Map Scenario Categories In Download Windows

Cernel

@redrum said in Map Scenario Categories In Download Windows:

Also given the number of WW2 maps it would probably be good to separate that into 2-3 categories.

Also, keep in mind that there are the quality categories splitting up; so the lists you would see for "World War 2" would be:

-World War 2/High Quality
Big World
New World Order
The Pact of Steel
The Rising Sun
Total World War
World At War
World War II... (x9)

-World War 2/Good Quality
Big World 2
Pacific Challenge
Red Sun Over China
Ultimate World

-World War 2/Experimental
Arnhem
Atari
Big World Variations
Classic Variations
D-Day
D-Day2
Eastern Front
Europe
Global 1940 Redesign HouseRules
Global War
Global War2
Iron War
New World Order Lebowski Edition
NWO Variants
Pacific
Pact of Steel Variations
Ultimate World Variants
World At War Variants
World War II Revised Variations
WW2 Philippines
WW2v3_11N
WW2v3_Variants

As a motter of splitting up more, what I've already suggested several times, but was always refused, and it is off topic here, is that the variants should have their own category, and, in this case, it would be:

-World War 2/High Quality
Big World
New World Order
The Pact of Steel
The Rising Sun
Total World War
World At War
World War II... (x9)

-World War 2/Good Quality
Big World 2
Pacific Challenge
Red Sun Over China
Ultimate World

-World War 2/Experimental
Arnhem
Atari
D-Day
D-Day2
Eastern Front
Europe
Global War
Global War2
Iron War
Pacific
WW2 Philippines

-World War 2/Variants
Big World Variations
Classic Variations
Global 1940 Redesign HouseRules
New World Order Lebowski Edition
NWO Variants
Pact of Steel Variations
Ultimate World Variants
World At War Variants
World War II Revised Variations
WW2v3_11N
WW2v3_Variants

So, if any developers want to take up this task, let me know and I can update the list (yaml) with what needed, as instructed.

Cernel

Of course, quality categories with no maps for the scenario should be absent, not to have to make pointless clicks.

For example, as per the categories above, if you select "Primeval", then you would have only "Experimental" with only the "Jurassic" map in it. This is to avoid you clicking on High Quality and Good Quality, just to verify that no Primeval maps are in there.
"Medieval", when selected, would show only two quality categories: "Good Quality" and "Experimental"; not "High Quality".
Etc..

Another consideration is that this feature would make interesting the addition of an "Any Quality" category, not sure if before or after all others, so that you can, like, select "Late Modern" and see all the scenario together, if you are maybe searching for a Cold War game, without having to go through different quality categories with very few games listed for each.

Another possibility would be to delete the "Counterfactual" category, and just have them stay in their setting. Now that I think about it, Cold War games about only wars that never happened are counterfactual, so I'll update the list at the first post accordingly.

Cernel

Personally, if somebody makes a "Canadian Civil War" map, I would prefer it listed as "Counterfactual", rather than with the proper "Late Modern" ones. If we list it together we might even convince people that it happened.

Cernel

@redrum said in Map Scenario Categories In Download Windows:

@Cernel Not a bad idea though I think that's probably a few too many categories.

So, even tho I personally don't like to mix up counterfactual with regular history, one may easily make an argument that the distinction is rather blurred (hard to defend against someone arguing that "Empire" or "World At War" are counterfactual) and, say, if you are searching for Cold War stuff, maybe it is better having all cold war scenarios together, in Late Modern, since they are very few.

So, this would be a possible alternative in which:

Counterfactual are dropped into their own settings.
Primeval, Ancient and Medieval are all packed together as "Antique" (which means not-modern).

This reduces the categories to only 9.

