Thread: Doing a map together

I voted no, not because I thought it was a bad idea (I actually like it), but because of time constraints.

A single month may not be enough time, I would suggest making this a special challenge and extending the time frame. This way should something come up for one of the team members (vacation, business, whatever) they can try and plan around it.

I voted no mostly because collaboration is difficult even when you're being paid and have a loose deadline. Free and fixed deadlines require massive commitment from both parties, meaning that they have to already have a good working relationship before the challenge starts.

As you might gather from the above discussion, I've had some very bad collaborations in the past. Of course, I don't do much in the way of participation anyhow, so it might not make much difference in the long run.

Well in this kind of challenge you would have to know where to set the limits. Many projects fail because they aim too high. One part of the challenge is to estimate what kind of goal is realistic in the time constraint and how much effort that requires from both parties. Being able to do compromises will probably get you far in the challenge.

In the end, you set the difficulty level of the challenge with your partner. If you set it just right and work as a team, you'll complete the map in time and maybe even win the whole thing.

I thought this idea had been proposed before. Didn't we say last time that it would be good to have a team mapping event where the total rep per team had to be about the same. I think its a good idea but I have no idea how it would be realized tho. Maybe someone arty could do a backdrop and several people do icons for a map then composite it all up at the end.

I kinda like the idea, time constraints aside, organization aside...

It would also be interesting how cross software work would go... not everything everybody uses here is cross compatible...

What about a challenge where instead of some time limit... you set the max number of entries and (with some flexibility) the team size... and only judged once all the entries were complete or dropped... Monthly challenges would continue (probably focused on lighter challenges) if need be...

Yeah I think a fixed number of teams headed up by a different CL each or doubled up CL's (do we have that many ?). Anyway, after that they should say what kind of map their doing and software their using and you join a team based on your preference to the software. Like say, Neon could do a CC3 group or RobA heads up a Gimp map etc. If there were 5 or 6 groups or something like that then that would mean that each one could have quite a few members. Although people say they don't have the time the collaborative effect ought to mean that the map gets done faster. Im not suggesting that the CL does all the drawing on the team of course. Thats for the team to decide how to break up the work.

I love the idea, however, not everyone uses the same formats/methods. I'm just starting out (not counting hand drawn) for example, so both my software and my skills in them are rather limited.

You don't need to be proficient in tools or use the same tools if you're part of the design process. "This should go here, those should be that colour, this area needs to look more consistent with that area, can we move X to that point over there" direction is tool-independant (just ask AslanC, heh)

Uh, yeah, I'm good in rushing people around like that (my former co-GM could confirm that), but that sounds more like one person doing all the slave work.