The Evil Guide to Mapping

[a happy song]

but the reasons you give makes me think that you are talking about bad and good..

I am typing about bad and good!

I'm not typing about right and wrong.

There is clearly no wrong way to map, but there are clearly better ways to map. This isn't about opinion, it isn't about what I think is best and what you think is is best, it's about objective observation. Objective means uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices.

I don't like certain author's maps because their styles don't suit my tastes, but I can still appreciate the quality aspects of them. From an objective standpoint, Evil_Sire has proved to us that he has a very poor and limited understanding on the usage of objects within NED ( 'lasers are bad' is a clear demonstration of this), therefore his guide is built upon limited and somewhat ignorant opinion.

You must be able to see how that is not a good thing?

[crescor]

What does decide wheter a better way to map is used? Opinion, right?

[a happy song]

What does decide wheter a better way to map is used? Opinion, right?

Look up objective, read my post above, then try again.

[Nexx]

(This is the last post I'll offer for this back-and-forth.)

He offers totalitarian and final opinions in his guide.

Sorry, I didn't explain it properly. Yes, most of what he offers he offers as a statement. That doesn't mean it's totalitarian. The tone of the guide is one of offering advice and recommendations. This comes from subtle wordings and the general absence of statements that criticize other uses of enemies. (Though he does say a couple things like that, such as for rockets and mines, and we are in agreement that such statements are quite objectionable) As for the tone, sometimes the wording is obvious:

"I recommend a decent amount of mines..."
"Lasers are terrible enemies, my best advice would be not to use them..."
(Btw, you changed that line to "lasers are rubbish", which has a very different tone. Altering the tone to agree with your argument reflects poorly on your argument.)

Sometimes the wording is less obvious, but it's there, if you look. And as I said, the few times he does make totalitarian comments, they are definitely in poor taste and should be removed. But the guide as a whole is far from totalitarian. That's a stretch at best.

Also, all of this is still about E_S's guide. What about your reasons for being against guides in general? I would still like to know what you thought about the paragraph I wrote in my previous post. If you want to respond to it in your thread (the ultimate guide), I completely agree with that. Or you can just PM me and give me a quick answer. Whatever works.

Oh and:

crescor clearly doesn't understand [...]. I would have thought you'd have had more of a chance...

You were the one who advised me about keeping things civil in a debate. We can disagree without being disagreeable.

[crescor]

I know what objective means, and I read your reply good enough to repeat my previous question.

Example:
Johny makes a map.

-I say, 'Wow johny, great use of the laser drone mod! It looks awesome!'

-You say, 'Johny, that mod is so overused, unoriginal and ugly, I really don't like this.'

I said he used a great way to map, you didn't. What's objective, what isn't? There's no-one who can decide that, so I come back on my latest question about the opinions. The answer you should give is 'Yes' and then I come to my decision, it's all based on opinions: no good, no bad, no great, no awfull, no right, no wrong.
And this has nothing to to with an objective point of view.

[a happy song]

"I recommend a decent amount of mines..."
"Lasers are terrible enemies, my best advice would be not to use them..."
(Btw, you changed that line to "lasers are rubbish", which has a very different tone. Altering the tone to agree with your argument reflects poorly on your argument.)

I paraphrased. Calling lasers 'terrible' carries clear connotations 'rubbish'. The tone is nowhere near differing enough to confuse plus the original text is clear as day in the OP. We're all intelligent enough to work with that, I hope.

You're telling me I'm clutching while you're holding on with one hand...

Also, all of this is still about E_S's guide. What about your reasons for being against guides in general? I would still like to know what you thought about the paragraph I wrote in my previous post. If you want to respond to it in your thread (the ultimate guide), I completely agree with that. Or you can just PM me and give me a quick answer. Whatever works.

The entire purpose of my guide is to direct people to consider ALL sources. The danger of more subjective guides is that they could convince before that opportunity is found.

[crescor]

Avarin said how I think about it, the only difference is that he's better at writing it down.

[a happy song]

And this has nothing to to with an objective point of view.

Yes it does. Read:

Objective

=Having verifiable existence.

Within the context of mapping these things are the evident data we can correlate to come to such an objective understanding.: consensus, ratings, rewards etc...

