removed due to lack of trees

[tropic prawn]

Hello @quartz girder thank you for submitting your map, i must sadly reject it because it does not fit the quality of maps we are looking for.

you can dm me if you want some specific advice.

[quartz girder]

removed due to lack of trees

[buoyant radish]

Hi @quartz girder
I went ahead and reviewed your map as well and am going to have to give it a denial. The route is technical which is a plus but it's equally as boring. Couple that with the lack of scenery and it feels like a WIP map. At the very least you could put a GPS on the map highlighting the technical aspect you were going for. Scenery is not a requirement for maps but that is usually reserved for top notch routes.
I also have an issue with one of the CPs blocking the optimal line on a outside turn. The ending felt awkward as well, I get the idea you were going for but it wasn't executed properly.
I think this map has plenty of potential and would benefit from you taking more time to perfect it.

on a completely different note I hope this will be the last time you "throw a fit" and change the title of the post because you are mad. If you have a problem then feel free to DM since i'm the server admin.

I really hope you take this as the intended constructive criticism and work on the map and resubmit.

[quartz girder]

Hi @buoyant radish I am new to the Trackmania community as a whole and have only been playing for around 3 months. I'd like to make a few notes here.

I appreciate you acknowledge that the point of the track was to be a technical challenge. I'm a big fan of dirt and sliding surfaces and creating a gear challenge that was tight from start to finish while not requiring braking was the intent.

I don't use GPS unless the track actually makes me lost, so I didn't feel the need to include a GPS as the track is linear. I also feel like adding GPS to short tracks invalidates the fun of discovering lines.

The ending is a bugslide, and I received good feedback from multiple players (including Mudda) that the bump was enough indication for the experienced and advanced players to think about a bugslide. The bugslide is required to get the Author Time. As far as I can tell, you can't without it, but I encourage people to try. It would almost be like a shortcut though, as the "awkward ending" is the setup for a "janky" bug slide.

The details you consider awkward, are intentional, if driving the pixel perfect line was my intention, I could have used traditional CPs or Line/zone CPs, the rings and arcs are in the way on purpose as the theme of the track is to be Jank.

It is not a transitional track, so I'm not considering optimizing smooth connections between sections.

The grass is banked to make the gear check work. I originally had grass platform, but in order to make the turn you'd lose the gear, or if you kept gear, you couldnt make the turn. I intended the route to include a skill-check for the harsh grass corner. Keeping 4th, switching back, and keeping speed to bugslide is a challenge. It took me about 80 attempts to set the AT time, and about 150 more to beat it again for the leaderboards.

When speaking with DirttyDuck, I may have been abrupt, but that was primarily because it seemed like they were taking alot of time trying to compose the perfect response when my questions were simple: Is it only the scenery or were there other concerns? The concerns with the technicality and route were addressed. This isn't a WIP. While this is my first track, I am content with not putting alot of time into polish because it was more about creating something fun and nonconventional. Jank is my aesthetic.

While I won't be editing this track as I don't want to disrupt the leaderboard for those that've taken the time to learn and discover the track, I want to inquire if future "Janky" tracks will be denied by default. Is minimalism not allowed?

Lastly, I did not change the title of the post due to being mad. I initially was trying to figure out how to archive it, but it appears forum threads have different rules than chat threads for Discord. I do not know if I am allowed to close my own submission. This is the second time an EVO admin has taken my confusion as aggression or anger. Perhaps you as an individual could consider that you just changed the process in the last few days, and with this being my first submission, confusion or understanding is at the root of it instead of taking things as an attack. EVO as an organization should be careful assigining malice to situations where ignorance or miscommunication are far more likely. When I named it "removed due to lack of trees" I was under the misconception that scenery was the primary concern. I have been dually informed that scenery wasn't the concern and I have since responded directly to the criticisms you have presented.

[twin lake]

Hi, your map was not meeting our quality standards, hence it was denied. No need for further clarification or justification from your end.
To answer your question, if the map plays jank, is jank, looks like jank, it doesn't fit our servers. We want quality maps, not jank maps.

[quartz girder]

Understood, thank you for concise response. If I submit any more maps for EVO consideration, I will ensure they are more polished and not in this style.

[twin lake]

Thank you!