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.