=Having or indicating an awareness of things as they really are

Within the context of mapping: it's clear that E_S isn't an experienced, nor a successful author overall. He might have some people who enjoy his maps and guide, but if we take a look at the wider picture we see this:

There are users who are held in very high regard due to their mapping ability, they've either earned positions of authority in the community (mod positions etc..) and/or have had a heavy influence on the progression of mapping in general.

This is objective evidence of quality.

Most (I'd hazard close to all) of these authors would consider advice such as

"Floorguards are easy, place them on a floor and you're done."

"Chainguns are probably the hardest or easiest (depending on your style) enemy to place. I personally find them easy, this is because you just have to find a nice, wide open space and let the chaingun dominate it, try not to have more than 2 in a map as they are very ugly enemies."

"Gausses are the most versatile enemy, this is because they will work in just about any map, if you have no other enemies, place a gauss."

etc..

to be trite and detrimental to the mapping process.

Therefore, by applying objective reasoning and following a clear trail of logic, we can decipher that this guide is inherently flawed and will probably only inspire lesser quality maps.

[crescor]

Yes atob, are ratings objective?

Then why do you disable the ratings? Because you want better feedback, I heard. But if you would think that ratings are objective, then I think you would have no reason for disabeling them. A rating is the most subjective thing there is, because a rating is a number someone gives something, and that number is entirely based on his OPINION. So are comments. People suggest you'd change something, because in their OPINION, it isn't good. OPINIONS are far from OBJECTIVE. An OPINION is ALWAYS SUBJECTIVE.
I hope you get it now.

[a happy song]

This is becoming painful...

Firstly, please, stop trying to lecture me when you're not even understanding the fundamentals of the debate.

I didn't say ratings were objective themselves, I implied that the data they provide can be correlated and used as a tool to come to an objective conclusion.

-

PS - While the context of the post (I believe) was clear enough, I've edited my last post to make this even clearer.

[crescor]

Firstly, please, stop trying to lecture me when you're not even understanding the fundamentals of the debate.

I didn't say ratings were objective themselves, I implied that the data they provide can be correlated and used as a tool to come to an objective conclusion.

I think I understand the fundamentals better then you, and you're also wrong trying to lecture me. You blame me for doing something, I blame you for the exact same thing.

A data provided by a rating can never be used as a tool for an objective conclusion, because the rating itself is subjective. What you're saying is that you use subjective stuff to come up with an objective conclusion. That's like using apples to make a pear-cake. Atob, you are so heavily wrong, and it seems that you don't even want to understand that.

[Condog]

Atob, you are so heavily wrong, and it seems that you don't even want to understand that.

Please, take a second to read this statement, and realise that you are doing the same thing. Please.

This argument has come to the point that neither side is willing to accept anything the other says. crescor, you need to accept that atob knows what he is talking about, and that his method is what leads to great mapmakers. Atob, you need to realise that following guides like this can help new mappers, and regardless of the arguable quality of the guide, it still gives them a framework from which they can start, and eventually, when they have gained some level of experience, they will be able to expand their horizons more in keeping with you're method.

I get the strong feeling that neither of you two are going to back down, regardless of what the other says. This isn't just about the guide anymore, is it guys?

[a happy song]

We're debating objectivity now. Crescor. It's probably too far off tangent for the thread in question, but I'll say this in final:

A data provided by a rating can never be used as a tool for an objective conclusion, because the rating itself is subjective. What you're saying is that you use subjective stuff to come up with an objective conclusion.

An objective thing is something that actually exists. Something you can't deny, nor argue against. It's free from opinion.

In philosophy, an objective fact means a truth that remains true everywhere, independently of human thought or feelings.

We can all agree that high average ratings provide an objective view of success, this is undeniable. Regardless of the the value of this success, which is the subjective.

Ergo: we can use average ratings as data when considering an objective view of quality in this context.

[crescor]

@ Condog
True.
It is about objectivity.

@atob
Objectivity exist, but not in this community.
I'll try to explain it differently. When you play a map, you like it or you don't. That depends on how you think about it, how you feel at that certain moment, if you can complete the map, if you like the theme, and a dozen of other things. That is nowhere near objectivity. If you have to rate something at how you like it, and everyone does that, how can you speak of an objective conclusion then? It's the same with art. There is no objectivity about any piece of art, because emotions and feeling are involved! It's exactly the same with 'N'-maps.

