Map Tags for release 2.6

LaFayette

@thedog I like the first two, I'd scrap the last three. Keep in mind we will want to try and update tags for every map, there are over 100 of them. For example, we wouldn't want tags that exist on just 15 maps, it's too sparse.

Popularity: how would this be measured, would it not be subjective? How do we avoid the tenure effect where popular maps are popular because they are popular (in other words, how does a new map become popular?). What happens when this gets a bit more out of date, can we really stay on top of it once a week for the next 3 years? So there are a number of problems here compared to some redundancy in the base star rating. Are there are examples for more than a half dozen maps where this would be a critical dimension?

AI Raiting: Is this measuring single player suitability? I've seen AI make some really bad moves on maps it's supposed to play well on. My 2 cents, it seems like AI is either okay with occasional game throwing moves or is just completely terrible.

BGB Tag: This gets a bit murky and could throw confusion whether the board game sponsored the map or if there is a deeper relation.

Historical Tag: Most maps kinda try to be historical, but even then it's going to be debatable. For example, the French in WWII had one of the strongest standing armies and navies! Virtually no map is historical about this .

Five million men were mobilised in France at the start of World War Two. The army was reputed to be one of the strongest in the world, certainly every bit a match for the Germans.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32956736

This is an example, the historical marker will be the start of debate club. It's interesting conversation, but it'll become tedious (and there are over 100 maps!). For new maps coming in, it'll be a bit subjective and sometimes not all that obvious whether a map is really historical or not. Another consideration is the gray line, how historical is historic? How much liberty can a map take before it's not historical anymore.

A new question, should the ability to create tags be open to any mod or just the admins?

TheDog

@lafayette
I am prepared to do 50%+ of the maps, if no else volunteers I will do all of them.

I think the ability to create Map Tags should be the map admins and not be open to any mod.

Popularity is subjective and I would guess it would be about 10 maps, it would be based on what's been played in the lobby or forum and perhaps the most downloaded over say a year.

AI rating, was intended for single players only, I will change the 1st post to reflect that. Do we need another AI rating for mixed humans and mixed AI ?
Or again, is that too subjective?

Historical Tag: I agree is perhaps too subjective for as you say "how historical is historic".

TheDog

As there a lot of WW2 maps, do the WW2-ers want the maps tags split into?
Say;
WW2-Europe
WW2-Pacific
WW2-Global

or just left as WW2?

LaFayette

@thedog Splitting makes some sense, but now we are not really talking about era but we are talking about era+theater. Perhaps that is totally okay though, it's really useful to know which maps are europe only vs full world.

Keep in mind that even if you do all the maps, we need to sustain over the long term. Can we keep this up 3~5 years (or even more). It's not just enough to get it done once, but we have to keep it up.

TripleA ran into this problem (in a number of ways, but one salient example is) with how maps were administered before. Previously a map maker would send their map zip to one of two map admins who would then do all the work to upload and update the map in repositories. This worked fine for a number of years, but eventually it started to break down and map updates were then done less and less frequently, eventually with a delay of 3-6 months in between any map update.

LaFayette

Maybe instead of "good for AI", number of players would be better. If we say "1-4" players, then it implies a single player experience is good and presumably AIs are ideal. If we say "2-4", then presumably it'll be all humans. Just a suggestion.

Cernel

@thedog I strongly dislike your usage of the "Modern" and "SciFi" names. The modern age starts in 1492, not in 1961 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_history#Modern_history) and "science fiction" doesn't imply in any way that is set in the future (For example, Frankenstein is maybe the most typical example of "science fiction" and takes place in 1700.).

I personally believe that "science fiction" is a type of "fantasy" (and they are often hard to tell apart, or even impossible if the author doesn't tell whether or not there is magic going on).

TheDog

@cernel
Renamed these two eras;
Contemporary ......1961-2040...........(was Modern)
Future...........................2041+....................(was SciFi)

TheDog

Is it possible for someone to find out the top three downloaded maps from say the past year and their number of downloads?

zlefin

We definitely need an ai tag of some sort; based on the discussion in the prior threads it's one of the most important tags for the less experienced users.

The most pertinent part about it isn't how well the ai plays in general, but whether the map has features the ai doesn't know how to handle/doesn't support. eg on TWW the ai doesn't understand the moving around materials to build infrastructure part, I'm not sure it understands how to use trucks/railroads either, though it's been a long while since I checked. Or on Cernel's new 270bc map how the 'neutral' barbarians can spawn attackers.

RogerCooper

@cernel On my wiki I have the categories of "Historical", "Hypothetical", "Fictional" and "Abstract".

Historical: This category is for historically-based scenarios which depict actual conflicts, even if realism has been compromised for simplicity or gameplay.
Hypothetical: Scenarios based on situations which did not occur but were plausible. This includes plausible futures and alternate histories that lack fantastical elements,
Fictional: This category contains scenarios based upon entirely fictional backgrounds or incorporating fantastical elements (alien invasions, zombie hordes and the like).
Abstract: These scenarios do not depict any historical or even fictional situation. They exist only as games. This applies even if a realistic map is used. Most free-for-all scenarios fall in this category.

There are occasional borderline situations (where I use 2 categories) but I can define most scenarios easily. Note that mods may have multiple scenario types (such as Classic Variations)

I don't use eras, instead I categorize by the exact year.

