Proposed Monthly Contests Rule Changes

[Balthasar]

After looking back on the last few weeks' posts, I've been thinking about making a change in the rules. What I'd like to do is separate single-file PCX's and multiple-file PCX sets into separate categories for the purposes of the contests.

Single-image PCX files would include any image which uses only one PCX, such as Wonder Splashes, Resources, Tech and Building icons, Cities, Buttons, etc. Obviously, in cases like buttons, which is displayed as a set of just two files, an allowance would be in order.

Multiple-image PCX's would include Interfaces, Terrains, Spaceships or whole Sets of images, such as Blue Monkey's Steampunk Tech Icons set, for example.

I think that separating the two types of PCX entries would be both more fair to artists that put a great amount of work into a Building or City or Wonder Splash, only to have it blown away in the contest by, say, a Terrain Set.

Vuldacon has suggested a second possible change that sounds reasonable: if, in any month, a submission faces no competition, that entry would be held over to the following month(s) until suitable competition is submitted. If no competing PCX is submitted by the end of the year, a default win would be declared for that submission.

The time to make such rule changes is before the end of the month (1st contest of the year). I'd like your feedback. What do you think?

Update: since we started, this has been amended somewhat. See Post #19 or continue reading.

 

[Yoda Power]

Sounds good to me.

Only concern is if there wil be enough entries.

 

[Balthasar]

I'm hoping that entries of smaller PCX files would increase, while makers of larger projects would be relieved of the guilt of stomping, for instance, PinkMothra's little resource file.

 

[Vuldacon]

The Civ Game if Full of many pcx Files and to make a "competition" where all are against each other is too extreme... Single pcx file entries should be in contest with others of the same category... Not against more extreme works that include many pcx files such as an entire game interface.

Lets change this so the contest is fair and contestants are up against others who have submitted the same category. At least single Verses Multiple pcx files.

If you make a Great Wonder Splash or Resource... that should be in contest with other single pcx images not entire interface or multiple image files.

Lets discuss this and I hope you all agree that fairness is key to making the contest work for all.

 

[Kyriakos]

In theory it is a good idea to have two PCX categories. In practice? Not so sure:

a) What about building collections? Ogedei makes his buildings released in sets, and i suppose he will continue to do so. They aren't a single graphic or single collection of one graphic.

b) It can be irritating to lose a contest to a terrain or interface, but on the other hand it is true that virtually always the terrain/interface took a lot longer to make, and it is rare to see them in a row. Personally i don't regard this an issue now (although i did in the past...).

c) Most importantly: Like Yoda said, we already have very few files in the contests. Making two categories will obviously not increase them by default, and a theoretical increase due to other parameters is not that set in stone.

I do like the map and scenario/mod annual contest idea.

It was inevitable that the game would in the end have fewer and fewer new mods for it. It is a very old game and rarely do such games welcome new modders. Sad as well that the open-source version never happened either.

 

[Vuldacon]

Building collections would be in the Multiple pcx category rather than single such as a Great Wonder image or resource.

...In regard to the number of entries. If there are not enough entries to sponsor a monthly contest for any category, those contest categories could be held once a year.

Another point is in order to have a "contest" there must be more than one entry. "Winning" by being the only entry should not stand. Single entries could be carried over to the next month or when there are at least two entries.

The main point is not to create more work or complicate anything but to be more fair to the people who submit their work in a contest. We have divisions in place for contests that have worked well but the pcx area needs at least one separation of Single or Multiple. Even if done, it would probably not be enough difference for the many varieties of pcx files but it is at least some separation.

...A Single pcx cannot contend with the level of work required to make an interface or any of the multiple pcx file work. So if we have a contest for a pcx, it at least should have a level ground where the contestants have an equal opportunity to win with their Good Work. Single or Multiple is only one parameter to help separate a broad area to be more fair to contestants.

 

[Balthasar]

It is a very old game and rarely do such games welcome new modders.

