Speaking of BPCTF: it&#039;s awful.<br /><br />I would like to know under what circumstances were the maps tested under? Were they organized 3v3 matches? Did everyone just join a server, run around and shoot with no ambition or attempt of a coordinated plan to truly test the map? By all accounts, I have to assume some of them weren&#039;t. Otherwise, out of respect for all the board member&#039;s skill and understanding of CTF, I&#039;d have no other reason to explain why some of these maps are in here other than saying they were tested with bots. Because some of them really are just that bad. <br /><br />I&#039;m sure you&#039;re wondering why I ask about the play-testing and I&#039;ll gladly explain:<br /><br />When the contest maps were introduced and setup for play-testing, the method in which they were tested in could be described as negligent at best. There was no effort to organize 3v3 coordinated matches, everybody just ran around and shot at people and tried to score. For the sake of shortening this ramble, I&#039;ll simply say the way in which they were tested was a step under public CTF. At least in public, both teams try to win. <br /><br />I&#039;ll give credit where credit is due, however, as I remember Fastidious and Mass really trying to pursue just that. The sad thing is, very rarely did they play in 3v3 settings. And I suspect that&#039;s where determination of what maps are deemed playable get skewed a bit. 4v4 and 5v5 is not 3v3. A 1st grader could tell you this. But to dig deeper, 3v3 does not inherit the same strategy or method of playing that 4v4/5v5 does. Therefore, you cannot say they were accurately tested&nbsp; for IDL games since they are played in 3v3 format. <br /><br />However, I will admit some maps can give you a good idea no matter how many players play in it. For example, I don&#039;t need to test map31 in 3v3 to see how it&#039;ll play. I&#039;d get a pretty good idea in 5v5. Granted, in 3v3 it would be a little slower as there are less players naturally, making coordinated attempts a little more feasible. Nonetheless, maps like that are straight-forward. <br /><br />Overall, this is what I&#039;ll say: Mass is correct, there is no conspiracy here. Nostar was also correct earlier tonight when he said nobody gets paid. In fact, people actually lose money to make this happen. So in that tense, we should at least show some gratitude for people making this happen and realize they&#039;re not perfect. But they, being the board amongst others, should understand their efforts would be fruitless without us and should take that into account. Both sides can be a little harsh and in order for us to move forward, we should do a better job of venting our frustrations with each other so we can move closer to productive discussion. <br /><br />