-Antique
270BC
270BC Variants
Feudal Japan
Age Of The Sturlungs
Ancient Times
Empire
Feudal Japan Warlords
First Punic War
Jurassic
Rome Total War
The Great Norther War
Total Ancient War

-Early Modern
Civil War
Diplomacy
Napoleonic Empires
Caribbean Trade War
Domination
Blue vs Gray
The Great Northern War

-World War 1
Great War
Battle of Jutland
Domination 1914 No Mans Land
1914-COW-Empires
Domination 1914 Blood And Steel
Domination 1914-Weltpolitik
New World Order 1915Lebowski

-World War 2
Big World
New World Order
The Pact of Steel
The Rising Sun
Total World War
World At War
World War II... (x9)
Big World 2
Pacific Challenge
Red Sun Over China
Ultimate World
Arnhem
Atari
Big World Variations
Classic Variations
D-Day
D-Day2
Eastern Front
Europe
Global 1940 Redesign HouseRules
Global War
Global War2
Iron War
New World Order Lebowski Edition
NWO Variants
Pacific
Pact of Steel Variations
Ultimate World Variants
World At War Variants
World War II Revised Variations
WW2 Philippines
WW2v3_11N
WW2v3_Variants

-Late Modern
Cold War
Camp David
Cold War Asia1948
World War2010

-Multi-Age
Age of Tribes

-Futuristic
Star Trek Dilithium War
Star Wars Galactic War
Star Wars Tatooine War
Twilight Imperium
Stellar Forces
Invasion USA
Ur Quan War Masters Edition

-Fantastic
Middle Earth
Battle of Aventurica
Dragon War
Greyhawk
Greyhawk Wars
Elemental Forces
Game of Thrones
Large Middle Earth
Steampunk
War of the Lance
War of the Relics
Zombieland

-Abstract
Capture the Flag
MiniMap
Hex Globe10
Neuschwabenland
Tactics Campaign

"Invasion USA" is Futuristic or Late Modern counterfactual? Anybody knows?

prastle

@Cernel I am guessing by Fantastic you mean Fantasy?

Cernel

@prastle I mean fanciful. But maybe fantastic is too broad, as one may say that futuristic is fantastic too. Maybe "Fantasy" is better, but would the Iliad or a Steampunk or Zombies map in the modern era or even current time be well defined as "Fantasy", or is fantasy only something "antique" (that would require adding another category between fantasy and future)?

Anyways, if anyone has a better proposal for its name, this is the definition that was there since I made this topic:

Fantastic: purely fantasy maps, set anytime from contemporary backwards, as long as fantasy based (also old fantastic legends, like the Iliad Epic or the Arthurian cycle are fantasy, if primarily aimed at representing the legends themselves).

Meaning that is meant to represent anything from Angels&Devils before the creation of man to Zombies today.

prastle

@Cernel fantasy is generally demons, monsters, lord of the rings etc.

prastle

@Cernel also sorry. I never noticed the topic before. I think u are on the right track or have the right idea but perhaps to many categories as red said. Just offering an idea .

Cernel

Maybe better merging "Fantastic" and "Futuristic" into a single "Fictional" category?

It is sometimes hard to distinguish. Think about a setting in the future with gods, demons and magic.

That would bring down to 8 categories:

-Antique
-Early Modern
-World War 1
-World War 2
-Late Modern
-Multi-Age
-Fictional
-Abstract

Opinions?

Cernel

But maybe fictional is too broad a concept? Should then "Cold War" and "World War2010" go in there too or stay in "Late Modern"? How about "Age of Tribes"? Do we want a "Counterfactual" category for these things or not? Is a counterfactual scenario a fictional one by definition or should fictional be 100% so, like D&D?

Hepps

@Cernel Seems like we are attempting to dramatically over-complicate this...

Seems to me you either stay with time periods or specific themes...

I really don't think we need to distinguish between "Historical" or "Counter-factual" as we have very few games that are truly historical or play out in a totally historical manner.... so really every single map is counterfactual. As I see it the only category that needs to be included outside of a time period is "Fantasy" and possibly "Sci-Fi" (just to separate those as they each target a very different demographic).

Categorization is supposed to simplify the selection process... not complicate it further. I believe the age old acronym is applicable here... KISS.

Cernel

@Hepps So you would list "Steampunk" in WW 1 and "Zombieland" in Late Modern or in Fantasy? Can fantasy be used as a label for not-antique fictions?

Hepps

@Cernel Personally I think that it matters about as much as the quandary of "Which came first the chicken or the egg?"

I think that if a scenario is designed to be in a time period that should be the prioritizing factor... so yes Steam Punk would go in WWI and Zombieland would go in Modern. I don't really understand what "Late Modern" is anyways... the names for periods should make more sense anyways.

prastle

@Cernel ug Fantasy =its a fantasy...