Au contraire mon ami! Most of the modders currently competing in the MOTY contest joined the group after 2010. You can check that yourself. I'm very pleased (and a bit intimidated, frankly) by the talents and participation of our newer modders.

In a sense, that's the point: there are many times more creations being made and downloaded in the forum (especially units) than are being represented in the contests. The question is: why? My suggestion is based on the speculation that single-file PCX makers (especially new artists) might be feeling intimidated away by the bigger sets. They could be very wrong on this: of the last six PCXoTY contests, single-file entries won three of them. On the other hand, Vuldacon makes a valid point about even-ing the playing field, especially for new artists.

 

[Blue Monkey]

...A Single pcx cannot contend with the level of work required to make an interface or any of the multiple pcx file work.

This.

Which is not to argue against splitting into multiple categories. I'm just not convinced that single/multiple pcx the way it's being defined here is the way to go.

The files include a Tundra Forests pcx ... Plains & Grassland Forests pcxs ... and an LM Forest file. The graphics are the same in all files for this version - just placed appropriately for each pcx file

iirc this graphic, which was essentially a single pcx (at least in terms of the creative work), did well in the polls. It wasn't even really a complete pcx - just the pine forest part. But because it's "terrain" it would be in the "multiple" category.

I truly don't care what categories exist. Sooner or later good work will be recognized. Just asking that everyone think through the implications carefully rather than deciding on the basis of what sounds good just now.

Balthasar mentioned the steampunk tech icon set. In those days there was a semi-moribund tech icon poll separate from all other pcx. It had fairly recently become acceptable to submit a tech icon in the same poll with other pcx, but there was a widespread feeling that tech icons couldn't compete effectively against other types of work. There was a lot of back and forth by PM between Flamand and myself to make sure that submitting them as a set was acceptable, that the preview was acceptable compared to other styles of presentation, and so on. I would have presented them differently if that had been required. No big deal.

If we need new categories that's fine. But don't use unfair advantage of one type of graphic over another as the primary reason. My own work has demonstrated that despite the contemporary common knowledge to the contrary: tech icons can do well against other categories of graphics, that a single button can do well in a poll against more complex graphics, and that a terrain pcx can do well without being part of a much larger set.

This present conversation started because once again things have changed enough that the existing structure isn't effective. Let's create something flexible enough to be adaptable to changing trends in submissions.

Vuldacon has suggested a second possible change that sounds reasonable: if, in any month, a submission faces no competition, that entry would be held over to the following month(s) until suitable competition is submitted.

Whether categories change or not, rethinking poll frequency makes sense. As Plotinus guided me through the process of taking over the announcements and adjusting to a steady but lower level of submissions we settled on a frequency based on number of submissions rather than the calendar. Something similar would work here. Set a minimum number. Whenever that number is reached announce a cutoff date for further submissions (maybe a week into the future?). Anything submitted after that deadline rolls over to the next poll.

 

[Vuldacon]

Blue Monkey... Not really sure what you were trying to say with your post, especially with the link there. Unless you were trying to point out that a smaller group of pcx files could gain favor over a larger one.

This issue is not a complicated thing at all.

Sure a Great Single pcx could win over Multiple pcx files of a much larger scope... especially IF the Multiple pcx files were poorly done or the single pcx was overwhelmingly desired.

How about I submit a single pcx that is Very Good and also an entire interface that is also Very Good... No Contest between the two. Basically due to the level of work to accomplish the end results would separate them. Not Fair to try to say they are the same in a contest because they are pcx files.

I simply believe that there needs to be the same consideration given to pcx files as has been done with other contest categories.

IF all are the same, why then do we not simply have one contest a month or year for the Best Graphics Work on this site... that includes Units, Resources, Maps, Terrains, Mod Packs, MODs, Scenarios etc... Everything.

