics.
3. Time for consideration is: as long as it takes for the judges to make an informed decision.
4. Great maps will be approved; not good ones. Don't let this discourage you.
5. Judge discussions will occur in a public and private forums on the non-official Heroscape web site: Currently www.heroscapers.com (http://www.heroscapers.com)
7. Reviews on maps will be public with status and results presented.
8. Maps that receive a super-majority of 75% (currently 5 out of a possible 6) of the Council will be formatted and given the Battlefields of Valhalla Seal of Approval. Judges may abstain from a vote on a particular map, thereby reducing the total number of votes needed for acceptance.

[Velenne]

Honestly, the only thing I feel should be different between a competitive classic map, and a competitive Supers map, should be the total footprint of the map.

Terrain requirements for BoV are based on a reasonable expectation of the number of sets a typical tournament director will have access to. This could also translate to roughly the number of sets your average Scaper will own. So when considering competitive Supers maps, it may also be wise to focus on a wide selection of terrain requirements.

When it comes down to specifics, you might consider reducing the size of the standard starting zone from 24 to, say, 10 (a 7- and a 3-hexer) or maybe 14 (2, 7-hexers). I'm feeling 10 and my Underground Lair map reflects that. Competitive Supers games should be about Supers.

That's my :2cents:

[Griffin]

Honestly, the only thing I feel should be different between a competitive classic map, and a competitive Supers map, should be the total footprint of the map.

Terrain requirements for BoV are based on a reasonable expectation of the number of sets a typical tournament director will have access to. This could also translate to roughly the number of sets your average Scaper will own. So when considering competitive Supers maps, it may also be wise to focus on a wide selection of terrain requirements.

When it comes down to specifics, you might consider reducing the size of the standard starting zone from 24 to, say, 10 (a 7- and a 3-hexer) or maybe 14 (2, 7-hexers). I'm feeling 10 and my Underground Lair map reflects that. Competitive Supers games should be about Supers.

That's my :2cents:
I agree with V. :up:

[Taeblewalker]

I also agree. 10 start zone spaces works for supers. Varied terrain does as well. While maps like Corner High-Rise and City Streets are great fun maps to play on, we want competitive maps to be more like Undeground Lair and Fast Lane.

[IAmBatman]

Something else I could see as a difference might be stressing a wider distance between startzones. I say this because I think, as a group, Superheroes tend to have more mobility, more special attacks that affect multiple targets or areas, and more ranged attacks. I think that you'd want to avoid too much start zone dive bombing for the maps to stay competitive. I'm not saying don't let someone attack a start zone in two turns, but you'd want to avoid it happening in one turn.

[Griffin]

Something else I could see as a difference might be stressing a wider distance between startzones. I say this because I think, as a group, Superheroes tend to have more mobility, more special attacks that affect multiple targets or areas, and more ranged attacks. I think that you'd want to avoid too much start zone dive bombing for the maps to stay competitive. I'm not saying don't let someone attack a start zone in two turns, but you'd want to avoid it happening in one turn.
That sorta thing is exactly what I look at in a map, that and the question "did the entire map get used".

[quozl]

I also agree. 10 start zone spaces works for supers.

I totally disagree. That won't even fit 3 squads of Street Thugs!

For regular 'scape, I like 20 points per hex as a guideline. For Superscape, I could see that going to 40 points per hex.

[GreyOwl]

I disagree as well. Once we get into larger teams, or more squads, or (dare I say it) larger figures like Anti-Monitor, 10 start zone spaces won't be nearly enough.

[Griffin]

I also agree. 10 start zone spaces works for supers.

I totally disagree. That won't even fit 3 squads of Street Thugs!

For regular 'scape, I like 20 points per hex as a guideline. For Superscape, I could see that going to 40 points per hex.
But we are not creating maps for equal opportunity tournament purposes. I don't mind having variable start zones that will favor one army build over another, or even force/encourage the player to draft certain types of armies. A good tournament director would never consider a map that had less than 24 spaces for a starting zone, but we are not creating maps for T-Directors. If during a playtest or friendly game, one side needs more starting zone spaces, just add some extra terrain on the end, there is no need to try and regulate everything. I think you are thinking in terms of organized gaming events, and we aren't really equipped to accommodate for that in the map department.

[Taeblewalker]

I also agree. 10 start zone spaces works for supers.

I totally disagree. That won't even fit 3 squads of Street Thugs!

For regular 'scape, I like 20 points per hex as a guideline. For Superscape, I could see that going to 40 points per hex.

We seem to have two different aesthetics here. How many squads do we want to basically "allow," start-zone wise? I think a Supers game would have at most a few squads of Civilians, etc., and mainly heroes, but that's just me.

[IAmBatman]

All I know is I want there to be squads allowed in and made for SuperHeroscape, but for the most part when I'm playing it, I'm going to have hero heavy armies, because SuperHeroscape is all about the Superhero.

[quozl]

But we are not creating maps for equal opportunity tournament purposes.

True but I thought that's what we're heading toward when you want to start using them for playtesting like a BoV map. Why not go all the way and create them for tournament purposes? If we don't, who will?

[Hahma]

All I know is I want there to be squads allowed in and made for SuperHeroscape, but for the most part when I'm playing it, I'm going to have hero heavy armies, because SuperHeroscape is all about the Superhero.


I agree. For the most part I figure Superheroes will dominate the battlefield, but if we are going to create squads, then we should make allowance for them on maps IMO. Besides, who doesn't want to try a few Supers vs. a Blast/Glad evil robot army. :D

[IAmBatman]

True ... maybe 14 spaces would make more sense than either 10 or 24? Or even 16?

[mad_wookiee]

If we're designating start zones, 10 feels too small to me. I think 12 to 16 is probably the right amount to allow for people to draft more than one common squad.

[quozl]

I think 24 works as a base, especially if you want supers to take on a glad/blast army.

Also, there's a nice benefit that most maps out there already have 24-space start zones.

[Hahma]

16 could be fine, enough to allow 3 squads of Civilians or Thugs and a few heroes. We really don't need any bigger as there won't be many double spaced units and they will likely be high pointers anyway.

Edit: or I guess 240-320 worth of Blasts/Glads combos on a 16 space SZ for small time heroes to face, but then again, if Batman and Robin combo end up being 350 then even this small hero tandem would cost too much to go against only 16 spaces of cheaper squads. :?

[Griffin]

But we are not creating maps for equal opportunity tournament purposes.

True but I thought that's what we're heading toward when you want to start using them for playtesting like a BoV map. Why not go all the way and create them for tournament purposes? If we don't, who will?
Uhhh... the BoV. :D

We are simply not going to become BoV lite. There is not need for us to try and reproduce maps in the way that they are doing things. The idea for us here is to create super hero themed maps and some of them can be used for friendly competitive purposes, but don't overvalue what you or we have done or can do here. We cannot create maps on the level in which they can. That is their specific purpose, and they devote countless hours to that goal. At best, we can create maps that are fun and fair, but realistically not going to be real tournament worth maps. With that said, it is best for us to just make some fun maps that are geared towards 1 VS 1 matches, and leave all that regulation stuff out, cause even with the regulations that you desire, we are still not going to achieve tournament worthy maps.

[quozl]

We cannot create maps on the level in which they can.

I believe in the C3G!

I also would like to see C3G/Marvel/Valhalla tournaments and they would probably start on a smaller scale like in people's homes. And, yes, BoV maps are great to choose from there but it would be nice to supplement those with maps that are designed for supers, which is what I believe we can do here.

[Griffin]

We cannot create maps on the level in which they can.

I believe in the C3G!

I also would like to see C3G/Marvel/Valhalla tournaments and they would probably start on a smaller scale like in people's homes. And, yes, BoV maps are great to choose from there but it would be nice to supplement those with maps that are designed for supers, which is what I believe we can do here.
I believe in C3G too, but the problem is that I think you may have devalued the BoV. I don't think you fully understand or appreciate what all they do to balance a map, and that is something I know for sure that we are not interested in doing here, besides, BoV is doing a great job producing tournament maps if that is what you are looking for in a map.

[quozl]

that is something I know for sure that we are not interested in doing here

Isn't that why a separate map division was created? For those people who would be interested in putting in the work to develop balanced maps?

I really think you're selling us short, Griffin. I'm not undervaluing the BoV and I'm not undervaluing us either.

[Griffin]

that is something I know for sure that we are not interested in doing here

Isn't that why a separate map division was created? For those people who would be interested in putting in the work to develop balanced maps?

