Actually, scratch that. New idea.ah yes the "we used to do this back in 2009" new idea
Loved as it is currently known, is renamed to Approved. Approved maps follow the SP/favourites criteria outlined earlier - you meet them, you get in. No questions asked.
so marathons will be called marathons or what and just rankedGuess we'll need to provision for them in the RC, yeah. Another topic entirely I think. Failing that, we can just also make special exceptions for Marathon maps.
and approved maps are just that approved via a process
What if the mapper is inactive or has left the game?I don't see issue here because if mapper had posted his map on the forums it already belongs to the community in some way. If community loves map and wants to see a leaderboard on specific mapset, mapper is not obliged to actively participate in this process.
This poses a conundrum. What if a mapper does not consent to having their map deemed "complete" enough to have a scoreboard? What if they do not or never intended the map to have one in the first place?
At what point do we assume the mapper's intentions for the map in this process? Is this something we should consider at all?
I have no answers for these questions. It is a complicated topic, and we have deliberately erred away from adding very dated maps from the most part after this issue was raised VERY early on in the community voting for the first round of Loved.
There are maps that I would love to see in the category, but with their creative directors long vanished from the game (Larto is a good example of this), often times with unclear intent for their creations that are left behind, it will likely remain a very difficult issue to resolve fully.
Time to tidy this up, I think.When Rezoons Jump training maps then?
The general consensus seems to be that the expectation for the category is to unequivocally support maps that are highly appreciated by the community. By large, it appears that most people do not endorse the ability for mappers to contribute a majority share of the SP requirement via their own kudosu (though people from the modding community do support this as it obviously empowers them).
It also appears that there is large support for a return to the community-based voting to determine at least a nominal number of Loved maps to enter the pool.
I think we can address this by implementing the mode-specific scaling SP/favourites requirement as listed in this post while also imposing a hard limit on the amount of SP that can be contributed by any one user - perhaps something to the order of no greater than a third of total contribution towards the base SP cap. We'll also start holding votes for older maps with inactive or uninvolved mappers that have widespread community support, though the number of maps this will introduce per month will be very limited (2-3) to start with.
Over the years, a common complaint with the ranking cycle has been that it is fairly restricted for most people [...] especially if it tailors to a distinctive audience, or seeks to attempt gameplay paradigms that are not allowed by the current Ranking Criteria.So we define "Loved" as attempting to highlight and immortalize maps that deserve attention or are cult classics, but explicitly do not and will not fit the criteria to be ranked. So, what's the best way to accomplish this task while avoiding pitfalls, explits, and controversy such as:
we're involving sp because it's actually worthless otherwise [...] the loved section is supposed to be about the community (which is mostly players), not mappers.Couldn't agree more. That seems to be the case as to why kudosu is involved - because the staff have failed to incentivize modding properly, so the reward for modding is being shoehorned into this system, to the system's explicit detriment and abuse.
[the modders] make the maps for you to play and they know more about mapping than the communityDo they know more about fun than the community, or do they know more about rules?
Why are the people who focus on making something rankable whether it is fun or not getting an undue say on literally the exact opposite type of mapping category?
Ephemeral wrote:I'm not sure I can get behind the idea of removing SP qualification from the system entirely - the modding community should have some sort of investment in the system themselves given the work they both undertake to make it a thing in the first place.
chainpullz wrote:The modding community works to make the ranked section a thing. If a map is getting heavily modded it should be getting ranked not loved.