@cernel
Most games, 51%+ (probably 90%) have 1 map 1 xml, so are easy to define. The ones you refer to are too complex. I have tried to do this below. Where 5v1v5 Sides= 3 alliances/sides with 5 in one,1 in one, 5 in another. This is too complex to list in table format, with pulldown selection.
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/3741/curated-best-top-maps-triplea-guides

.

I still have not understood if, for example, a game with 4 sides with 2 players per side (total 8 players) would be a FFA-4, a FFA-8 or not a FFA in your classification. (I guess not?)

It would be 8 player & FFA or shortened to FFA-8 (Groups all FFA together and does not try to group factions)

.

I still suggest NOT DOING this because it belongs to game (not map) classification. If you absolutely want to do this, then just give the number of players (or powers, polities, countries, civilizations, factions...) and number of sides (or teams, alliances...) in two distinct columns. FFA will be implicit when you have same number of players and number of sides.

I agree as mentioned above it is too complex and is in small percentage of maps.

.

However, IN ANY CASE, you have to decide what you are going to do in case of maps having games with different such things. Will you count Napoleonic Empires as a 8 players with 2 sides or a 8 or 5 players FFA?

If I was going to do the #Players column it would be FFA-x, not good, it raises more questions. Also one of my own maps has the same problem is FFA-11, but with fixed sides/alliances of 5 vs 1 vs 5 again how to convey FFA-11 ?

.

Also, please no .2 .3... Use 02, 03...

So overall a good discussion to a conclusion for me, I will be removing the #players column.

I think Quality, Year/Genre and Spaces are good additions. Let's just keep these 3 columns only and not add any more of them (removing the Play column). If more things are wanted, better adding them as information in the "Select a Game" window after you download the maps.

@Vendetta Well, I agree that your remake makes things better to look at, but it does not change root issues like the fact that FFA is PvP unless by PvP is meant that AI players are not players, so PvP actually means HvH, in which case a FFA may or may not be a PvP and being or not being a PvP has nothing to do with being or not being a FFA unless PvP actually means 1v1. If PvP means 1v1, then a FFA and 1v1 distinction would actually start making sense if we assume that 1v1 means 1 team versus 1 team (but we are missing the AI yes/no information unless writing 1Hv1H), except that 1v1 usually means that you have 2 teams each of which is entirely controlled by only one player, but it is leaving out all games which are neither FFA nor 1v1 unless by FFA we mean every game in which there are more than 2 sides/teams, in which case it would be better to rename FFA as 3+Teams or something like that.

This is why I said it is a confusing mash-up.

I strongly suggest totally scrapping this column and forget about it.

Good format that list would be something like:

02
02
02
02 (PvP)
02 (PvP)
03
03
03 (Solo)
04
04 (FFA)
04 (FFA)
08 (FFA)
09 (FFA)
12
12 (Solo)
18

Same info but now it all sorts properly