Moderator: Community Team

yeti_c wrote:Came across this website the other day...
http://www.playriskonline.net/
I didn't realise there were so many other risk sites out there...
C.
Woodruff wrote: I mean, seriously...7 maps gets a 77 rating while our tremendous number of maps gets an 81?

What part of "7 high quality maps vs 163 maps with 60 high quality maps" do you not understand?mibi wrote:Are you aware that the top map makers on ConquerClub, who have produced most of CC's awesome maps, have all gone to MajorCommand. I think you are over-valuing quantity over quality.Woodruff wrote: I mean, seriously...7 maps gets a 77 rating while our tremendous number of maps gets an 81?
I guess the part about the people who made the 60 high quality maps now make maps at MajorCommand instead.Woodruff wrote:What part of "7 high quality maps vs 163 maps with 60 high quality maps" do you not understand?mibi wrote:Are you aware that the top map makers on ConquerClub, who have produced most of CC's awesome maps, have all gone to MajorCommand. I think you are over-valuing quantity over quality.Woodruff wrote: I mean, seriously...7 maps gets a 77 rating while our tremendous number of maps gets an 81?
Which is fine...but a rating based on future promise instead of reality? Never mind the other ratings, which appear to me to be just as thin as far as rationale goes. As I said...I strongly suspect the individual in charge of the ratings site is also closely affiliated with MajorCommand.mibi wrote:I guess the part about the people who made the 60 high quality maps now make maps at MajorCommand instead.Woodruff wrote:What part of "7 high quality maps vs 163 maps with 60 high quality maps" do you not understand?mibi wrote:Are you aware that the top map makers on ConquerClub, who have produced most of CC's awesome maps, have all gone to MajorCommand. I think you are over-valuing quantity over quality.Woodruff wrote: I mean, seriously...7 maps gets a 77 rating while our tremendous number of maps gets an 81?
I agree with youzel x3Woodruff wrote:Which is fine...but a rating based on future promise instead of reality? Never mind the other ratings, which appear to me to be just as thin as far as rationale goes. As I said...I strongly suspect the individual in charge of the ratings site is also closely affiliated with MajorCommand.mibi wrote:I guess the part about the people who made the 60 high quality maps now make maps at MajorCommand instead.Woodruff wrote:What part of "7 high quality maps vs 163 maps with 60 high quality maps" do you not understand?mibi wrote:Are you aware that the top map makers on ConquerClub, who have produced most of CC's awesome maps, have all gone to MajorCommand. I think you are over-valuing quantity over quality.Woodruff wrote: I mean, seriously...7 maps gets a 77 rating while our tremendous number of maps gets an 81?
Skoffin wrote: So um.. er... I'll be honest, I don't know what the f*ck to do from here. Goddamnit chu.
Seriously. I made an account at major command just to check it out. Haven't gotten the confirmation email yet, not exactly impressed with it so far.Woodruff wrote:That appears to me to be one big old commercial for MajorCommand.Com. I mean, seriously...7 maps gets a 77 rating while our tremendous number of maps gets an 81?yeti_c wrote:Came across this website the other day...
http://www.playriskonline.net/
I didn't realise there were so many other risk sites out there...
C.
In truth, I strongly suspect that the individual that created the playriskonline site is the same one that developed MajorCommand.Com.

There have been some maps i quite enjoy that came out recently. The napoleon map, Runification Italy and Germany are some very cool maps.porkenbeans wrote:I agree that, like in all things, map makers do hone their skills, and do get better with time. But, to truly call yourself a "good" Map Maker, you must first have artistic talent. I am afraid that the so called "top" talent these days at CC, with a few exceptions, are just NOT very good artists to begin with. I will not point fingers here. I will let mibi do that, as he is so good at it.
They sure are.Baron Von PWN wrote:There have been some maps i quite enjoy that came out recently. The napoleon map, Runification Italy and Germany are some very cool maps.porkenbeans wrote:I agree that, like in all things, map makers do hone their skills, and do get better with time. But, to truly call yourself a "good" Map Maker, you must first have artistic talent. I am afraid that the so called "top" talent these days at CC, with a few exceptions, are just NOT very good artists to begin with. I will not point fingers here. I will let mibi do that, as he is so good at it.

Couldn't agree more. They're spectacular maps with great graphics.Baron Von PWN wrote:There have been some maps i quite enjoy that came out recently. The napoleon map, Runification Italy and Germany are some very cool maps.porkenbeans wrote:I agree that, like in all things, map makers do hone their skills, and do get better with time. But, to truly call yourself a "good" Map Maker, you must first have artistic talent. I am afraid that the so called "top" talent these days at CC, with a few exceptions, are just NOT very good artists to begin with. I will not point fingers here. I will let mibi do that, as he is so good at it.
Maybe so, but I think that they have more talent residing there. CC's maps are numerous, that is for sure, but only 30% - 40% are what I would call top quality maps. Where as MC's maps are (for the time being) only a few, but all are spectacular.Army of GOD wrote:Couldn't agree more. They're spectacular maps with great graphics.Baron Von PWN wrote:There have been some maps i quite enjoy that came out recently. The napoleon map, Runification Italy and Germany are some very cool maps.porkenbeans wrote:I agree that, like in all things, map makers do hone their skills, and do get better with time. But, to truly call yourself a "good" Map Maker, you must first have artistic talent. I am afraid that the so called "top" talent these days at CC, with a few exceptions, are just NOT very good artists to begin with. I will not point fingers here. I will let mibi do that, as he is so good at it.
See, I just see MC going down the same road. I mean ya, some of the current maps aren't wonderful graphically, but there are so many on this site that it doesn't really matter. They'll run into an artistic wall too, I think.

What have you against lunar war?mibi wrote:
This is what ConquerClub is turning out now.

He said it all here-natty_dread wrote:What have you against lunar war?mibi wrote:
This is what ConquerClub is turning out now.

Don't worry 2dimes. I'm pretty sure it's political mumbojumbo.2dimes wrote:I'm kidding, I don't even know what a GFX is.
porkenbeans wrote: Re: Lunar War <v20> p1, 25 - POLL - vote please!
Postby mibi on Wed Apr 28, 2010 9:37 pm
As a successful graphic designer of many years who is quite knowledgeable in the field of user experience and user interfaces, it is my professional opinion that this map sucks ballz. I would list the many egregious violations of all things aethetic, however I am afraid my monitor might run out of ink. If this map were quenched in even 10% of its current form it would signify that the CC foundry is nothing more than a farting ground from over-encouraged noobs to fumble their way through pirated software in an attempt to depict our closest celestial bodies as visual crack whores slumming the starscape.
p.s. a bird pooped on your moon.[/color]

definitely need a sperm donation room.hairy potter wrote:i think we should have a map where players fight over different stages of the reproductive cycle