Wargrounds of Scape (WoS) - discussion thread

[OEAO]

I appreciate the suggestion, Rÿchean, and I hope you’ll indulge me in a fairly lengthy response in the interest of being transparent and thorough.

Rule 4

Rule 4 is, once again, not mandatory. We want to hear what people think. If someone else has an issue with a map, it helps us when testing that map (or when deciding whether to test the map). For example, if multiple people say "podding on this map is too strong" (see the feedback on Odin Wept), that is very helpful feedback, and we would take it into account. Notably, Odin Wept hasn't been nominated, and I don't expect it would make it through in its current version, in large part due to the problematic podding on the map.

Why does it only apply to mapmakers? We don't want this to be treated like SoV, where only mapmakers are nominating their own maps. Rather, we ENCOURAGE tournament attendees who really like a map to nominate that map. Personally, I don't want to add any more hoops for the average attendee who enjoys a map enough to where they go out of their way to nominate it here. And in fact, as superfrog said, someone else nominating a map is effectively per se evidence that people like the map.

Judges Nominating Maps

As for sitting judges nominating maps, I think it's worth discussing a few things.

As a threshold note, the BoV's rules did not forbid a judge from nominating a map. Nor did they forbid a judge from voting on a map that they nominated. Now, I don't care enough to comb through that thread to see how often a judge voted on a map that they nominated, but for the following reasons, I don't view it as problematic here.

First, ignoring my BoV nominations (which really should not count towards this analysis, as it was our collective desire to re-review the BoV catalogue as our first step in the Revival), there have been 42 nominations (again, post-BoV nominations; I'm not looking at the maps that were reviewed pre-2021, as there was almost an entirely different panel of judges during the first iteration of the WoS). Of these 42 maps, I have nominated 6 maps. One other judge, superfrog, nominated 1 map, although this one does not count for the purposes of this discussion.*

The important thing to note about each of these 6 maps is that they were used at GenCon or ScapeCon. Maps at GenCon/ScapeCon have traditionally received an extreme amount of scrutiny over the course of the weekend. I've heard personally from people about their enjoyment of each of those 6 maps- which is precisely the feedback I'm looking for when considering a map for WoS.

Second, I would invite people to once again consider the goal of the WoS: to curate a collection of the best maps. My job as a judge is to acknowledge when a map deserves to be inducted by upvoting deserving maps.

However, I don't view this as inconsistent with my role as a player. As a player, I can acknowledge when a map should be nominated without it interfering with my duty as a judge to upvote maps that deserve to be inducted. These are two separate and independent functions.

And beyond the theoretical question of whether it is proper for a judge to both nominate and vote to induct the same map, we can examine the practical effects of a rule proscribing such conduct. There are only two instances in which this would make a material difference.

First and most obviously, if a judge nominates a map, upvotes it, and is the only judge to vote on said map, then the map would be inducted on the say of only the nominating judge. I agree that this would be a terrible outcome. However, I'm sure dok would say, "If that happens, then the WoS has much bigger issues," as he said during a debate on the timer. And he'd be 100% correct.

The second and only realistic scenario is in the instance in which a map passes in a 3-1 vote, with the nominating judge upvoting the map.** In this instance, the nominating judge would also effectively be the deciding vote. However, would the fact that the judge nominated the map have any bearing on the final vote? Should a judge not nominate a map that may only pass 3-1? Should a map that may only pass 3-1 not be nominated by anyone?

For all practical purposes, our voting process comes down to whether a map receives 2 downvotes. If a map receives 2 downvotes, it fails. If a map doesn't receive 2 downvotes, it will almost certainly pass.


*I know that someone else was going to nominate Wingspan; superfrog just beat them to the punch. For this reason, along with superfrog receiving extensive feedback from ScapeCon attendees, I view his nomination as completely proper. And the other part of the complaint (that a judge should not be able to vote on a map that they nominated) is irrelevant for Wingspan, as superfrog cannot vote on his own map.

**Battlefield 23 is the only map to pass 3-1, and it was not nominated by a judge.

[caps]

Why does it only apply to mapmakers? We don't want this to be treated like SoV, where only mapmakers are nominating their own maps. Rather, we ENCOURAGE tournament attendees who really like a map to nominate that map.

Side note, but in the beginning this was the main purpose of SoV as well. SoV's intentions haven't changed, but the way people interact with it has. You're saying the same thing for WoS but I see the community approaching it the same way they do SoV.

[Sheep]

To be fair to tournament attendees, I think the majority of them attend events with the idea that map reviewing is not one of their responsibilities.

At least that’s my observation and assumption over many years of having my own maps used at numerous events across the country and getting little to no feedback on them.

[OEAO]

Originally Posted by caps

Side note, but in the beginning this was the main purpose of SoV as well. SoV's intentions haven't changed, but the way people interact with it has. You're saying the same thing for WoS but I see the community approaching it the same way they do SoV.

I appreciate the historical perspective on SoV- I wasn’t aware that’s how it began.

I think the community is doing a good job overall here. On a cursory count, of the 42 maps, I believe 12 were nominated by the mapmaker. We don’t want to completely bar a mapmaker from nominating their own map, and I think this number is pretty reasonable so far. I really appreciate the players like Vegie who have come in here and nominated maps that they thought deserved consideration.

[Leaf_It]

I will say that as a map maker, I don't think that most of my maps will ever be good enough to get into the WoS, but I definitely have the WoS in mind. If any of my maps get played at enough Tournaments, I will be nominating them in here. I will follow whatever rules you have, and I will ask for feedback in the Tournament Map Feedback Thread, but if possible, I will submit them here. I think this the way most people will look at this. It is just the nature of people to be more aware of the usage of their own creations than anyone else's, so they are far more likely to submit their own maps.