I really think you're selling us short, Griffin. I'm not undervaluing the BoV and I'm not undervaluing us either.
Consider us sold then. :D Besides, if you want a balanced tournament map, why not just use a BoV map? I don't see any reason to start a new type of NM24 either.

[mad_wookiee]

We are simply not going to become BoV lite. There is not need for us to try and reproduce maps in the way that they are doing things. The idea for us here is to create super hero themed maps and some of them can be used for friendly competitive purposes, but don't overvalue what you or we have done or can do here. We cannot create maps on the level in which they can. That is their specific purpose, and they devote countless hours to that goal. At best, we can create maps that are fun and fair, but realistically not going to be real tournament worth maps. With that said, it is best for us to just make some fun maps that are geared towards 1 VS 1 matches, and leave all that regulation stuff out, cause even with the regulations that you desire, we are still not going to achieve tournament worthy maps.
Sorry, griffin, but I have to respond to this. First of all, I've had at least half a dozen maps of mine used in tournaments in April alone, maybe more. Velenne could probably say the same thing; I can't speak for anyone else but I wouldn't be surprised if others have as well. In other words, what you're talking about is something that some of us already strive for and have achieved. As for the BoV group, they don't create maps. They playtest existing maps that have been nominated. They don't balance them or tweak them or do anything like that - that work is all done by the map designer. That's not to devalue what they do as they put in a lot of hours of testing but map design isn't what they do.

Do we want to go down the route of designing maps that are specific for tournament play? I'm not sure about the demand for that sort of thing, but I don't think it's something that we couldn't do if we wanted to. The BoV maps are good for what they are, but they lack strong theme and some of the more extreme terrain features that I like in superhero maps. I just don't feel like I'm having a comic book fight on Badru Valley, for example. They also limit terrain in a very specific way for a specific purpose. We might not feel the need to be bound by that.

I'm not necessarily saying that we should go in that direction. I am saying though that if we did I think we've got the talent to make some kickass maps.

[Cavalier]

If I want tournament style maps, I know where to go to find them. To me, this project should be about theme-filled and epic-feeling maps. That doesn't negate the need to make them balanced or negate their usability. I just think they should be something different than BoV.

[IAmBatman]

Interesting discussion! :-) I hope scenarios don't get lost in the mix of this conversation. I would really like to see the C3G Map department start honing some nice scenarios based on your maps. To me, that's a much more interesting route than a BoV direction.
Speaking of tourney play, though, I think developing more of a grass roots superhero/C3G tourney scene would be awesome - something EternalThanos already laid the groundwork for. I could also see a C3G Skype tourney stretching over several nights or even weeks if we all trust each other to be honest about our die rolls. :-D

[EternalThanos86]

With regards to start zones:
Less than 24 spaces does not seem to work well within the consciousness of this community. 24 is the standard, and I honestly think one of the reasons for the failure of the BoM was that we asked for 12 spaces. It just doesn't fit with how the game has been played for quite some time. For the sake of the success of this project, I strongly urge C3G Mapmakers to use 24 start zone spaces, except in scenario-specific cases.

With regards to the purpose of this project:
While I agree that we should not try to duplicate the BoV and I agree that these maps should be thematic and epic (Cav is the best at this), yet I still think this project can put out some excellent material.

Why not try to release a series of maps/campaigns set up in booklet format? We could call them Map Packs or some other catchy name. I mean, the C3G releases customs in sets, so why not a set of maps/scenarios for people to play. This way, those who want to run C3G/Superhero tournaments have a base set of competitive and fair maps and some of those maps (supplemented by more thematic or epic maps) could be used for scenarios.

[Velenne]

With regards to start zones:
Less than 24 spaces does not seem to work well within the consciousness of this community. 24 is the standard, and I honestly think one of the reasons for the failure of the BoM was that we asked for 12 spaces. It just doesn't fit with how the game has been played for quite some time. For the sake of the success of this project, I strongly urge C3G Mapmakers to use 24 start zone spaces, except in scenario-specific cases.

Upon what do you form the basis for this opinion? I really think something in the way the game is played with Supers is fundamentally different from the way a normal game of Scape is played. Limiting starting zones seems natural to me and would actually increase the types of maps which could be made.

With regards to the purpose of this project:
While I agree that we should not try to duplicate the BoV and I agree that these maps should be thematic and epic (Cav is the best at this), yet I still think this project can put out some excellent material.

For sure! My original comments were directed more to the idea that a "competitive" map still needs to be balanced range/melee. I'm not sure how a competitive scenario would really work but I'm sure it doesn't have to be too strict for it to be fun. You're dealing with a different sort of player with Supers games than you are with classic Scape tourneys. I think you can play this quite a bit looser than the BoV.

Why not try to release a series of maps/campaigns set up in booklet format? We could call them Map Packs or some other catchy name. I mean, the C3G releases customs in sets, so why not a set of maps/scenarios for people to play. This way, those who want to run C3G/Superhero tournaments have a base set of competitive and fair maps and some of those maps (supplemented by more thematic or epic maps) could be used for scenarios.

I think that's a swell idea! There's certainly enough material now in this thread to do something like that.

:ponder: <imagines C3G tournaments going on around the country...> :ponder:

[EternalThanos86]

With regards to start zones:
Less than 24 spaces does not seem to work well within the consciousness of this community. 24 is the standard, and I honestly think one of the reasons for the failure of the BoM was that we asked for 12 spaces. It just doesn't fit with how the game has been played for quite some time. For the sake of the success of this project, I strongly urge C3G Mapmakers to use 24 start zone spaces, except in scenario-specific cases.

Upon what do you form the basis for this opinion? I really think something in the way the game is played with Supers is fundamentally different from the way a normal game of Scape is played. Limiting starting zones seems natural to me and would actually increase the types of maps which could be made.


I suppose the basis would be two-fold. First, when players think of creating competitive armies for tournaments or simply for competitive home games, it seems that everyone tries to fit their army into 24 start zone spaces, because we, as a community including Supers players, have been conditioned that way. Second, this allows for Supers players to use hordes of cheap commons and Super Leader in battle (thinking of Dr. Doom/Magneto and tons of Deathreavers, Gladiatrons, and Blastatrons or Poison Ivy/Solomon Grundy and Vipers or Spiders). Thematically, why limit start zone spaces? In some comics and most Superhero video games, the heroes are facing massive amounts of dummy enemies before getting to the big boss. I think Scape should follow the trend.

So, my biggest question I suppose is what do we want to do with this project and what can I do right now?

[IAmBatman]

Interests I'm seeing out there, to synopsize:

- scenarios
- tournament worthy maps
- more of the same awesome themed maps
- booklets compiling maps
- grass roots tournament event organization for superheroscape

Maybe a poll where people name their biggest priority for the group right now? Probably best to have it restricted to active participants (so I'd stay out. :-P ).
That doesn't mean you couldn't work on more than one of these things, but it could help establish what should be your biggest focus.

[quozl]

My priorities:

1. scenarios
2. grass roots tournament organization for superheroscape
3. tournament worthy maps
4. more of the same awesome themed maps
5. booklets compiling maps

[Cavalier]

My priorities:

1. more of the same awesome themed maps
2. scenarios
3. booklets compiling maps
4. grass roots tournament event organization for superheroscape
5. tournament worthy maps

[IAmBatman]

Nice change on the grass roots option, Cav. :-) I agree with you there that it shouldn't be a tournament mindset so much as an organized play/fun mindset.

[Griffin]

My priorities:

1. more of the same awesome themed maps
2. scenarios
3. booklets compiling maps
4. grass roots tournament event organization for superheroscape
5. tournament worthy maps
Nice change on the grass roots option, Cav. :-) I agree with you there that it shouldn't be a tournament mindset so much as an organized play/fun mindset.
I also agree with Cav's list. :up:

[IAmBatman]

I actually agree with Quozl's list. :-D

[Griffin]

I actually agree with Quozl's list. :-D
Now I am confused. Are you saying that you agree with Quozl's list, just not the part of it being geared towards tournament worth/BoV standards?

[A3n]

My priorities:

1. scenarios
2. more of the same awesome themed maps
2. tournament worthy maps
4. booklets compiling maps
5. grass roots event organization for superheroscape

I would love to see us release a booklet with scenarios based on our "awesome themed maps" with a section of 2-3 "tournament worthy maps".