There is a separation for Graphics Work and the pcx work is a very large area that has not been addressed the same as other creative work here... it was combined to try to accommodate ALL pcx files Single or Multiple, then left up to the voters to decide what they liked best. Sure that can work but is that a Fair Contest? I think not.

It is a contest to see what the voters like best. IF this is the case, it would probably be best to just have one contest per month or year for all the work that is done and uploaded to the site and let the voters decide the Winner.

 

[Kyriakos]

Blue Monkey... Not really sure what you were trying to say with your post, especially with the link there. Unless you were trying to point out that a smaller group of pcx files could gain favor over a larger one.

Blue Monkey was probably thinking that it would help to note how a button by him won over a city set. But that was not due to the level of complexity of the pcx. Rather an infamous case anyway

 

[Etain]

.....

 

[ruby_sauce]

Maybe not specifically annually, but tri-monthly or something? like best PCX of the winter/spring/summer/fall? (winter would be jan-mar tho, to still keep some annual competition )

Same could even be done for units, although there are still enough units produced to have monthly competitions. The only problem with those is that creators dont submit them :/

 

[Blue Monkey]

Blue Monkey... Not really sure what you were trying to say with your post, especially with the link there.

The majority of that post was a direct response to your previous post - which is why it was quoted. The major point is that things are not so simply because we say they are. A rationally thought through hypothetical usually trumps unsupported opinion, but reality always trumps both. It only takes one white crow, as the saying goes.

Your most recent post makes some assumptions that just don't hold up when stated simply and directly. Did you really mean to say that effort is directly and inherently related to size? So making a unit is easier than an interface simply because the interface is larger? Please understand, I'm only objecting to the use of universal generalizations, especially in the context of assertion presented as evidence. Whether what you've suggested is in fact true in particular cases is not in doubt.

It's been several times suggested that the "other other contest categories" have received some sort of consideration not given to pcx. How have LHs been handled differently from pcx? What consideration have units received that pcx have not? Those are the only other categories and I honestly don't know how those polls differ - I've yet to make either a unit or an LH. If there are valuable lessons from those histories that are applicable here, then please let us know what they are. Hard to ponder something we know nothing about.

If the point is to get people who create but aren't entering their work in the polls, then the solution will only be known by consulting them - thanks, Etain, for sharing your experience.

If the problem is that people who do usually post their work for consideration are not posting the same quantity as in the past then changing things based on time doesn't directly address the problem. What happens if/when a surge comes of posted work? Do we once again change the way the polls are managed? Then do so a third time when the surge passes?

I agree that the pcx poll is problematic enough that it would benefit from some changes. I'd rather see those changes based on careful consideration of root problems than on hypotheticals, opinions and wishful thinking. But then that's just my opinion.

 

[Balthasar]

I know I didn't even want to enter my first contest until Balthasar convinced me to.

And hooray that you did! But the reason for your hesitation at that time enters very strongly into my decision to bring this up now. Your list re-states the proposed rule changes well, to which I'd make the following edits:

1. Henceforth, (beginning this month) full sets of PCX images such as interfaces and full terrain sets would have their own category, PCX Sets, which would be voted on annually. "PCX Sets" would be defined as collections of multiple PCX images which serve a common purpose in the game.

A. Single interface graphics (buttons, science screens, etc.), including single terrain graphics (mountains, goody huts, resources, etc.), single building graphics, and other single pcx graphics would continue to be contested once monthly, as usual.​

B. If authors wish to enter a single file from a Set into the Monthly PCX contest they may also then enter the whole Set into the PCX Set category.​

2. If there is only a single monthly submission in any category it would be carried over to the next month until there are at least two entries to contest.

Stated this way, it's actually just one rule change, the second item falling into the category of 'allowing the contest moderator to employ common sense'.

I agree that the pcx poll is problematic enough that it would benefit from some changes. I'd rather see those changes based on careful consideration...

