November Map Pack Ready For Consumption
Quote from youme on November 20, 2007, 5:09 pmThis map pack has had its voting finished, voting will start for the next contest eventually and an apropirate thread will apear then.
On the topic of voting, can I suggest 'voting forms'? everyone that votes has to give a 0-10 rating of each map in the contest. Just a bit fairer that way imo
This map pack has had its voting finished, voting will start for the next contest eventually and an apropirate thread will apear then.
On the topic of voting, can I suggest 'voting forms'? everyone that votes has to give a 0-10 rating of each map in the contest. Just a bit fairer that way imo
Quote from Bulska on November 20, 2007, 5:31 pmgood idea, the map with the highest average rating would win if so.
good idea, the map with the highest average rating would win if so.
Quote from Hober on November 20, 2007, 5:43 pmyoume wrote:On the topic of voting, can I suggest 'voting forms'? everyone that votes has to give a 0-10 rating of each map in the contest. Just a bit fairer that way imoTwo problems with this: the first is that there is no code for this, currently. The poll method is already implemented and bug-free. I could try writing in Python or Java, the two languages I am proficient with, but neither would do the job. Msleeper might be able to do it, but it would require a shitton of work on his part.
The statistics behind this thing is super-squirrely. I just read a blog post on the intranet at my Corp, which I wish I could reproduce here, about it in reference to this type of tabulation method. Basically, there's the idea in any voting, A candidate x should not be harmed [i.e., change from being a winner to a loser] if x is raised on some ballots without changing the orders of the other candidates. In other words, a candidate should not be made to lose by getting more votes.
I know this sounds illogical, but it isn't, it's just counter-intuitive. There's a bit of description here, under the Instant Runoff section. It's pretty fascinating if I do say so myself.
Two problems with this: the first is that there is no code for this, currently. The poll method is already implemented and bug-free. I could try writing in Python or Java, the two languages I am proficient with, but neither would do the job. Msleeper might be able to do it, but it would require a shitton of work on his part.
The statistics behind this thing is super-squirrely. I just read a blog post on the intranet at my Corp, which I wish I could reproduce here, about it in reference to this type of tabulation method. Basically, there's the idea in any voting, A candidate x should not be harmed [i.e., change from being a winner to a loser] if x is raised on some ballots without changing the orders of the other candidates. In other words, a candidate should not be made to lose by getting more votes.
I know this sounds illogical, but it isn't, it's just counter-intuitive. There's a bit of description here, under the Instant Runoff section. It's pretty fascinating if I do say so myself.
Quote from MrTwoVideoCards on November 25, 2007, 10:48 amThe maps in here weren't all that bad, decent brush work, good use of creativity, and alot more. However they were frustrating, and at times, had hardly any solid hinting or anything to give the player a real head advantage.
Another thing was the ball and chain, i manged to break that by leaving a portal in a far away room, and once closed the crane was stuck. However aside of that, the other three maps where good, and were well made. The lighting however was off, and way too white half of the time.
But its a good start, and i hope to see more like this.
The maps in here weren't all that bad, decent brush work, good use of creativity, and alot more. However they were frustrating, and at times, had hardly any solid hinting or anything to give the player a real head advantage.
Another thing was the ball and chain, i manged to break that by leaving a portal in a far away room, and once closed the crane was stuck. However aside of that, the other three maps where good, and were well made. The lighting however was off, and way too white half of the time.
But its a good start, and i hope to see more like this.