Cheers

[IAmBatman]

My priorities:

1. scenarios
2. grass roots tournament organization for superheroscape
3. tournament worthy maps
4. more of the same awesome themed maps
5. booklets compiling maps

I actually agree with Quozl's list. :-D
Now I am confused. Are you saying that you agree with Quozl's list, just not the part of it being geared towards tournament worth/BoV standards?

I think there are already lots of awesome themed maps out there from this group. :-) Now I want to see you guys do something with them. Just booklets compiling them doesn't interest me so much unless there's a campaign of scenarios as part of that booklet (and hopefully a storyline as well. :-) ).
And scenarios are the number one fun thing I think that this group could do with all those cool maps already here.
ET being around reminds me how cool it is to have organized play that shows love for C3G. I'd love to see more of that and I think this group could be a great launching pad for that type of action.
That said, I think this group could also produce some competitive-minded maps that can be used in tourney play without having to worry about being Gencon level awesome. Like some of the others have said, there are some great map makers in this group and I think you could concentrate on playtesting some maps to determine them fairly competitively balanced without making that the group's main focus or starting to feel like BoV wannabes (I'd still oppose going there). The nice part about this option as well is that we might be able to consider some of the competitive-minded and playtested maps eligible for future C3G design playtesting. That would be really cool, IMO, as I'd love to do some playtesting on more Superhero themed maps instead of just the Valhalla themed maps I've been doing it on.
Then there's more of the same awesome themed maps. Of course I want to see that. But there's already a ton of them out there and I feel like people just aren't really enjoying them fully yet because we're not making an effort to do something extra with them, whether that's scenarios, use in organized events, use for playtesting if they've been competitively balanced, etc. Just slapping some together in a booklet doesn't alleviate this issue, IMO, it just makes them more fancy to look at (thus that's last on my list).
You guys have done some awesome work here - I just want to see it fully appreciated by the community.

[Griffin]

Well, we currently are creating competitive maps... the larger issue here is "what are going to be our standards for them, or should we have any at all?" I personally don't need any standards for our competitive maps other than they look good, the map can be used by all types of figures, the map gets plenty of use in all areas during a game, and the start zones are fairly placed for each army.

[quozl]

What do you think of these by-laws for C3G Tournament Maps:

SECTION 1: Submission guidelines and tips
1. Maps shall contain exactly 24 hexes of start zone for each player. Start zones must be identified in the build instructions and must accommodate the Marro Hive in some capacity.
2. Maps should be balanced for 1-on-1 competition.
3. Use of the Marro Hive as a line-of-sight blocker is allowed with the SotM set.
4. Submitted maps must state what sets are needed.
5. Submitted maps must include build instructions.
6. Glyphs are not required, but any number may be used to enhance a map.
7. Maps should not heavily favor any one special ability to the point that it makes the map non-competitive if an army does not contain that ability (i.e. range, flying, etc.).

SECTION 2: How maps are judged
Maps nominated for consideration will go through the following process after a majority of acceptance votes by the judges:
1. Maps will be playtested competitively at least 4 times by C3G playtesters.
2. Consideration for approved maps will be given, generally, based on the following criteria and in this order: balance, interesting play, and aesthetics.
3. Time for consideration is: as long as it takes for the judges to make an informed decision.
4. Great maps will be approved; not good ones. Don't let this discourage you.
5. Judge discussions will occur in a public and private forums on the non-official Heroscape web site: Currently www.heroscapers.com (http://www.heroscapers.com)
6. Reviews on maps will be public with status and results presented.
7. Maps that receive 75% of the C3G playtesters votes will be formatted and given the C3G Tournament Map Seal of Approval. Playtesters may abstain from a vote on a particular map, thereby reducing the total number of votes needed for acceptance.

[Griffin]

If the other Map Makers want to go that route, then I have to step down as a map maker. I just don't have enough time in my life to be that committed to a map project right now. I really like what we have, and I have resisted quozl's attempts to place regulations and rules and laws on the group since the beginning. I have really enjoyed the casual nature of the Map Project, and the "come and go as you please" spirit of the process without all of the burden that I am used to within the mainframe.
If this is something that anyone in the group other than quozl wants to do, or if someone like A3n (a C3G Hero representative) wants to take lead in this direction, I probably should just focus on the mainframe and bow out now before I become overwhelmed.

[IAmBatman]

I think that you can run a playtest or two on the competitive minded maps and determine whether they're competitive enough for a casual type of tourney or playtesting for C3G (especially if they're symmetrical). I don't see any reason to go gung ho on regulations here. I agree with Griff that staying fun and casual is a good thing and I know a number of people here would probably lose interest if it went in the other direction.
Also, I think scenarios are winning out on the poll over anything else right now anyway. :-P

[quozl]

I think scenarios are winning out on the poll over anything else right now anyway. :-P

That's because scenarios are awesome!

[EternalThanos86]

I also see the need to use the maps that have been made thus far in a campaign or individual scenarios. This seems to be the best option for the near future. Can we finalize that idea and put it on the Goals page as a semi-official change of direction?

For long-term projects, I also see the desire to be a launchpad for C3G friendly or even focused tournament/competitive play (I dream of National SuperHeroscape Day).

At this point, I still feel like this group is beating around the bush in terms of the "next step." I say let's tighten up this discussion, get an official proposal and get to work!

Am I moving too fast?
~ET

[quozl]

I also see the need to use the maps that have been made thus far in a campaign or individual scenarios. This seems to be the best option for the near future. Can we finalize that idea and put it on the Goals page as a semi-official change of direction?

That has always been a goal. If you'd like to start the first scenario project, go for it!

[IAmBatman]

I don't think a change to the rules/goals is even necessary. C3G Heroes have already voted to allow you one scenario in Ala Carte at a time as long as it's polished and playtested once by you guys before it's submitted as a Design.
I think you just need to agree on a scenario to work on and ... start.
I think some X-Men scenarios - maybe even a campaign - to replace the hole in the X-Men release would be awesome. :-)
Plus, Wolverine, Deadpool, and Nightcrawler are now available as well as what was in the X-Men set.

[Cavalier]

I interupt this discussion to bring you a map: The Book of the Lair of the Mole Men (a C3G Map proposal) (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1069440).

And now, back to our regularly scheduled discussion:

I feel much the same as Griff in this; I cannot commit to play testing. Oh how I wish I could, but I so rarely even get to play a game of HS anymore (my schedule after work hours is quite full). If we want to go the route of required playtesting from every member of the guild, I would have to back out. :(

[IAmBatman]

First page updated - and I see no reason why this group couldn't undertake some things that require a small amount of playtesting, but not put that burden on the creators. We have a playtest sign up sheet stuck in the C3G forum for a reason. :-)

[EternalThanos86]

First page updated -

Any chance of being moved to the active members list?

[Griffin]

We have been authorized by the C3G mainframe to create scenarios, and then once we have created them and playtested it at least once, we can put it up in A la Carte for review, playtesting, and finalizing by their voting process. We can't assume that they want us to produce campaigns, especially when we haven't even created a Scenario yet. If "we" create a scenario, we are suppose to do it as a team. So no one here can just Go Ahead And Go For It until we have agreed as a team that we are ready to do that now. If someone wants to propose that we create a scenario, I would probably vote yes.


EDIT: WoW, I got massively ninja'd

[quozl]

I see no reason why this group couldn't undertake some things that require a small amount of playtesting, but not put that burden on the creators. We have a playtest sign up sheet stuck in the C3G forum for a reason. :-)

Yes!

I suggest we set a number of playtests needed for a C3G Tournament Map and then have people sign up to playtest the maps just like any other C3G design.

[mad_wookiee]

I don't particularly care for the suggested bylaws. I'm not keen on redoing the BoM. Not because I think that was a bad idea, but because I think the goals of the BoV/BoM groups were and are more to recognize already existing maps that are currently being used and sanction them for competitive play. This project is more about creating and collaborating on great maps than sanctioning existing ones. Like some of the other folks, I just don't have the time to put into that kind of playtesting. I'm far more interested in scenario design and map creation (new content) than exhaustively working out the kinks of existing content.

[IAmBatman]

Exactly. Be the creators. Concentrate on creating. A few of you can step up here and there to do initial playtests on scenarios or competitive maps (if we want to open those up for Ala Carte at all). Then farm the rest of the playtests out to the C3G Sidekicks and Allies who want to earn points in the Ally Rewards Program.

[EternalThanos86]

I have no desire to participate on the competitive maps side of this project. While I understand some do want to continue with it, I would rather spend my energies on creating/playtesting scenarios for the C3G to publish and use.

Therefore, I propose that the C3G Mapmakers create a new scenario for Corner High Rise (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1025752#post1025752).

