Wargrounds of Scape (WoS) - discussion thread

[GameBear]

Originally Posted by Sir Heroscape

I don’t buy that it takes 6 months for judges to decide if a map is even worth testing.

Originally Posted by Grey Waves

.. the time limit was ... not to fail maps that didn't gain enough attention from the judges.

I'm not sure these statements match what superfrog and OEAO wrote:

Originally Posted by superfrog

I know other judges were feeling like they could have used more time to decide on the map ..

Originally Posted by OEAO

Several of us are still deciding how- or if- to vote.

These posts suggest to me that Savage Corridor has been getting attention, and has been tested by at least some of the judges. I read these posts as saying the judges are trying to decide whether to vote 'yes' or 'no', not trying to decide whether to test in the first place.

In other words, Savage Corridor is somewhere between a clear 'yes' and a clear 'no'. I imagine reviews of maps in that range might be the hardest for judges to write.

Originally Posted by Grey Waves

Something worth considering is that if a map fails due to the time limit rather than the judges' votes, then the creator of the map is not going to get any useful feedback about how the map could be improved.

This is true. As a mapmaker, I always valued the feedback provided by reviews, positive or negative. At the same time, judges may feel additional pressure to write something thoughtful when voting, for this reason. Trying to put into words why a map falls short (rather than just writing "meh") can be a challenge. I've received "meh" votes before; I appreciate when judges take the time to provide additional feedback.

It's also possible that judges on the fence are waiting to see if other judges feel more strongly about the map, before writing a lackuster review. This, too, seems like an acceptable approach, and potentially leads to more constructive feedback for the mapmaker.

I would not have any objection to a judge voting 'no' on a map they weren't enthusiastic about. With the timeout in place, maybe a "no" vote at the deadline from judges on the fence (with a simple "I wasn't enthusiastic enough about this map to vote yes" review) would be more satisfying than a timeout for mapmakers? With or without an explicit deadline vote, the implication is the same:

Originally Posted by OEAO

If we were enthusiastically in support of it, we presumably would have already voted. If it times out, that’s a pretty decent indication of our opinions.