But generally if your in a library it refers to dragons elves etc or FANTASY! thus zombies and dragons and unicorns are all fantasy. Think ur digging to deep here but up to u

Cernel

Since modern wars start in 1492, "Late Modern" would be here the after WW 2 part of it, till current. I'm open to other labels for the same, as well as "Early Modern". Only othen one I can think of is Contemporary, but I don't quite like it much.

Cernel

@prastle said in Map Scenario Categories In Download Windows:

@Cernel ug Fantasy =its a fantasy...

But generally if your in a library it refers to dragons elves etc or FANTASY! thus zombies and dragons and unicorns are all fantasy. Think ur digging to deep here but up to u

Ok, so you would put "Zombieland" in fantasy, while @Hepps would put it in Late Modern. I'm unsure, but I don't like the idea to have Zombieland beside the normal modern conflicts, so I was leaning for a category in which to put anything having really strong fictional elemets, even if set in a real and specific timeline.

Hepps

@Cernel The reason I say you use time period as the overall governing factor is that it makes it simple. Then you can keep the list based almost entirely on time frames (with the exception of Fantasy & Sci-Fi) and not have to have maps listed in duplicate locations. All maps have a description which details whether it is a "historically" based scenario or whether it is "Fantastical" in nature. So if you keep everything in a specific time period then it is easy.
I say this because I really don't see a difference in how modern games like: Cold War, where the nations of the world are nuking each other, verses Zombieland where America that if fighting a zombie apocalypse, are any more or less fictional comparitively. Both are wildly fictitious and the only common theme is the time period. A category like Fantasy (to me) is purely for games that have no relation to the real world... ie. Game of Thrones, Middle Earth, War of the Lance... things that are truly unrelated to Earths history... real or alternate.

prastle

@Cernel yes I would but @Hepps was mainly referring to timeline either is fine

Black_Elk

Probably would be pretty helpful, though I don't know if its necessary to divy up the maps chronologically by era with that much detail. Especially if half of them are set in WW2. Still I like the idea of more information provided by the categories.

Also, while we are on the subject...

I think the qualitative categories we have currently are kind of rough. They seem sort of subjective, like who is the arbitor quality, and what criteria is used for deciding what is high quality or low quality or whatever? I think categories like "Most Popular" or "Unfinished" might be more useful, or at least easier to assess/defend objectively.

It's nice to have a way to dump defunct or poorly designed games into a category where they aren't being showcased front and center, but the descriptions we have now don't provide a whole lot of info explaining what determines the various gradations of quality.

Perhaps something describing gameplay-scale (ie. size/length of an average game) or how old it is, would be helpful in a category breakdown too? Maybe we should start putting some dates in the game notes, so people can see which maps are more recent vs old as dirt. Or to see popularity over time. Things like that.

Or if all that is too much effort another approach might just be to do like an Editor's Choice, Fan Favorites or Top Picks type thing. Maybe a periodic review of the entire catalog would be nice. Even if it's just a separate article.

But yeah, I like the idea of more info. I think it would be good to start with maybe half a dozen chronology/era based categories.

LaFayette

Good feedback/discussion. From a dev and admin perspective a couple questions to answer:

How to manage the data?
How to handle the UI?

To clarify a bit and also to jump to my point. 3 layers of tabbing for categories is overwhelming for a UI. 2 layers is already a bit much, but I think mostly works for us. Regardless it still sometimes would have been nice at times to see all maps in one list (I've hunted for specific maps before and it took a few tab clicks to find the right category).

So, I think we can only really long term support 1 level of tabbing, the 'installed', 'to-update', and 'available' tabs.

Shifting approach a bit, we could define 'tags' for each maps. For example there could be a "category" tag, an "era" tag, a "is in testing" tag and so on. At the bottom of the download screen we can add drop down lists so that someone could filter between the options. It would actually not be too much trouble to make this free-form, what set of tags we define in map download config are the set that UI would render. It may be better though to keep it to the one or two really useful filtering options and pre-define a limited number of tags such as "era" and "quality". 'Author' would be a good candidate for another tag.