[IAmBatman]

Ooh, that'd be a good map for a Spidey scenario.

[quozl]

Therefore, I propose that the C3G Mapmakers create a new scenario for Corner High Rise (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1025752#post1025752).

Yea

[mad_wookiee]

I have no desire to participate on the competitive maps side of this project. While I understand some do want to continue with it, I would rather spend my energies on creating/playtesting scenarios for the C3G to publish and use.

Therefore, I propose that the C3G Mapmakers create a new scenario for Corner High Rise (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1025752#post1025752).

YEA

[Cavalier]

Yea!

[Griffin]

I have no desire to participate on the competitive maps side of this project. While I understand some do want to continue with it, I would rather spend my energies on creating/playtesting scenarios for the C3G to publish and use.

Therefore, I propose that the C3G Mapmakers create a new scenario for Corner High Rise (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1025752#post1025752).
Could you give me an idea as to what theme or type of scenario you have in mind?

[EternalThanos86]

I have no desire to participate on the competitive maps side of this project. While I understand some do want to continue with it, I would rather spend my energies on creating/playtesting scenarios for the C3G to publish and use.

Therefore, I propose that the C3G Mapmakers create a new scenario for Corner High Rise (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1025752#post1025752).
Could you give me an idea as to what theme or type of scenario you have in mind?

Whatever 'we' decide, but I was thinking of a domestic disturbance scene with the call and arrival of a group of Supers to stop the crimes.

EDIT: If that is not savory to everyone's taste, I'm open to whatever. Choosing the specific map was the main thrust of the proposal, not the scenario theme.

[Griffin]

OK, in the spirit of "moving forward" I will vote yea, though I don't think this would have been the best pick for a scenario.

[EternalThanos86]

The proposal passes. Thread created (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1069597) for the scenario and discussions on theme should be moved there. The floor is now open for proposals.

[A3n]

I was going to suggest we come up with the basis of a whole campaign & then take it one scenario at a time through the C3G process. But hey if we are all gun hoe about it I vote YEA if not belated :p.

BTW I quickly wrote this out on a Riddler comic pic for the C3G Riddler & after I had completed it, I thought it would be a pretty cool campaign:

1. Set up ambush at Aldridge Chemicals.
2. Set up ambush at Abandoned Missile Base.
3. Set up ambush at the Corner highrise on Death St.
4. Lead Batman to Aldridge Chemical plant.
5. Get Robin
6. Take Robin to the Joker at the Carnival gounds
7. Leave clues for Batman to lead to Abandoned Missile Base.
8. Solve the riddle - Who is Batman?
9. Kill Batman & take body to cemetary.
10. Lure Joker to the Corner highrise on Death st.
11. Unmask Robin.
12. Frame Robins secret identity for the Joker's murder.

Cheers

[Taeblewalker]

And then it turns out that Bats and Robin were just androids, and everyone is hiding in the batcave watching it on their monitor.

At least, that's how it happened in the Super Friends.

;)

I like the idea, though I wonder how the unmasking would be accomplished. Upon their deaths?

[IAmBatman]

You'll also need to wait until there's a C3G Robin. :-P

[Porkins]

Besides, you can't kill IAmBatman!

[Griffin]

Front page updated with ET's scenario. :up:

[quozl]

Added Crash Landing:
http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1088740#post1088740

[quozl]

Another map! Day At The Office:
http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1092931

[quozl]

What does everyone think about having a time limit to vote?

What should the time limit be?

[IAmBatman]

We have a 48 hour limit for all votes for other C3G threads. This means that everyone has 48 hours to vote, and the vote doesn't close until either everyone has voted or 48 hours have passed. It also means that if someone doesn't vote within 48 hours, his vote is forfeit and the majority will be determined based only on those who did vote.

[quozl]

I propose that we adopt the same voting rules as the rest of C3G.

[Cavalier]

We have a 48 hour limit for all votes for other C3G threads. This means that everyone has 48 hours to vote, and the vote doesn't close until either everyone has voted or 48 hours have passed. It also means that if someone doesn't vote within 48 hours, his vote is forfeit and the majority will be determined based only on those who did vote.
Sounds like a workable policy to me.

[EternalThanos86]

Sure thing! I will let the group know when I am out of town for work ahead of time.

EDIT: Sorry for the casual words. My vote is YEA

[Griffin]

Yea.

[mad_wookiee]

YEA

[Cavalier]

Official reply: Yea

[quozl]

And it passes (in much less than 48 hours)!

[A3n]

Yea

[Griffin]

I have updated our rules (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showpost.php?p=1023061&postcount=3)post on the front page.

[quozl]

Thanks but I think C3G Hero needs to be changed to C3G Mapmaker.

[Griffin]

Thanks but I think C3G Hero needs to be changed to C3G Mapmaker.
Got it. :D

[quozl]

I don't know if anyone else has has two maps up for nomination into the BoV at the same time before but mad_wookie has now!

Congratulations!

[A3n]

My new map is up for the Critiquing. Freak Show Alley (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1106149).

Cheers

[EternalThanos86]

Ok guys, so I have been thinking about this project as a whole a lot at work lately. If anyone has ever played Memoir '44, you know that they released the core game, expansions, and then maps packs and a scenario booklet. With the C3G taking care of the core and expansions, I really think we should invest the time to create an official C3G map pack (all our best maps in one PDF) as well as a scenario booklet (a few scenarios and a full campaign or something like that). Then, we could release them together and do a front page thing and have even more uses for C3G customs. We already have a plethora of maps, a little lacking in scenarios, but I think we are already over halfway there.

What say you?

[Griffin]

So say we all! That is a great idea ET, and lots of work. I probably won't be able to help much, but feel free to run that shizle dawg!

[IAmBatman]

What he said. :-D
I think A3n's map for the Fallen Heroes is a great place for a Wonder Woman scenario (see that map thread for what I suggested).

Having a theme/campaign for the scenarios might help guide them better and allow you to "tell a story" with them.
I think both X-Men and Justice League have enough units now to justify a campaign. They might both be a tad light on enemies, though.

[Taeblewalker]

I also like the idea, ET. I encourage mixing classic figures in the campaigns to have enough enemies and even a few allies. I have used the new Drake quite well as a sort of super hero on the power level of Venom and Spidey. Soulborgs can be classic robot drones, and we can easily imagine a Marro Invasion to be the Imperium.

[Griffin]

Martian War Zone: The Heat (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=30744)

[Hidicul]

Can I also add in DOs as part of that? For some reason, everytime I go to the books of index thread I keep checking the DO spoiler for something. Of course sadly I'm always ley down. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy and praise you all for the work you do.

[A3n]

Can I also add in DOs as part of that? For some reason, everytime I go to the books of index thread I keep checking the DO spoiler for something. Of course sadly I'm always ley down. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy and praise you all for the work you do.

As part of what?

DO's are part of work & any one of the Heroes can decide to design one instead of doing a unit at any point we aren't designing something else. It's just at the moment we are more focussed on getting the units out there.

Cheers

[quozl]

What say you?

I think we need more scenarios but, yeah, I'd like to see that too.

[IAmBatman]

I'm not sure Destructible Objects fall under the parameters of this part of the group ...

[Hidicul]

I'm not sure Destructible Objects fall under the parameters of this part of the group ...

Sorry guys, I had apparently forgotten what C3G thread I was in when I made my last post :brickwall: I promise to pay more attention to where I am to aviod stupid posts like that.

[quozl]

So there hasn't been anything done in the last month or so.

Are all members still committed to putting out maps?

I am.

Please reply to this if you are too.

[Griffin]

So there hasn't been anything done in the last month or so.

Are all members still committed to putting out maps?

I am.

Please reply to this if you are too.
I have been very very very busy with trying to get a bunch of Playtesting stuff ready for the Allies and Sidekicks over in the Main Frame. I also have a C3G tournament event this week, a new baby last month, a vacation last month, etc etc etc... I am certainly still interested, but it may be until next week until I can build my lava map.

[IAmBatman]

Not to mention you're still working on the Scenario the Map Makers sent to our Inner Sanctum. :-P
I know Griff, though - if you guys are active and getting things done, he'll chip in. I doubt he's got it in him to take as much of a leadership role here as he has in the past, though (too much going on in the rest of C3G!). So we need more people to step up around here.
I'm glad to see Quozl doing it, but we need others to join him.
I may not be that active in this section, but this is still C3G. And I love me some C3G.