RogerCooper

@zlefin said in Map Tags for release 2.6:

The most pertinent part about it isn't how well the ai plays in general, but whether the map has features the ai doesn't know how to handle/doesn't support

I disagree with you. The AI does not know how to handle National Objectives, Political Options or Victory Cities but it can play reasonably well in scenarios that use them. The important question is whether you can play an interesting game by playing 1 or more powers against the AI.

Most scenarios can be handled by the current AI. A "No AI" tag would be useful warning for those which can't be.

TheDog

I have done a spreadsheet with the 127 maps and have the following proposed changes, ready for entry into the Toolbox Window.

Note

Napoleonic and ACW have 3 maps between them, we could merge them and call them, Colonial or maybe Napoleonic/ACW ?
WW2-Alternate is new and is a catch all for WW2 maps with a difference like the Hex maps and non earth time line maps and sandbox style mini maps.
Contemporary now starts in 1946, as the Contemporary would have had only 3 maps, but now has 5.
Although WW2-Global has 37 maps these can filtered again using the Star Rating or other Tags to reduce the number.

TheDog

Popular Tag
For me it is a requirement, as I still class myself as a new player. When people say look in the lobby to see what is popular, below is what is popular, but these are the scenario/xml names, not the maps to download names. So for this reason new players need a Tag showing them which Maps are popular to download.

Below is a lobby list from a few days ago;
Big World 2: Balance of Power
Domination 1914 No Man's land x5 players
Great War x2
New World Order
Ozteas 1941 Global
The Rising Sun - vXXX
World at War
World War II 1940 2nd Edition x2
World War II Global 1940 Balanced Mod3 with Combat Move First x3
World War II v3 1941 Balanced Mod
World War II Revised

Currently there are 7 Popular Tagged maps.

For reference, Cernel has a post from 2017 with very similar scenario names, so they have not changed much in 4 years.
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/36/start-of-a-new-v3-anniversary-tourney/48

TheDog

AI Rating Tag
Is Intended for single player v all AI players.
None - not rated
1 Does not play well using the AI or AI plays too slow
2 AI plays OK, using Fast or Hard AI
3 AI plays fast, using Hard AI

The above is vital for new players to get to grips with TripleA, however this Tag is a bit subjective and worse it really needs to be at the scenario/xml level not the map download level (as we are discussing now). One map has 6 scenario/xml, so should have 6 AI Tag rating.

Having said the above I think the AI Tag still has value and will aid single players, I have already AI rated 41 of the maps, so about 1/3.

Although this Tag is aimed at single player v AI, this is still useful to multi human player games taking the major nations with the AI playing minor/neutrals.
.
.
Scrap both of these ideas
BGB Tag (Board Game Based)
Historical Tag
.
.
Star Rating Tag
Has not changed and could be ported over to the new Tag system, with a few changes.
Listed here from the 1st post
None - Not rated, newly uploaded, waiting to be rated by the map/mod team using the map toolbox. If it does not load or errors, it will be removed after say 1 month if not improved?
1 Experimental needs work to be playable/acceptable
2 Good...................Game play is Good and is reasonably balanced
3 Excellent...........Game play is Excellent and is well balanced and has good graphics/sound

TheDog

Putting it all together in one post.
A newly uploaded map after 1 month will have a Star Rating and Era Tag.

Star Rating Tag
None - Not rated, newly uploaded, waiting to be rated by the map/mod team using the map toolbox. If it does not load or errors, it will be removed after say 1 month if not improved?
1 Experimental needs work to be playable/acceptable
2 Good...................Game play is Good and is reasonably balanced
3 Excellent...........Game play is Excellent and is well balanced and has good
graphics/sound
.

Era Tag (the years are a guide)
None = not rated
Fantasy
Ancient-Medieval......pre 1450
Renaissance.................1451-1790
Napoleonic...................1791-1860
American Civil War...1861-1900
WW1..............................1901-1930
WW2-Alternate.........1931-1945
WW2-Europe.............1931-1945
WW2-Global...............1931-1945
WW2-Pacific...............1931-1945
Contemporary...........1946-2040
Future.............................2041+
.

Popular Tag
None..... = Not rated or not popular
Popular = Is played often in the lobby or forum or downloaded lots over a year
.

AI Rating Tag
Intended for single player v all AI players.
None - not rated
1 Does not play well using the AI or AI plays too slow
2 AI plays OK, using Fast or Hard AI
3 AI plays fast, using Hard AI

LaFayette

I'm still concerned about popular tag. Specifically it being arbitrary, potentially hard to break into for new maps, and the maintenance to keep it up.

Suggestion, what if we folded popular into star rating maybe? IE: '4', would mean ranking '3' plus popular.

TheDog

@lafayette
Another option could be to remove the Popular tag and just have a pinned post perhaps in Player Help.

~~I would prefer the above option rather than modifying the Star Rating Tag.~~

Edit: Actually I dont mind which option we go for.

LaFayette

@thedog A pinned post I like, it'll be more obvious if it gets out of date and does not commit us to maintaining the tag ad-infinitum.

Cernel

I don't think everyone will understand the meaning upon seeing acronyms like "ECW" and "ACW" (respectively for 1451-1790 and 1861-1900).

I understand it is important to keep it short, but I question how much such acronyms are popularly known. I tend to think that acronyms should be used only if they are known to virtually everyone (like "USA" instead of "United States of America").

TheDog

@cernel
Thanks, edited the above post, removed ECW and expanded ACW.

Renaissance.................1451-1790
American Civil War...1861-1900