[Typhon2222]

Good people, I'd like to nominate my own revised Song of the Walrus.

The original was used at GenCon 2014. Feedback from the event, and from others subsequently, reported that it was too easily clogged, and too flat on top.

This revised version addresses those concerns. It has been widened, and the hive/big glacier bumped outward, to reduce clogging. There's also dynamic height in the middle now, and much more room for maneuvering.

Since revision, it has seen use at three tournaments (big thanks to the organizers):
Utah Monthly July 2022 (07/30/2022)
Eastern Ohio Tournament (10/8/2022)
Utah Monthly October 2022 (10/29/2022)

I believe the map stands out in its terrain requirements, as there are only two maps in the WoS so far which feature tundra (Platypus and Draugur), and none which pair it with only a single master set and nothing else.

Thank you for your consideration.


Song of the Walrus Download PDF
Uses: 1 SotM, 1 TT
Board for online play

[Flash_19]

Thanks for the submission @Typhon2222 ! I'm looking forward to trying the new version!

[Sir Heroscape]

I like to submit Slated!

Slated is a very unique design, using 5 sets...a combo that has never been used before in a competitive tournament map (that I know of), and I think it remains restrained but still quite dynamic in the games it produces.

Slated
Sets: BftU X2, RttFF, TJ, VW


Used in:
Peoria Monthly - Sep 2022
MO NHSD - Do the Krug 2022

[Flash_19]

Originally Posted by Sir Heroscape

I like to submit Slated!

Slated is a very unique design, using 5 sets...a combo that has never been used before in a competitive tournament map (that I know of), and I think it remains restrained but still quite dynamic in the games it produces.

Slated
Sets: BftU X2, RttFF, TJ, VW


Used in:
Peoria Monthly - Sep 2022
MO NHSD - Do the Krug 2022

I'd love to know if you've received any feedback on the current version of the map from people who played it at those tournaments, and particularly if any of that feedback has addressed the pull to the right out of the startzone.

[Sir Heroscape]

I have not received any feedback, no.

[OEAO]

Royal Gardens: This is a good, and very attractive, map. As is standard for a Flash map, the height is really well placed. All three level 4 spaces on each side are placed extremely well. I also love the five hexes of level 3 off to each side that is not attached to the rest of the level 3- that placement is excellent, and it led to some interesting decisions. I also really like that Flash covered some of the wall walk spaces- I don't really like double-wide roads (they're not necessarily problematic, but they tend to separate height further than it needs to be without adding any real interest).

However, I have a few critiques that really boil down to one main critique: the map feels small- really small. I think I like it a bit more than Blackridge overall (another of Flash's maps with the same sets), although that also plays like a very small board. I'm not saying it needs to be made bigger in actuality- just in feel.

Because it's so small, the number of LoS blockers feels restrictive. This is a classic early Flash map- I could've told you just by looking at it that this was a 2018 Flash map. It doesn't really choke up (except at the one-hex large ruin chokepoint, which I did not like), but it's a bit tight. It could be opened up a bit more.

The other thing that makes it feel so small is the relative lack of height. While I love the placement of the level 4 height, there just isn't quite enough of it. This map leaves 7 7-hexers in the box, and it over-supports numerous tiles on levels 2 and 3. The 7s could easily rescue the 4 level 3 grass 3s.

I'd start by removing a few pillars (especially the one that creates the large ruin chokepoint), freeing up some flexible (non-7 hex) tiles, and adding a bit more height. This is a good map, but it just isn't quite ready for WoS. NO to induct.

[Sheep]

I'd like to submit a map of my own... Yngvild Pass.


Requires: 1 RotV and 1 TT
.PDF Download

In general, Thalenk Tundra has been an historically hard terrain set to utilize. RotV + TT in particular has not often provided much cartographic success. The LoS blockers can be useful for an RotV, but with 26 single hexes and 10 2-hexes already (more 1- and 2-hexes than SotM and BftU combined), the RotV master set is rarely in need of 12 more of each.

The best RotV + TT of the BoV era resulted in Artic Divide, Sidewinder, and if you discount four trees stolen from RttFF, Ice Blossom - none of which made the transition to WoS. But that doesn't mean 1MS + TT hasn't had success. Nearing the end of the BoV era, Draugur, a map using 1 BftU + 2 TT, was inducted.

Draugur features what is essentially a large Level 2 platform with six Level 3 sections of height separated by glaciers. 2 of those Level 3 sections are 2-hexes placed on the outskirts adjacent to each glyph.

In the first go of WoS, a similar map was inducted: Platypus, featuring 1 SotM + 1 TT + 1 TJ. This map has the same features as Draugur, but with more "runway" on the central Level 3 heights. Both of these maps are inducted into WoS already.

That brings us to Yngvild Pass. Bringing the evolution of Cartography full circle, Yngvild Pass takes a difficult terrain set that resulted in the likes of Artic Divide and Sidewinder during the BoV era and instead of looking at the failures of 1 RotV + 1 TT for inspiration, looks to the success of other 1MS + TT maps to replicate that success in its own RotV way.

Event Usage

Spoiler Alert!

Eastern Ohio - October 2022
Oregon - October 2022
Omaha - October 2022

I was pretty sure it was used at either Peoria or Utah but I can't find it. It is being used later this month in Utah though.

Beyond the event appearances, I've played numerous private games with a multitude of members within the community. This is where the majority of the feedback I got took place, and it was majorly positive. The only thing beyond a more efficient base layer that has changed since the map was officially posted to HSers in August has been that the Treasure Glyphs were rotated one space counter-clockwise. Like its inspirations, each feature on Yngvild Pass consistently provides tremendous gameplay and strategic options.

Thank you all for your consideration!