As I said before number 2 imo.

3 seems most logical considering the problems.

4 will help finding SCs and all shit!

As i said.....

For 3.

A kind of communityvote or something that all users can vote. And when the map tops a percentline, it will be accepted.

But maybe before that happend, 2 or 3 XJ-Mappers check for big errors etc. and contact the mapper.
Like a fastcheck or something. Then the publicvote.
My idea is a combination between 2 and 3.....
But the mappers are not allowed to denied, only to give suggestions....
The community we will give the feedback for the mapper who uploaded the map.
Then he will get feedback if he did a good job when the map is raising a percentline....:)

Why that idea:

An example.

Look at bkz_goldbhop, the worst map ever.
But in runs 24/7 on the nost servers...

as i said before only thr official mappers and jumpers can check/test maps thats how the XJ mapcheck team won`t have so much work and they wob`t lose motivation so quickly.And if the mapper wants he can post his map at Map previews section

if 3rd win, we will be back on the old way (of public testing). and don't tell me it will be diferent. 3rd sucks ..

I suggest an "advanced old Kreedz system"

It works the same as described in the newspost (2nd system) but not with only one person: with a small team (4-5 people).
In this case it wouldn't take so much time to check a single map, those admins wouldn't have to writte down a 10-page essay everytime a map is sent "just" to explain their choice.

This way the work would be very light for admins, who wouldn't loose their motivation, imo.

"quick and efficient" - This is how I would define this system.



That would be mapper's job with his friends
It worked this way before!

The idea is to lighten admin's job so as they don't lose motivation.

It's hard to decide because every plan has drawbacks. But I prefer 3. The system works because player who love the maps will vote for them in order to get them on the official list. That's a real motivation. Demo admins always get bored and become inactive, the reason is just lack of such motivations.
The biggest problem is that there might not be huge surprise any more, but it's trivial against the advantages.

Number 2, maybe with loosened restrictions on the tag. (I.E. it seems like each new map has to be better than the last one to get a kz_ tag currently. Why not lower the standards slightly?)

Voted for number 2 just because all the other ones were public but i stand by what i said that i think 1-2 is to few.

I think a mix between number 2 and number 5 would be the best.

BUT it isn't really a big change from the old system, which i don't dislike.

i chose number 2 because i surprised when every map release posted, i enjoy playing 3-5 new maps at the same time, decovering any possible shortcuts.

no. 5 is also an acceptable choice but no. 2 is better for me.

i just have the same position as chrizzy, a mix would be fine for me.

1, 3, 4 rules out, no way.
The big question to choose between 2 and 5, chose 2 at last.

When this vote will end? I'm not saying that it should end now, I'm just a little nervous everytime I come to XJ...

Like i said, option 3

voted for 5

tho 2,3 and 5 are ~about equally good in my opinion.

as I said before in the news comments, combining them (or some of them) will cover most disadvantages.
3. public check is pretty good for finding a lot of bugs/mistakes and getting sugestions from jumpers and mappers. so you can force denied maps go throug it before those can be submitted again. also people can choose public check to fix last bugs and mistakes (if they couldnt get many/good testers).
5. more expirienced check, good for finding tiny and hard noticeble bugs, also could be done more quality feedback - this will defenately help mapreleases come faster
2. this one is a bit problematic since check is not as much precise and maps can come out with some bugs and unwanted shortcuts. but this can be combined with 5th... for example if map is really good - it can be passed over for shorter check to mappers and record holders to make sure map is playable w/o any bugs to accure.

If 3rd win, here we have an important question, that what would you rate as bug, that is able to destroy map's chances to get accepted ..
For example when in the map would be small amount of light bugs, and i would know about them, but i would not appreciate them as major and i would let them there, would you denied the map and totally take the chances to get accepted, even though the map is perfect?

Faker you miss something important, you know ? There's nothing damn wrong with the current map system check, the problem is the admins in the mapcheck team, except 2 of them. There's no need to change the system, just the members...If you don't understand this, better leave the map checking falling down, all those options SUCKS.

Good luck

make the 2nd poll :/

Make the new poll with 2 votes - between two winning options

I felt the same as spr1n. I found 2, 3, and 5 to be okay, but I voted for 5.