[crescor]

It's late, going to bed, I'll check this again tomorrow.

[a happy song]

Ok, I've had enough. I'm out.

[crescor]

Check.
Me too.

[Condog]

@atob
Objectivity exist, but not in this community.
I'll try to explain it differently. When you play a map, you like it or you don't. That depends on how you think about it, how you feel at that certain moment, if you can complete the map, if you like the theme, and a dozen of other things. That is nowhere near objectivity. If you have to rate something at how you like it, and everyone does that, how can you speak of an objective conclusion then? It's the same with art. There is no objectivity about any piece of art, because emotions and feeling are involved! It's exactly the same with 'N'-maps.

Okay, he is not saying that the act of rating is objective. What he is saying is objective is that a higher rating means a better map and a lower rating means a worse map. This has nothing to do with the actual act of rating a map. It is about using the data as point of reference.

[Izzy]

No need to double post about your bedtime, crescor.

[Evil_Sire]

I never changed my guide.

When I edited it, it was for spelling mistakes and only that.

Yes, I know it sucks, but that's how I learnt to map, using a certain way that would usually work.

If you don't like it then kill it!


Now can we please stop this troll war on this terrible thread?

Also, I think that both sides of the argument have a good point, Condog nailed it on the head; it's not telling you to do anything, it's simply my opinion of what I like in maps, where I derived my style from and how I MAP MYSELF -SOMETIMES-!!!!!

atob, you are write when you say it isn't a great guide, it isn't, it's something I wrote up incase a newcomer wants some help; someone could link it to them on my map. I guess I should have been a bit clearer when saying it is advice.

Crescor, you're write about objectiveness and opinion, it is one's opinion whether the guide is good, someone -kaylab, for example- could find this guide really helpful. Mappers like blackson with experience and a ton of maps won't. See what atob is getting at? It's based simply on opinion and experience, like you said.



Now that I've cleared up both sides of the argument, both of you take a minute to consider the other's point, learn to accept it, and move on.

[lord_day]

I made a map with your guide.
I followed all your rules on enemy placement and tilesets as best as I could, while trying to keep the map good.

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|5^612,372!12^372,288!12^192,192!12^252,108!12^408,132!12^504,288!12^180,288!12^192,372!12^168,384!12^180,504!12^384,408!12^552,396!12^600,276!12^528,168!12^648,96!12^540,24!12^348,528!12^492,576!12^720,396!12^768,240!12^288,24!12^72,84!12^48,336!12^48,432!12^84,576!12^252,576!12^324,132!12^564,480!12^456,24!12^636,576!12^276,300!12^60,168!12^408,456!12^624,408!12^360,396!10^480,432!10^228,168!0^336,408!0^336,396!0^336,420!0^480,156!0^480,168!0^480,180!0^288,84!0^264,84!0^240,84!0^252,84!0^636,240!0^612,240!0^624,240!3^156,60!3^636,468!11^576,564,360,120!4^180,570,1!4^492,570,1!8^588,240,0!8^456,168,2!8^252,60,0!8^312,408,2!0^144,348!0^144,360!0^144,384!0^48,252!0^36,252!0^60,252!0^396,492!0^408,492!0^420,492!0^564,348!0^576,348!0^588,348!0^468,96!0^456,96!0^444,96!0^132,108!0^132,120!0^132,132!0^708,528!0^720,528!0^732,528!0^756,528!0^744,528!6^228,492,1,0,2,3!6^60,540,1,0,0,3!6^516,84,0,0,0,0

[Evil_Sire]

spacebar.

[a happy song]

Those tiles are actually really nice, l_d :)

E_S's guide was good for something...

[Evil_Sire]

Those tiles are actually really nice, l_d :)

E_S's guide was good for something...

Yes, I know, directing people the wrong way. You've said.

[a happy song]

Regardless of what you may think, E_S, I'm actually trying to offer you some guidance. I may have lost a little patience with you since your transformation, sure, but that doesn't change my motivations.

Stop stirring your beef noodles and take a step back from the stove. You'll do yourself a favour, I promise.