[Griffin]

:word:

[A3n]

I haven't pushed it but my map is at the point where I needed somebody else to build it - that's what I get for offering something that I can't build myself I guess. I'll go give it a bump & maybe somewhere will help me out.

Cheers

[IAmBatman]

I wish I could pitch in and help just build some of these for you guys sometimes. Unfortunately, my map space is perpetually taken by maps used for playtesting.
I am getting to enjoy my first fruits of your labors right now, though, playtesting on Platforms 5 and 6 (and having lots of fun - thanks, guys!).

[quozl]

So there hasn't been anything done in the last month or so.

Are all members still committed to putting out maps?

I am.

Please reply to this if you are too.
I have been very very very busy.

And I totally understand that. We all get busy times. I'm not looking for commitment now. I just want to make sure all our members still want to be committed to this project.

[quozl]

I haven't pushed it but my map is at the point where I needed somebody else to build it - that's what I get for offering something that I can't build myself I guess. I'll go give it a bump & maybe somewhere will help me out.

Cheers

Well, I did build it but I had some issues and asked someone else to build it too. Time to get the whip crackin'!

[Taeblewalker]

I have had family visiting for the last few weeks. After next Wednesday, I should have some time to build some maps and work on Savage Land.

[mad_wookiee]

I'm still here - I had a lot of my terrain committed to maps for the tournament that I held last week. (One nice thing about an SUV is that there's a lot of room in the trunk for map transport. ;)) Now that I have those maps disassembled and stored I'll be able to start building stuff again.

[A3n]

I'm still here - I had a lot of my terrain committed to maps for the tournament that I held last week. (One nice thing about an SUV is that there's a lot of room in the trunk for map transport. ;)) Now that I have those maps disassembled and stored I'll be able to start building stuff again.

Glad to hear it guys. Griff & I have our hands full in the other C3G stuff so we can't drive these like we would like to so we rely on you guys to step up & keep it moving. But you will notice that both of us will be here when there is activity happening. Like moths to a flame it's hard to keep away, so light that fire guys.

Cheers

[Hidicul]

I'd help build the maps, but sadly my terrain is limited, and you guys tend build maps with either more then I have avalable, or with sets I don't have. As soon as I get more terrain and the missing sets I'll be halping out by building some of these to see how well they are.

[A3n]

I'd help build the maps, but sadly my terrain is limited, and you guys tend build maps with either more then I have avalable, or with sets I don't have. As soon as I get more terrain and the missing sets I'll be halping out by building some of these to see how well they are.

My sets are limited also, I usually only design for what I can build but this time I had a great idea & I could build half of it to see what it was like, so I put it up for the others to run with, just because I thought it was cool. So look out for any of mine in the future.

I build with 1x RotV, 1x FotA, 1x MtCB, & the recent addition of 1x RttFF.

Cheers

[Hidicul]

I'd help build the maps, but sadly my terrain is limited, and you guys tend build maps with either more then I have avalable, or with sets I don't have. As soon as I get more terrain and the missing sets I'll be halping out by building some of these to see how well they are.

My sets are limited also, I usually only design for what I can build but this time I had a great idea & I could build half of it to see what it was like, so I put it up for the others to run with, just because I thought it was cool. So look out for any of mine in the future.

I build with 1x RotV, 1x FotA, 1x MtCB, & the recent addition of 1x RttFF.

Cheers
Well I have all of that except thr RttFF.

[quozl]

So there hasn't been anything done in the last month or so.

Are all members still committed to putting out maps?

I am.

Please reply to this if you are too.

OK, so far we've heard from:

Quozl
Griffin
A3n
Taeblewalker
mad_wookiee

I'm going to send PMs out to the remaining members to see if they'd like to continue or be dropped from the roster.

[IAmBatman]

Great job taking a leadership role here, Quozl. I'm loving it. :thumbsup:
I've also been talking to Griff lately about a project we think the Map section of C3G can work on that would really help with a larger project for the entire C3G.

[quozl]

That would be fantastic!

[Griffin]

That would be fantastic!
Exactly. I can tell you this much, soon I will post a list of thematic map builds that have a specific location. Then you guys can sign up for ONE to create the map for. Then that map will be sent to the Inner Sanctum to see about turning it into a scenario.

I will please ask all of you to not even ask about creating scenarios for this set. That is something that is tied so tightly to a lot of components in the set, that only people privy to the details could write scenarios for. And no, don't ask for all the details either. :p

[IAmBatman]

Let me know when you start putting together that list of locations, Griff - I have some ideas to share. :-)

[EternalThanos86]

After two full weeks out-of-town for my job I am back and ready to work. Is the hostage scenario still being tested? And as far as upcoming stuff please give me a reason to reorganize my gaming table!

P.S. Is the first post up to date?

[Griffin]

After two full weeks out-of-town for my job I am back and ready to work. Is the hostage scenario still being tested? And as far as upcoming stuff please give me a reason to reorganize my gaming table!

P.S. Is the first post up to date?
The Hostage Holdout Scenario is not finished and will not be even ready for us to post it for playtesting to the Allies until sometime next week. Unfortunately, A LOT of changes needed to be made as the scenario was quite honestly very broken even in the first round. I have it built, all the pieces out, and I have been nibbling away at it for two weeks, but I have had some other major priorities with getting some figure designs out of the door for public playtesting. Next week though is all about maps and scenarios for me.

[quozl]

It's been 4 days since I asked Cavalier, MrCrimson, and Velenne to post here. I'm guessing they don't want to continue with this since I haven't heard anything from them.

Does anyone know of any good candidates to replace them and bring new life into this group?

[Hidicul]

It's been 4 days since I asked Cavalier, MrCrimson, and Velenne to post here. I'm guessing they don't want to continue with this since I haven't heard anything from them.

Does anyone know of any good candidates to replace them and bring new life into this group?
If you don't mind my limited terrain, I'd be willing to give it a shot.

[quozl]

If you don't mind my limited terrain, I'd be willing to give it a shot.

To apply for the job, we'll need to see a map. :)

[Hidicul]

If you don't mind my limited terrain, I'd be willing to give it a shot.

To apply for the job, we'll need to see a map. :)
Well I've been kicking one around, trying to get it to the way I want it, guess I'll get cracking on it so I can show you.

[Cavalier]

Sorry, gentlemen, I am unable to continue to contribute. Good luck in your future endeavors.

[quozl]

Sorry, gentlemen, I am unable to continue to contribute. Good luck in your future endeavors.

I'm sorry to hear that and I hope that when you are able, you come back to us!

Thank you for all the work you've put into this already.

[quozl]

Is the first post up to date?

I don't know how I missed this but, yes, the first post is up to date.

You could also submit a new map too. ;)

[Griffin]

It's been 4 days since I asked Cavalier, MrCrimson, and Velenne to post here. I'm guessing they don't want to continue with this since I haven't heard anything from them.

Does anyone know of any good candidates to replace them and bring new life into this group?
If you don't mind my limited terrain, I'd be willing to give it a shot.
What sets do you have? Because realistically, you need a good collection, not a poor collection of terrain to be a part of the map group.

[Griffin]

New Master Set on rise means new maps. So this is what we need:


Baxter Building: City Streets
Subterania: Cave with a large water section (you may even want to use a Cav Water Mat, but not necessary either)
Latveria: Von Doom Castle
Negative Zone: Other Dimension

New York: Statue of Liberty (already done)

So 4 maps right now is what we need. Anyone here can create their versions of any or all of the above listed maps, then we can have several great ideas to choose from as we piece together the scenarios.

[quozl]

New Master Set on rise means new maps. So this is what we need:


Baxter Building: City Streets
Subterania: Cave with a large water section (you may even want to use a Cav Water Mat, but not necessary either)
Latveria: Von Doom Castle
Negative Zone: Other Dimension
New York: Statue of Liberty (already done)So 4 maps right now is what we need. Anyone here can create their versions of any or all of the above listed maps, then we can have several great ideas to choose from as we piece together the scenarios.

Awesome! Hopefully, this will inspire some new designs!

As an aside, you may also want to look into Dark Cave Lair (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=29161), The Lair of the Mole Men (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1069440), City Streets (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1023808), Police Headquarters (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=29153), and Martian War Zone: The Heat (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=30744).

[IAmBatman]

Great job organizing things around here, Quozl! :-) I'd rep ya if I could.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure Velenne is out - he resigned from C3G a few weeks back.

[GreyOwl]

I got him.

[Hidicul]

It's been 4 days since I asked Cavalier, MrCrimson, and Velenne to post here. I'm guessing they don't want to continue with this since I haven't heard anything from them.

