If you are going to vote, please do it based on whose map you actually prefer, not based on who made it :)

I never said that :) I just stated that you were nominated again, and the majority of your maps are decent! Therefore you will most likely win, tho JK's map is decent and might have another chance later

While the name is fitting, and it looks ugly, it IS alot of fun to play, with some quirky strategy if played in multi attack. RECOMMEND

Free JKs map!!!!...

the majority of your maps are decent!

I agree . . .

but . . .

this week . . .

kidney stones? hrrrmmmm

https://www.warzone.com/SinglePlayer?PreviewMap=94695

You are talking about the 7th highest rated map on Warzone :P

I love krinid's malicious smile in his pfp.

You are talking about the 7th highest rated map on Warzone :P

I thought you were joking . . . I looked . . . it's true!

How is this so?! That map is creepy!

My first thought was that it's a small sample size, only 11 ... but the maps rated higher only have 20-34 ratings, still not large sample sizes either.

Imho, Haunted Mansion, Romania, Cologne, Serbia, Zimbabwe, Old Kingdom are in a different class of their own. Scrabble has its niche use as well. Haven't played the Python one tbh ... assuming you used to be w/Python when you made that? (Note that there is no mention of any washing machines, we don't need to talk about that).

Why does no one read map descriptions istg

It was part of the fundraiser, commissioned by Beep Beep (who is in Python)

And yes, it's 99% the sample size, when the map gets to 20-34 ratings it will probably not even be top 100 on the game

That being said, I don't mind bragging about it until it does :D

There's just not enough people rating maps left, and as a result the map rating system is completely out of whack.
None of the top ten maps have more than 75 ratings (and all made in the last year - not a coincidence either).
Compare that to old-time classics (Europe, Rise of Rome) with close to 4000 ratings.

It's OK that every new map will be at the top for a short while. It's not hard to gather ten friends to give a map a 5-star rating. If there'd be enough people rating maps, new maps would quickly drop to a realistic rating.

But if those ten friends are the only people rating the map, the rating will stay ridiculously high.

Not saying that to throw shade at the Kidney Stones - just that most people probably wouldn't rate it has the seventh best map on the site.

Edited 5/9/2021 18:01:32

(removed)

Edited 5/9/2021 18:07:20

@Murk: The rating system is broken anyway, since every map that is in a SP level will get 1 star reviews cause newbies confuse map with level, and say things like "the ai's are way too strong" as feedback on the map. This already gives any map not in a SP level a major advantage.

@RWP: Mapes with less than 30 territories were published before the map requirements were added

The rating system is broken anyway, since every map that is in a SP level will get 1 star reviews cause newbies confuse map with level, and say things like "the ai's are way too strong" as feedback on the map. This already gives any map not in a SP level a major advantage.

Yeah, absolutely true. A map getting into the single player "campaign" is a death sentence for its rating.
Even popular custom single player games can do a bad number on the ratings.

Still, this would also be mitigated by more ratings. If every map had 1000+ ratings it would be much less affected by arbitrary 1- or 5-star ratings.

I'm not sure why the number of players rating maps has gone down so drastically. Maybe because quickmatch and the mobile app (and the consequent disappearance of the real-time lobby) is less open to trying out new maps?

Edited 5/9/2021 18:12:43

True, JK ... there are far too many reviews that talk about the AI, cards used, taking too long to finish, etc.

Yeah, its probably cause more games than ever are made using the 7 first QM templates.

There is just very little variety in maps, and if i even play on a new map i often forget to rate it.

Maybe Fizzer should just nudge players into ranking more maps (but not from SP levels, cause that always goes wrong!). Maybe make the rate map button flashing if the map hasn't been rated yet and the player meets some criteria (like high enough level to know the difference between a map and a level).

True, JK ... there are far too many reviews that talk about the AI, cards used, taking too long to finish, etc.

Maybe there should be a system where the community can remove some reviews (and the ratings associated with it) if its clearly not about the map but about the settings of a game.

The same way that downvotes on a forum post hides the forum.

I think the main reason the amount of people rating maps has gone down is because it's kind of a pain in the ass to rate maps on mobile, especially if you play on new maps often. There really should be a feature to rate maps within the app, most people can't be bothered having to load up the browser every time they want to leave a quick rating or review.

Plus, I agree that the rate map button is kind of obscure, I never even noticed it until I got into mapmaking. It really should be flashing or highlighted every time you finish a game on a map that you haven't rated.

And actually, I just went and tested the mobile rating system and got this error... https://gyazo.com/345900f104b5170b76f254adfe4a659f

I think Fizzer implemented rating maps as UJS now, which would make it possible to rate maps on mobile.

Make sure your app is update, i will try to test this as well.

Ah, I recently turned off auto updates for apps and didn't realize I didn't have the update. Kinda feel dumb now.

But yeah the point about the rate map button being out of the way stands.

looks like Fizzer overhauled the map pages as well:

I wonder why he added so much empty space to the left and the right, seems like he just copy pasted the code for phones and tablets.