That's exactly what I'm trying to do, my friend. I have been considering this sort of change for a very long time, and the calender compels me to submit this proposed change to the group now. Your point about a 'sudden surge' is well taken, but contest history doesn't indicate that it's more than an unlikely possibility with sets. It is, however, a good reason to keep the monthly Leaderhead Category. Call me hopeful, but I think a surge is possible there!

 

[wuhjah]

Annually Quarterly?

If I have to wait 10 months for the contest, then there is no point in submitting and waiting. I'd just post it up for use and forget the contest.

Though I do agree with getting rid of monthly auto-wins. Holdover until suitable competition arrives or auto-win on the quarter.

 

[Balthasar]

Holdover until suitable competition arrives or auto-win on the quarter.

I like that idea. I could see doing PCX Sets and Leaderheads on a quarterly basis. ruby_sauce also made a similar suggestion a few posts back. Doing it quarterly would mean contests in March, June, Sept and December.

 

[Vuldacon]

Your most recent post makes some assumptions that just don't hold up when stated simply and directly. Did you really mean to say that effort is directly and inherently related to size? So making a unit is easier than an interface simply because the interface is larger?

Blue Monkey... You are assuming that your interpretation of my post, stated "simply and directly" by you is correct
...Why would anyone not understand the fact that one is less than Many. Effort is a personal decision while actual quantity dictates that more effort will be required to accomplish more than less of the same thing.

How much effort a person uses to create anything is not the issue. Some people can accomplish things with less effort than others for various reasons and the amount of effort applied to creations will differ between people. Regardless of the amount of effort a person uses to create a Single or Multiple game file, in the end using the same level of effort to create each pcx file, creating 100 files is indeed more than creating 1.

Units use Multiple pcx files for the flcs but I doubt anyone would think Units should be in a pcx contest. Work on Unit animations and an Interface cannot be compared equally because they differ in game category.

Do you believe that anyone could create one pcx image and also create all of the various pcx files for an entire game then believe they could be fairly compared in a contest as if they are equal simply because they are pcx files?

Simply stated... a single pcx file vs Multiple pcx file game work differ to the degree that each deserve different categories in a contest.

 

[Blue Monkey]

FIXED IT FOR YOU

If I have to wait 10 months for the contest, ... I'd just submit it and forget about the contest.

It's called "fire and forget" in the military. Do it then don't worry about it. Same as posting things for the announcement even if it seems like there hasn't been one in quite a while.

 

[Balthasar]

So, gathering up all of the comments so far, I now see five potential rules changes. Note that I've added a number of files needed to qualify as a PCX Set to Rule #1.

Proposed change One: That a new category be established called the PCX Sets Category, which would have its own annual competition. "PCX Sets" would be defined as collections of more than EIGHT (8) PCX images which serve a common purpose in the game. Examples of these types of sets would include whole Interfaces, Terrains, Spaceship files, and graphics collections. If authors wish to enter a single file from a Set into the Monthly PCX contest they may also enter the whole Set into the PCX Set category.

Proposed change Two: That the original PCX contest be restricted to entries representing a single PCX of any type, or of a single-function set of less than eight separate pcxs which could be represented in its entirety by a single image. All entries would depict the entry in its original size and may be represented by a thumbnail image linked to a larger image.

Proposed change Three: That if there is only a single monthly submission in any monthly category it would be carried over to the next month until there are at least two entry submissions in that category to contest.

Proposed change Four: That the Leaderheads contest be henceforth held on an annual, rather than monthly, basis. Entries would still be submitted to the Monthly competitions submissions thread.

Proposed change Five: That the Leaderhead Category be subject to a Quarterly Challenge, which could be brought by any qualified entry author in that category. Quarterly Challenges could be held in March, June, September, and December.

 

[Kyriakos]

Wait, how come anything up to 8 graphics counts as a "single" pcx?

Personally i dislike the idea of splitting the pcx contest, and also dislike the idea of having quarterly contests. It is likely this will lead to the contests dieing. I vote to keep things as they now are.