Does anyone know of any good candidates to replace them and bring new life into this group?
If you don't mind my limited terrain, I'd be willing to give it a shot.
What sets do you have? Because realistically, you need a good collection, not a poor collection of terrain to be a part of the map group.
RotV terrain and ruins, SotM, FotA, 2x Marvel, and BftU. If that's not enough then I guess I'll wait till I get some more sets.

[quozl]

That sounds fine to me. Would you like to give one of these a shot?

•Baxter Building: City Streets
•Subterania: Cave with a large water section (you may even want to use a Cav Water Mat, but not necessary either)
•Latveria: Von Doom Castle
•Negative Zone: Other Dimension

[Hidicul]

That sounds fine to me. Would you like to give one of these a shot?

•Baxter Building: City Streets
•Subterania: Cave with a large water section (you may even want to use a Cav Water Mat, but not necessary either)
•Latveria: Von Doom Castle
•Negative Zone: Other Dimension
I'll try Latveria. Something semi simple for my first shot.

[IAmBatman]

I'm really excited to see what you guys come up with. :-)

[Griffin]

OK, I do have some guidelines for the terrain sets included.

MEGA SET
You may only have one of these sets per map:
Rise of the Valkyrie
Swarm of Marro

TERRAIN BOOST
You may have up to 2 of any of these sets per map:
Volcarren Wasteland
Thaelenk Tundra
Battle for the Underdark
Ticalla Jungle
Fortress of the Archkyrie
Road to the Forgotten Forest
Marvel Set

The one Wild card here is the Marvel set. If you already have 1 Mega Set and 2 Terrain Boosts, you may still add 1 additional Marvel set as long as you do not exceed 2 Marvel sets per map.

[Griffin]

The new discussion thread for the Master Set. (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1158391#post1158391)

[quozl]

Time for some new blood.

I propose that we remove mrcrimson and Velenne from the member list and that we accept a new member.

Please vote within 48 hours.

[IAmBatman]

I'm not sure if Velenne even needs a proposal ... he formally resigned from C3G weeks ago. :-)

PS did you have a new member in mind or are you just hoping to find someone?

[quozl]

I have a couple of potentials but am open to nominations.

[IAmBatman]

Just curious. :-) This is definitely your show to run at this point, as far as I'm concerned.

[Hidicul]

Well shouldn't you post your nominations so people know who you are thinking of? I'd think it kind of hard to vote on adding someone if they don't know who the person/people are. Just my 2 cents.

[quozl]

Right now we're just voting to remove members that aren't active anymore. Then we will have space to accept new members and in the meantime, I'd like to see possible nominations.

BTW, hidicul and johnny139 are the two potentials I referred to.

[Taeblewalker]

I'll vote Yea to removing members who aren't interested in being active.

[mad_wookiee]

Yea to inactive members.

[Griffin]

Yea.

[A3n]

I thought McCrimson said he would be back but had a lot to do with a movie at the moment?

[quozl]

I thought McCrimson said he would be back but had a lot to do with a movie at the moment?

Almost a month ago he said he was done with the movie project and could devote time to Scape. He's posted a few times since then but never answered my PM to him about the Map Group. Also, his profile shows he was on as recently as today.

[Griffin]

I thought McCrimson said he would be back but had a lot to do with a movie at the moment?

Almost a month ago he said he was done with the movie project and could devote time to Scape. He's posted a few times since then but never answered my PM to him about the Map Group. Also, his profile shows he was on as recently as today.
Yeah he browses on his phone, but just can't contribute right now.

[A3n]

Ok, Yea then but we can slot him straight in when he does want to contribute regularly again.

Cheers

[Griffin]

:word:

[mrcrimson]

Sorry fellas, Work put me on a different shift, which completely destroys my free time. Griff's right, I do browse on my blackberry, but its usually just real quick to see new developments. I would recommend replacing me with some new blood who can devote more time to this. right now work, filming, and my sons upcoming specialist appointments/surgery has really put a strain on my scape time. I'll keep checking in because you all are some real good dudes, and I'm a huge fan of C3G. Thank you for the opportunity to be a part of it.

[Griffin]

Sorry fellas, Work put me on a different shift, which completely destroys my free time. Griff's right, I do browse on my blackberry, but its usually just real quick to see new developments. I would recommend replacing me with some new blood who can devote more time to this. right now work, filming, and my sons upcoming specialist appointments/surgery has really put a strain on my scape time. I'll keep checking in because you all are some real good dudes, and I'm a huge fan of C3G. Thank you for the opportunity to be a part of it.
GOD bless and good luck, and you are always welcome here. :D

[quozl]

Thanks mrcrimson for that post. I hope when things calm down for you that you remember us and come back!

[quozl]

Also, the vote passes. We now have room for two new members if anyone would like to nominate someone.

[Griffin]

Also, the vote passes. We now have room for two new members if anyone would like to nominate someone.
Do we need two new members? I think that I would be fine working with a core group of a few for a while.

[A3n]

Also, the vote passes. We now have room for two new members if anyone would like to nominate someone.
Do we need two new members? I think that I would be fine working with a core group of a few for a while.

Agree but if Hidicul steps up & shows us his got what it takes I'd be happy to include him. New blood might be what's needed here at the moment.

Cheers

[Griffin]

Just as a reminder as to our current membership. I think this is enough IMO, and I would not be in favor of increasing membership at least for a while. Besides, I don't really want to give Hidicul a reason to not playtest in the mainframe. :p

A3N (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=4382)
quozl (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=3887)
EternalThanos86 (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=5724)
Taeblewalker (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=94)
mad_wookiee (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=5590)
Griffin (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=5301)

Also, there is currently a proposition up in our Martian Map thread.

[Hidicul]

Just as a reminder as to our current membership. I think this is enough IMO, and I would not be in favor of increasing membership at least for a while. Besides, I don't really want to give Hidicul a reason to not playtest in the mainframe. :p

A3N (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=4382)
quozl (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=3887)
EternalThanos86 (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=5724)
Taeblewalker (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=94)
mad_wookiee (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=5590)
Griffin (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/member.php?u=5301)

Also, there is currently a proposition up in our Martian Map thread.
What you think this would keep eck Griff, if I can pass competitve maps through here, I won't be bored with the 2 maps I can currently use:twisted: Most of the maps I dont have enough terrain to even proxy for.

[quozl]

New blood might be what's needed here at the moment.

That was also my thought.

[quozl]

New map here
http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1189852

Rocket Launching Platform for 3 players

[quozl]

This map has brought up a question:

Do we want to consider mutiplayer maps as competitive maps?

[A3n]

I don't see any issue with that as long as it can be considered competitive between any of the players. Meaning it for a 3 player map there has to be the same competitive balance between players 1 & 2 as there is between players 2 & 3 & between players 1 & 3. There can't be any terrain advantage received by attacking one player other another.

Cheers

[mad_wookiee]

Agreed.

[IAmBatman]

:word: Good post, A3n!

[Griffin]

What A3nus said. :word:

[Taeblewalker]

Yea to the wisdom of A3n.

[quozl]

I just noticed that Hostage Holdout is listed as in progress. That's completed now and I think our first scenario turned out really well! Anyone want to give another scenario design a shot?

[A3n]

I just noticed that Hostage Holdout is listed as in progress. That's completed now and I think our first scenario turned out really well! Anyone want to give another scenario design a shot?
I think it's only you, me & Griffin that are still active here.

[Hahma]

I just noticed that Hostage Holdout is listed as in progress. That's completed now and I think our first scenario turned out really well! Anyone want to give another scenario design a shot?
I think it's only you, me & Griffin that are still active here.

Yeah, and I know Griff is working on scenarios for the FF master set, so that should be his priority until that's done.

[mad_wookiee]

I just noticed that Hostage Holdout is listed as in progress. That's completed now and I think our first scenario turned out really well! Anyone want to give another scenario design a shot?
I think it's only you, me & Griffin that are still active here.
I'm still here, but there hasn't been much activity in this space in general.

[quozl]

I put Rocket Launching Platform up for a vote!

[A3n]

You already had my Yea, but here it is again anyway. Yea.

[Griffin]

I actually have a great scenario and map to put up. I played it a month ago with a large group at our local Tournament, and it was a HUGE success. It is based off of Craig's Taelord's Colosseum scenario. I call it, Odin's Colosseum.

I will upload it and post it if you guys are interested.

[quozl]

Oh yes! I just hope I have enough sets to make it (it sounds big!)

