Hmm since nobody has yet, let me propose a scoring system for maps: (this is not official, just a suggestion)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Map RatingGameplay (60 points + 5 bonus points)
(1) 1. Originality (15 points)
(2) 2. Easiness to Play (10 points)
(3) 3. "Fun Factor" (20 points)
(4) 4. Map-Specific (15 points)
(5) 5. Atmoshpere (5 point bonus)
Technical - Triggers (40 points + 5 bonus points)
(6) 1. Complexity (20 points)
(7) 2. Efficiency (15 points)
(8) 3. Neat/Organized (5 points)
(9) 4. Groundbreak (5 point bonus)
Technical - Units (25 points)
(10) 1. Unit Names (15 points)
(11) 2. Unit Placement (10 points)
Technical - General (50 points)
(12) 1. Terrain (25 points)
(13) 2. Bug-Free (15 points)
(14) 3. Proper Use of Sound (10 points)
TOTAL ---------- (175 points + 10 bonus points)NOTES:
(1) How original the map is. If someone ripped off another map or didn'e even start from scratch, they will get a low score. New ideas in map will score high.
(2) How easy the game is to play. If the judge looks at your map and goes HUH? what do I do? then you will get a low score. Tips and HowTos are good for scoring high here.
(3) How much fun your map is. Purely a judge opinon, but the fun factor exists. A map can be complex, but not as much fun.
(4) Specific to the map type. Can be balance for defenses, RPGs, madnesses, etc; difficulty for bounds, etc. etc. etc.
(5) Your map will gain bonus points if it creates a proper atmosphere. As with all bonuses, it is hard to achieve. A good example of a map getting 5/0 here would be House of the Haunted by (U)Bolt_Head. (see the DLDB to look at the map).
(6) The complexity of your triggers. If you incorporate advanced trigger systems, you will score high. A map with few triggers or very simple triggers will score low.
(7) How efficient your triggers are. If you have unneccesary actions, conditions, or triggers, you will be marked down.
(8) How organized your triggers are. A mass of uncommented hard-to-follow triggers will get a 0 or a 1. Keep them organized!
(9) If you invent or discover a new trick and incorporate it into your map, you will get bonus points.
This will not make up for other categories. For example, a test map of BeeR_KeG[eM]'s Accuracy Bullet System submitted by him would get a bonus, but not score highly elsewhere. His snipers map, however, which uses it, would be a good way to get the bonus points without harming other scores.
(10) How neat you unit names are. If you have messy overlapping or missing capital or misspellings, you will get marked down. It may seem like nitpicking, but it can seriously detract from your map.
(11) How neat your unit placement is. "Unit Unplaceable"s at start of map are a fast way to lose points. Other placement that looks sloppy or uncoordinated in the map will also detract from this score.
(12) Your terrain. A judge's opinion of how good a job you did with your terrain.
(13) You map should not have any glitches or problems. If it does, you will loose points here, and probabally elsewhere, too.
(14) The best score here is achieved by use of sound subtly and cleverly to create a mood. Crude sounds will loose points as will no sound if the judges thinks there should be.
Playing rock music as beckground to a bound will not score too highly here.Each of the 5 judges will rate the map in each category and submit a report to the bookkeeper with the map name, author, and ratings. The bookkeeper will then average each seperate score (rounding decimals to 1 place, .X5 up) and add them to come up with a final score out of 175.
Maps will be ranked by final score. In the rankings, a detailed report of each judges score in each category and the average, and the totals will be provided.
^ ^The above text up to the line of --'s may be reproduced and reposted if this rating system is adapted.^ ^
I hereby volunteer to be bookkeeper.
So, what do you think? Can we use it?
Damn if this post was elsewhere I would have gotten 16 minerals
