Here is the actual layout of maps' categories modified by myself (I stroked the one I found to be wrong and added sub-categories for clarification), what do you think of it?


Suggested for Use Map Settings categories:
The 'Classics', if included, should be managed by DLDB Managers only.

Others:


I am wondering what would be the difference between "Assault" and "Offense". I've made one by setting Micro and Impossible into Offense, but it was a guess. ;o

EDIT: Here is a screenshot of the -actual- DLDB's categories.



EDIT: Just wanted to make sure you guys understood we needed multiples of 3 as # of maps categories. Please try to keep that in mind when proposing something. kthxbai.

to all.

EDIT: Here is a design made by DavidJCobb.



What do you think of it?

Post has been edited 3 time(s), last time on Apr 10 2010, 6:54 pm by payne. Reason: No u. >:O

+ "Others" and "Featured" ?

If we add "Others", I guess we'd eliminate "Offense" or "Assault".
And then, should Micro and Impossibles go under "Others" ? I really do not understand which map would go under either "Offense " or "Assault", to be honest.

Can we throw in "AoS" and "diplo" sub categories? (and maybe even 'temple siege' and 'custom hero wars' sub sub categories)
For Defense, make "sunken" sub category, "photon cannon" sub category, and "competition" (for elimination defense games like ai lurker defense, or sunken d competition)

I don't think those "Defense" sub-categories are necessary at all. Maybe a few years ago when you'd see a new Sunken or Cannon D daily, but not now.

I'm actually not a fan of sub-categories at all, because they are ugly to add.

Though they'll keep everything so much better organized!
I'd actually set the Temple Siege, Desert Strike and etc... into sub-categories of the Others. Or simply take the most played versions and put them into 'Classics' ?

Why categories for TS and DS if you could just as well search for them?...

Maybe start planning for SCII?

Why categories for RPGs and such when we could simply search for them?...

Because an RPG is a map genre, and TS is not.

However you categorize the maps, there's always a chance that something will slip through the gaps. So an "other" category is definitely necessary. Also, AoS and Strategy/Diplo each have enough maps and sufficiently unique playerbases to warrant their own categories.

So call it AoS // Diplo, not TS/DS. I agree that we need these two.

I think sub-categories could help, but it depends on how general they are. I don't think, for example, that sub-categories for each type of defense map would be a good idea. Instead, perhaps, a more vague set of sub could work (i.e. General Defenses, Random Defenses, Special Ability Defenses, etc.).

Here's a thought:

• Arena [AoS, Snipers, Cat 'n' Mouse, Sports]
  
• Board Game
  
• Bounds
  
• Campaign
  
• Defense [General, Random, Special Ability]
  
• Movie
  
• Offense [Survival, Mass, Impossible, War, LotR]
  
• Puzzle
  
• RP
  
• RPG [Hack 'n' Slash, Open, Custom]
  
  
• Miscellaneous
  
  
• Terrain
  
• Experimental
  

This needs more participation: it is an important question and people should worry about it!
You guys are all SEN members and I hope you want a better DLDB than the last one. In order to reach such an objective, we need your votes, ideas, comments, etc.
Please apply your SEN member's rights and share your opinion!

The DLDB's categories look very sexy. The actual page for the individual map, looks like it needs a bit of work. The buttons are ugly and the stars are very ugly. It's getting there though.