[Griffin]

Oh yes! I just hope I have enough sets to make it (it sounds big!)
Big, yes, but not overly consuming on terrain resources. I will likely post it tomorrow night, but I will try to get it in there in a bit.

[Griffin]

Odin's Colosseum (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=32312)

[quozl]

Odin's Colosseum (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=32312)

And we're voting on it now.

[quozl]

I noticed ET86 hasn't been on for about 3 weeks so I sent him an email. Turns out he's had a tremendously busy month at work but hopes to be back soon.

[Griffin]

I noticed ET86 hasn't been on for about 3 weeks so I sent him an email. Turns out he's had a tremendously busy month at work but hopes to be back soon.
Thanks for that. ET is a great guy, and has a lot of energy. This group needs members like that. I look forward to getting him back soon.

[quozl]

I just want to see our map group step up & start working together to create scenarios that are equally as good, from start to finish. But hey if I'm the only one in the group that feels that way then I'll shut up.



Cheers

I agree with you, A3n, about getting something for all us mapmakers to work on together.

I, for one, think that taking the Hostage Holdout scenario private was a mistake since it excluded the majority of the C3G mapmakers.

Any suggestions?

[Griffin]

I just want to see our map group step up & start working together to create scenarios that are equally as good, from start to finish. But hey if I'm the only one in the group that feels that way then I'll shut up.



Cheers

I agree with you, A3n, about getting something for all us mapmakers to work on together.

I, for one, think that taking the Hostage Holdout scenario private was a mistake since it excluded the majority of the C3G mapmakers.

Any suggestions?
I hate to sound so critical right now, but I think the mistake was our group sending the mainframe a scenario that wasn't very well polished. So my suggestion is that we start buckling down on our own process, so that anything we finish, or send to be playtested, or send to the Heroes, will be as near as perfection as we can possibly produce. If we want to create scenarios, we should know that as soon as they leave our hands, we have perfected our craft in it. If we cannot say that it is perfect, we should not push it forward.

[Hahma]

I just want to see our map group step up & start working together to create scenarios that are equally as good, from start to finish. But hey if I'm the only one in the group that feels that way then I'll shut up.



Cheers

I agree with you, A3n, about getting something for all us mapmakers to work on together.

I, for one, think that taking the Hostage Holdout scenario private was a mistake since it excluded the majority of the C3G mapmakers.

Any suggestions?
I hate to sound so critical right now, but I think the mistake was our group sending the mainframe a scenario that wasn't very well polished. So my suggestion is that we start buckling down on our own process, so that anything we finish, or send to be playtested, or send to the Heroes, will be as near as perfection as we can possibly produce. If we want to create scenarios, we should know that as soon as they leave our hands, we have perfected our craft in it. If we cannot say that it is perfect, we should not push it forward.


I agree with Griff here. In the same way we try to perfect a unit as much as possible before sending it to public playtesting, the same should go for maps/scenarios.

[A3n]

I agree with Griff here. In the same way we try to perfect a unit as much as possible before sending it to public playtesting, the same should go for maps/scenarios.
I too agree here with Griff, but from memory Griff you were a member of this group at the time too ;). We all voted it through. Probably what should have happened was that the "mainframe" should have said what was crap about it & sent it back to us to work on as a group to fix, discuss & even grow. And Griff, with your experience in scenarios you could have helped steered these discussions towards a positive outcome & not took on all the burden yourself.

The important thing is that we do learn from our mistakes in the first scenario & we move forward together as a group. We will probably make some mistakes with our next scenario also, but if we work together we will grow together in the same way the core C3G has.

Cheers

[quozl]

I agree with A3n. :)

[Griffin]

I agree with Griff here. In the same way we try to perfect a unit as much as possible before sending it to public playtesting, the same should go for maps/scenarios.
I too agree here with Griff, but from memory Griff you were a member of this group at the time too ;). We all voted it through. Probably what should have happened was that the "mainframe" should have said what was crap about it & sent it back to us to work on as a group to fix, discuss & even grow. And Griff, with your experience in scenarios you could have helped steered these discussions towards a positive outcome & not took on all the burden yourself.

The important thing is that we do learn from our mistakes in the first scenario & we move forward together as a group. We will probably make some mistakes with our next scenario also, but if we work together we will grow together in the same way the core C3G has.

Cheers
I really did try early on, but no one was listening to me. I am gonna sleep on things, but I think there are some definite changes we can make to ensure that we are becoming a tight nit family and not a red headed step child. :frustrated: :lol:

[Hahma]

I agree with Griff here. In the same way we try to perfect a unit as much as possible before sending it to public playtesting, the same should go for maps/scenarios.
I too agree here with Griff, but from memory Griff you were a member of this group at the time too ;). We all voted it through. Probably what should have happened was that the "mainframe" should have said what was crap about it & sent it back to us to work on as a group to fix, discuss & even grow. And Griff, with your experience in scenarios you could have helped steered these discussions towards a positive outcome & not took on all the burden yourself.

The important thing is that we do learn from our mistakes in the first scenario & we move forward together as a group. We will probably make some mistakes with our next scenario also, but if we work together we will grow together in the same way the core C3G has.

Cheers

I agree with A3n. :)


Yeah, this is true. The only way to learn is to make mistakes and learn from them. While I may cringe while letting my 7 year-olds do more and more things they ask to do, the only way they learn is to do it. If I do it for them because I get frustrated with them, then they won't learn to do it for themselves and I'll feel more burden by feeling like I have to do everything for them. Last thing I want is an 18 year-old that can't do laundry, cook, do housework, pick up dog poop (they wanted puppies, they are learning how to take care of them:D) or any other things that they need to know how to do. I'm not doing them any favors by doing everything for them as they grow.

[quozl]

I hope we're all learning now! :)

[IAmBatman]

I agree with both Griff and A3n here.
With Griff, let's not send work to playtesters until it's really polished.
With A3n, let's keep the mapmakers in on the entire process, rather than sending things private here. When things go private, they stop feeling like work by the whole map group and start feeling like work for just one or two Heroes.
I think scenarios should be done as public design threads from start to finish. The map makers can certainly collaborate and vote as a sub group on what to send to public designs, but let's keep them public, and let's make sure the Heroes are voting on them through every step of the process.
I think we ought to reinstall a requirement for an initial playtest beyond whatever is done by the mapmakers before it goes public. Make these things go through the design, ERB, playtesting, and final editing phases like any public design.
Hopefully these additional checks would allow these designs to feel more collaborative and at the same time keep quality high.

[quozl]

I propose that scenarios should be handled as any other public design.

[SirGalahad]

Sounds like a plan

[IAmBatman]

You have my support.

[Griffin]

I propose that scenarios should be handled as any other public design.
I am not sure exactly what this vague proposal means. I mean I could interpret that as "a single ally or sidekick that meets the required prerequisites for designing a C3G custom may receive Rewards Points and cash 15 of them in for a public design thread".

I think proposals should be much more spelled out than this, and I think that we need to discuss much more before making any proposals.

[IAmBatman]

Well, presumably he means the scenarios sent out by the map group should be put through the process in a public thread, since he doesn't have the power to make any proposals not directly involving the map department. :-)

[quozl]

Well, presumably he means the scenarios sent out by the map group should be put through the process in a public thread, since he doesn't have the power to make any proposals not directly involving the map department. :-)

Right.

[A3n]

That's Yea from me.

[Griffin]

Well, presumably he means the scenarios sent out by the map group should be put through the process in a public thread, since he doesn't have the power to make any proposals not directly involving the map department. :-)

Right.
Ahso.... yea. :)

[quozl]

...and the motion passes!

Griffin, could you please update the rules accordingly?

Also, these need to be removed from "Works in progress":

Hostage Holdout (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=30028), by EternalThanos86
Rocket Launching Platform (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?p=1189852), by Quozl

[Griffin]

Rules for Map Designs

1) Each map must have a theme that is Super Hero based.

2) Each map must have a VirtualScape file uploaded so the build instructions can be shared.

3) Each map must have a generic name that is not tied to any one set location that is specific to a comic universe.

4) Each map may use any amount of terrain from any terrain set or master set, but the map must have a list of how many sets are required to build it.

5) Each map must be defined as a Competitive Map, Casual Map, or a Scenario Map.

6) Scenario Maps may be submitted in the C3G Mainframe's Life of C3G thread, and must be playtested at least once by us first. We as a group may not submit more than one Scenario at a time, so we must agree by majority which scenario will be submitted.

