Right now, no map gets rejected. The creator just has to do a lot of work for it to be added. The problem with this system is that any map can pass through, including some pretty, well, bad maps. Recently, this has started happening a lot with both visually bad maps and maps that are really just horrendous in general. (cough cough amogus map cough cough)
The system shouldn’t be too selective, but basically if a map is really bad in a way, it could be rejected with a reason, and then the creator can just edit the submission/build and reply for another chance.
This seems VERY one sided yems, are you sure you didnt mean to post this in #not:suggestions:zombies
Maps need to have a list of items before being published, and it is very annoying to make that list. I dont think its good to say no to someone after they work hard to make the list
Also, there are aton of bad maps back then, so it would require removing them too like Shadows Descent (that one that people only like cuz DP, has lava pool at the bottom).
I partly agree with this suggestion. If a map has things that go against the rules, it would be banned. But as to my knowledge, no one did something like that, so it could be a rule that we never used, like an unwritten rule.
While map submissions aren’t usually outright rejected, there is a pseudo-rejection process during its development.
For example, before the #pending stage, other people may give input on the map and I may also request changes if necessary. During the #in-progress stage and before publishing, Map Testers or me may request additional changes if necessary.
If the changes requested in the pending stage aren’t met within 2 weeks, it will be closed for inactivity. Alternatively the map creator can give a good reason as to why it shouldn’t be met.
However, there’s currently no time limit for the in-progress stage. Though in the future I’d imagine a 1-2month time limit before it’s closed for inactivity.
(please keep the topic open, I’d like to have a discussion regarding the suggestion flowing)
While yes, yems might have a bias towards your map, it clearly is (whilst a little better than the others) another example of the very large amount of new amateur maps constantly being added as of recently.
When discussing this suggestion with yems, I told him about a system where a sort of Zombies Creative Team can rebuild the submitted map to meet lacking quality standards (this seems to have been discussed earlier before). This includes both visual and structural (map shape) improvements, although the breakdown is on the builder (this is until it gets published, but zm can already tweak balancing on abandoned maps).
The problem with this is that the workload is still on the builder and there is no checklist concerning the standards (lack of a checklist might have testers’ ideas and standards clash). I suppose this could be countered with “I permit/do not permit unauthorised changes to the structure and visual aspects of my map” or something in the likes of that in the submission format.
I’d still like any sort of outright rejection for maps. Anyone who is now a regular on the server can come up with a breakdown, even if it is a difficult process for some, and create a map regardless of their experience and building proficiency.
Maps that are not suitable for the general user base are just marked as vote only. A map could easily be put into this category without rejecting it. Some older maps have already been moved to this category.
Wouldn’t this be detrimental for the ones whom had made the map? To have their efforts be cast away, especially since a map is such a new and fantastic concept to them, could deter them from possible contributions to the map pool in the future.
The maps should be improved, not left behind. With this in mind, moving maps should carry more importance and regulations. The map creator must work hard to make their map to have sufficient quality so that it is equal in quality to the maps of the past couple years. Having a team to support this process would exponentially improve the quality and volume of the map pool.
Not really. If a map is put into vote only the map creator is given a reason if they want to make changes for it to be in the normal map pool. Some maps are made knowing it will be vote only anyway.