Random Map Script Reviewing Tutorial
by Cherub Thurdl01

Visual Appeal

Obviously, visual appeal rates the overall look and feel of the map in question.  Typcially, the look of the map should incorporate parts of the overall theme.  A lot of this category is subjective of course... what we are trying to look for here is enhancements to the map that give it a unique look, but don't overpower the player with loads of objects.  While scenarios can get away with going over the top with lots and lots of objects and specifically placed eye-candy, the beauty of a random map script should generally be a bit more subtle, but a beautiful random map can be achieved in many ways, from the placement of buildings, to the placement of starting units, to flowers and paths, to unusual and rarely seen items, to any type of terrain blending imaginable.  Certainly, the creativity of the author in developing an attractive landscape while staying within the theme is vital for success here.

A few questions that should be asked to determine the Visual Appeal score:

--Is there a visual beauty of the main map and mini-map?
--Does the mini-map accurately represent the objects on the game map?
--Are the aesthetics pleasing to look at?
--Is there a realistic feel to the map?
--Do the terrains match each other?  ie. A desert area with Palm trees should not be adjacent to ice fields.
--Is there the right amount of eye candy?
--Are there too many or too few objects?

Score Breakdown:

1 - Very Poor:  No terrain at all. Flat grasslands, a frozen wasteland, or desert as far as the eye can see. This will probably also affect the Playability score.

2 - Poor:  Terrain, but no derivation. There are forests, but only one kind, and always in blocky squares. Any water is only standard water, no depth variations.  No derivation in open land or elevations.

3 - Average:  Shows blending of water and forests. This should be the first evidence that care has actually been taken in the creation of the terrain beyond the essential.

4 - Good:  Terrain is very well blended, both in water, forest, and on land. Flatlands are broken by slight terain variations, either slightly, or with a bit of terrain variation is blended in. Elevation is well used. Also, there is either just a touch of eye candy, or perhaps the eye candy goes slightly overboard to mild distraction.

5 - Excellent:  A map that the reviewer might feel bad about altering by cutting down the trees, or placing his or her own buildings on. A map of this level should almost present an extra challenge by being distracting in the perfection of layout, terrain, elevation, and eye candy, without overusing the later.

Playability

This is meant to combine the elements of playability, balance, and the most important aspect of any Random Map Script, Fun.   The other two rating categories happen entirely before you place your first command to a unit, but as soon as you start playing the game, you're firmly into this category.   Again, fun is the over-riding factor here.  A random map script with exceptional playability is one that you want to give to all your friends so you can include it in your nightly multi-player gaming marathons.  ;)  Simply put, a map that is unplayable is no fun.  If your sheep are consistantly trapped by objects or if your nearest resource is two screens away, that's just not fun.  Same goes for the balance of the script... each player should start on equal footing and the overall difficulty of the map should lend itself to solid multi-player gaming.

Here are a few questions that should help in determining Playability:

--Can all players complete the game or achieve reasonable goals? If the resources required to finish the game are missing, or if the necessary buildings and people to start the game are missing, playability is very poor.
--Are the obstacles too big? Being just an island of grass in a full forest can be a challenge, but the challenge is almost too daunting, and the map becomes unenjoyable.
--Is this map FUN?  Would you be excited to play a game using this script?

As a side note, the ability of the standard AI to play the script in question should be mentioned somewhere, and Playability seems the most logical place.  However, since most random map scripts are written for multiplayer use, no script should be demerited for lack of AI functionality.

Score Breakdown:

1 - Very Poor:  Map is completely unplayable. This can be because of a complete lack of resources, or a map that refuses the placement of villagers without a Town Center to create them.  For whatever reason, this map cannot support a game of any length.

2 - Poor:  The proper resources and starting units are there, but for some reason, there still doesn't provide much playability. This might be because of a bug that doesn't give everyone the same starting conditions (I've seen scripts with bugs that don't place enough Town Centers).  For whatever reason, this map might support a full game, but does so in a sloppy and awkward fashion.

3 - Average:  A full game can be played on this map, but there may still be a few tiny flaws in it. Perhaps there are too many bottlenecks, or the terrain makes things just a little too difficult for the average player to take this map to the end of a game.

4 - Good:  This is the standard ES Script level of playability. The map can easily be played from beginning to end with no signs of lag, and no imbalance in the start. At this level, Playability should almost be unnoticable, but fun should be quite noticable.

5 - Excellent:  This also denotes a map that is a pure pleasure to play, and one that the reviewer thinks anyone will enjoy playing.  Typcially, high scoring scripts will add a bit of extra playability over the standard ES scripts by tweaking the gameplay just enough to make situations more interesting, intense and fun!

Final Thoughts and Reviewing Links