To create a map design thread, start a new thread in the C3G sub-forum section and title it with the name of your map first, then place this ending on the title: C3G Map. After starting that thread, post a link here in this thread so that it can be posted on the front page.



Any ideas as to what I should put down on section number 6?

[quozl]

How's this?

6) Scenarios may be submitted by a C3G mapmaker in the C3G forum using the rules for public designs in this thread: C3G Rules (http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showpost.php?p=1066440&postcount=1359). Only one scenario may be active at a time.

[Griffin]

Check the front page under point number 6, and thanks.

[quozl]

Check the front page under point number 6, and thanks.

It's a bit more involved than I was thinking but it looks good. Thanks!

[Griffin]

Check the front page under point number 6, and thanks.

It's a bit more involved than I was thinking but it looks good. Thanks!Yeah, I think it is best for us to make sure as much of our process is spelled out fully. Which reminds me; we need to add to our rules that we NEVER release a map or scenario until we have finished the PDF and rebuilt the entire thing from start to finish just to be sure nothing was accidentally changed. I propose this.

[quozl]

Should we require that someone else build it besides the person who did the initial build?

(sort of like proofreading - a second set of eyes is much better)

[Griffin]

Should we require that someone else build it besides the person who did the initial build?

(sort of like proofreading - a second set of eyes is much better)
I don't think that is necessary or practical really. I mean we don't all have the same terrain sets so if you build a huge map that the rest of us don't have enough terrain sets for, you would be stuck until you bought me some extra sets. :p

I think that we just need to learn to trust each other, that should be good enough. When you or A3n post on your personal findings on a map, I trust you guys, and right now, us 3 pretty much are this group with the occasional vote from TableWalker.

[quozl]

I'd like to see it as a recommendation then.

Anyway, you have my yes vote!

[Griffin]

I'd like to see it as a recommendation then.

Anyway, you have my yes vote!
Good call. It would also be preferred by me as well, and it is one more aspect that will encourage us to depend on each other, which will only strengthen our group.




Been meaning to bring this up, so why not. When this idea first formed early last year (almost two years ago), the original group was called M3G (Mercenary Map Makers Guild), which had an obvious similarity to C3G but also kept it distinctly separate as well. Being "Mercenaries", we are "hired" to create maps for the C3G and we abide by own own laws created by us.

Since that first project failed, and this one started not too long after, I didn't want to be too closely associated with it and its overall failure (though they did do some really fine work). That is why I avoided the name M3G. But now, we have come into our own I think, and we deserve a real name.

So I also want to propose that we hereby call ourselves M3G.

[mad_wookiee]

WTF? When did I become inactive? I just posted about a week ago to say I'm still here.

[quozl]

So I also want to propose that we hereby call ourselves M3G.

I abstain. I guess I don't really care what we call ourselves as long as our name focuses us on what we're supposed to be doing. If the majority think M3G does that better than C3G Mapmakers, that's fine with me.

[quozl]

WTF? When did I become inactive? I just posted about a week ago to say I'm still here.

Griffin was just asking the level and frequency of commitment. If it's going to be a once a week thing, we can work with that but we just need to know. To be fair, you did miss a vote because of that. But we can change voting so they last a week if that would fit the group better.

P.S. I'm going to be unavailable the next few days. Camping time!

[Griffin]

WTF? When did I become inactive? I just posted about a week ago to say I'm still here.
I think not being around for a week, and yet saying that you were is inactive. I know that things have been somewhat slow for us lately (not too much going on), but this past week there have been a lot of discussions and votes that you were not commenting on. I think the fact that you were not active in those conversations shows me at least that you were at best temporarily inactive. I am glad you are with us though, and I will gladly move your name back to the top of the active list. I definitely want you here, and the group honestly needs you. It just wouldn't be the same without you. :)

[Griffin]

But we can change voting so they last a week if that would fit the group better.Oh boy would I be against that. :poorpost:

P.S. I'm going to be unavailable the next few days. Camping time!
Thanks for the heads up. :) So who will be your proxy then? ;)

[Griffin]

TaebleWalker let me know that his school schedule has just now opened up to allow him to be more active, so he is also with us. :up:

[mad_wookiee]

Griffin was just asking the level and frequency of commitment. If it's going to be a once a week thing, we can work with that but we just need to know. To be fair, you did miss a vote because of that. But we can change voting so they last a week if that would fit the group better.

P.S. I'm going to be unavailable the next few days. Camping time!

I think not being around for a week, and yet saying that you were is inactive. I know that things have been somewhat slow for us lately (not too much going on), but this past week there have been a lot of discussions and votes that you were not commenting on. I think the fact that you were not active in those conversations shows me at least that you were at best temporarily inactive. I am glad you are with us though, and I will gladly move your name back to the top of the active list. I definitely want you here, and the group honestly needs you. It just wouldn't be the same without you. :)
I have to be honest and say that I find these comments frustrating. You guys seem to have discussions that don't even last 12 hours. I missed one vote over the past few weeks that I know about, and that's because it didn't show on my subscriptions so by the time I knew it was happening it was over. There was a lot of discussion on the 10th about how we were going to approach scenarios. I don't honestly have a strong opinion about that so I didn't feel as though I had anything to add. It was also over in about 4 hours, so when I read it on the 11th there wasn't really an opportunity to add anything anyway.

I'm not necessarily saying that the pace needs to slow down. But I am asking if there's space for those of us who have more limited opportunities to contribute to the discussion. This particular conversation is a great case in point. I read this thread Thursday afternoon, but other commitments prevented me from being able to sit down and respond until today. That's the way it is when you've got 4 kids who are active - I can't even begin to think about getting into a discussion until about 11pm on weekdays because I don't get that kind of time until everyone else is asleep.

To me that's not inactive - it's about not having the kind of space to allow the kind of participation that some of you guys can do. I don't have a problem with that - I'm ok with catching up on the discussion as I'm able, as long as the group is ok with that too. For my part, I'll be more proactive about subscribing to the individual map threads so that I can stay up on what's happening in each of them and catch up as I'm able.

[quozl]

We currently have 48 hour voting periods. What time period would better suit you?

[mad_wookiee]

We currently have 48 hour voting periods. What time period would better suit you?
I think that's fine as long as all votes are noted here. For example, one vote that I found last night after I posted this was for an additional member for the group buried in one of the map discussion threads. That's not an appropriate place for those votes imho. I'd like to propose that all votes be taken in the C3G Map Discussion thread (ie, this one) so that stuff that needs a decision from the group can happen expediently.

[quozl]

I'd like to propose that all votes be taken in the C3G Map Discussion thread (ie, this one) so that stuff that needs a decision from the group can happen expediently.

I vote YEA if modified that the vote should either be in this thread or linked to from this thread.

That should help keep this a central location so that important things do not get missed.

[IAmBatman]

Yeah, I thought that buried vote thing was a bad idea at the time ... :-P

[mad_wookiee]

I'd like to propose that all votes be taken in the C3G Map Discussion thread (ie, this one) so that stuff that needs a decision from the group can happen expediently.

I vote YEA if modified that the vote should either be in this thread or linked to from this thread.

That should help keep this a central location so that important things do not get missed.
I'm fine with that. I do think that the only votes that should take place in discussion threads for specific maps are those pertaining to those maps.

Altered proposal:
All votes should be taken in the C3G Map Discussion thread, except for those pertaining to specific maps, which should take place in the map's individual thread with a notification posted in the C3G Map Discussion thread.

[quozl]

Yeah, Griff messed up with that one vote. In fact, I don't think anyone voted on it.

Anyway, I like your modified proposal. I vote YEA.

[A3n]

Yea

[Taeblewalker]

Yea

[Griffin]

Yea

[Griffin]

I am gonna be recovering from some sleep deprivation for the next few days, and I need Mad Wookie to cover for me and vote for me while I am gone. I plan on being back on Thursday night. Thanks. :)

[quozl]

Ok, so all 3 proposals passed (the first two due to time):

1. We need to add to our rules that we never release a map or scenario until we have finished the PDF and rebuilt the entire thing from start to finish just to be sure nothing was accidentally changed. It is recommended this be someone other than the person who first built the map.

2. We will call ourselves M3G (Mercenary Map Makers Guild).

3. All votes should be taken in the C3G Map Discussion thread, except for those pertaining to specific maps, which should take place in the map's individual thread with a notification posted in the C3G Map Discussion thread.

[IAmBatman]

Personally, I find the M3G thing a bit silly, as that was a failed group and C3G has been a smash success, but whatever you guys need to make the work easier. :-P