CoasterForce Speed Build Gaming Competition

[Nicky Borrill]

I am trying to launch (or relaunch) the CoasterForce gaming competitions.

The idea is to have members set a theme and coaster type via a poll, and then give contestants a set time to build and submit their entries. With the winners being chosen by members via a poll.

I am hoping we can offer an incentive of some sort, be that virtual / on the forums, or something small and real. I also intend to keep league tables each year, and have an end of year result too.

I want it to be as inclusive as possible, so I definitely hope to include NL2 and PlanCo. In an ideal world we'd include others too, but I just don't know how fair it would be putting, say, Parkitect creations up against PlanCo creations. Perhaps you have some thoughts on this? feel free to share below.

There are lots of details to iron out, but this thread is basically to gauge who might be interested in taking part? Which games you play, as well as how long you think would be a fair amount of time for a speed build, given life gets in the way for many.

Please post your name below, as well which games you play, and how long you think would be right for a speed build... I'll start us off...

Name: Nicky Borrill
Games Played: Planet Coaster and a little NL2
Nominated time limit: 2 weeks

 

[HeartlineCoaster]

I like the idea. Because it would have such an impact on the time limit, what sort of definition are we looking at for a 'speed build'? Just coaster layout vs coaster layout? How much emphasis on theming, landscaping, presentation?
I can't even imagine speed building in NL2 and like you say:

I just don't know how fair it would be putting, say, Parkitect creations up against PlanCo creations.

is even more true when it comes to presentation. This could be perhaps avoided by sticking to one game per round, though it would entirely depend on how many people get involved and then how many have access to more than one.

Games Played: RCT2 is my expertise, but I'd like some incentive to get more practice in on NL2.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

I like the idea. Because it would have such an impact on the time limit, what sort of definition are we looking at for a 'speed build'? Just coaster layout vs coaster layout? How much emphasis on theming, landscaping, presentation?
I can't even imagine speed building in NL2 and like you say:

is even more true when it comes to presentation. This could be perhaps avoided by sticking to one game per round, though it would entirely depend on how many people get involved and then how many have access to more than one.

Games Played: RCT2 is my expertise, but I'd like some incentive to get more practice in on NL2.

I have literally never tried theming a coaster in NL2, so whilst I know it's possible, I don't know how long it would take.

But if you're suggesting what I think you're suggesting, that theming in NL2 is a time consuming nightmare, then we have a few choices.

1. We could just do layouts (which is probably my preferred option, as it would allow us to use some of the other games too.)
2. We could have an award for layout, and an award for theming separate. (This would to some extent allow other games too, but IMO would fragment it a little too much)
3. We could pick a game for each round (wouldn't be as inclusive, I fear some would skips rounds through either not wanting to buy a certain game, or because they don't want to learn a new game)

If folks could give their thoughts on this too, that would be great. I'm going with option 1, as I think it will help people really focus on the layout in a short time frame, and allow other games to be included.

 

[Hixee]

Name: Hixee
Games Played: NL2, with a bit of RCT2 (I do also have a PlanCo license, but never actually played it)
Nominated Time Limit: 2 weeks should (maybe?) be doable

In terms of theming - could it be different depending on the coaster/project/game? Theming is much easier in some games than others...?

That said, theming is generally hard work. Bit of landscaping I don't mind, but full on theming is something I've never really done.

 

[Skyye]

Name: Skyye
Games Played: PlanCo and NL2
Nom. Time: 2-2.5 weeks sounds good to me

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Well there's at least 4 of us then? I think that makes it worthwhile, so let's iron out some details, whilst we wait for over potential contestants.

Would people rather we just do the layout, so that any coaster game can be used, and we can, in the short time, focus on creating a layout that is great? Of course, those who want to can add theming, but we'll ask members to judge them purely on the layout...

Or would you like to see us have a go at theming coasters, and get members to judge them on that too?

Given the fact that 50% of players so far do not play PlanCo, I think it would be unfair to judge them on theming too, personally, but what says you?

 

[HeartlineCoaster]

I also think 2 weeks is fine then if everyone's happy with layout only.
Don't really think I'd ever be fully happy with something I themed in NL and that's part of the reason I don't play it enough!

 

[Kw6sTheater]

Name: Kw6sTheater
Games Played: Parkitect, RCT3 and NL2 (but I mainly just play NL2 nowadays)
Nominated Time Limit: 2-4 weeks ideally

Awesome... I've never seen a CF Gaming contest hosted in the almost 5 years (wow, didn't realize it's been that long already) I've been a member of these forums, so I'd be thrilled to participate! Personally, I'd be using NL2 for this contest over Parkitect or RCT3 (to create more complex, smoother layouts and continue to improve at NL2).

In terms of my thoughts and opinions... a contest based primarily on layout design would be the best option to save on time and get the most participants, but light landscaping (perhaps ponds, trees and small-scale terrain or rockwork) shouldn't be too difficult to do in any game. There could be additional judging categories (including layout, of course) for supportwork, presentation - which would include landscaping - and realism. Along with that, it could be an interesting challenge to work around some constraints (examples: the coaster can't be taller than 150ft/46m, must include at least 2 inversions, be less than 5000ft/1524m long, have at least one first-of-its-kind element, etc...) so the judges don't end up having to compare 10,000+ foot long terra-coasters against 2,000 foot long Euro Fighters. Plus, it could create fascinating results to see each participant's artistic interpretation of designing within such constraints, especially since it'd be impossible to provide a template if the contest's held across multiple games.

As for the winners, they could be decided through popular vote (but then I fear Intamin Blitzes/RMC Hybrids would win by default, given how much enthusiasts adore those models, over a genuinely higher quality submission), or we could nominate really skilled players (maybe one per game platform in the contest, but those could be hard to find/entice) to judge.

These are all just ideas though, consider them if you'd like to, but no worries - whatever the deadline, guidelines/constraints or the game platform(s) chosen are, I'd love to participate in this contest regardless.

 

[Hixee]

As for the winners, they could be decided through popular vote (but then I fear Intamin Blitzes/RMC Hybrids would win by default, given how much enthusiasts adore those models, over a genuinely higher quality submission), or we could nominate really skilled players (maybe one per game platform in the contest, but those could be hard to find/entice) to judge.

One way around this that was used for years across NLE (plus some other earlier version of this that I can't recall the name of) and CoasterForce is to use a series of "categories".

Score, out of five, each of the following: Realism*, Creativity, Build Quality, Overall

It helps iron out some of those biases that can crop up unintentionally, but does rely on everyone being "sensible" about it.

*Realism generally taken to mean "forces in check", rather than pushing away creative new elements or 'surreal' coasters.

 

[Rock_N_RollBob]

Couldn't it just be an ongoing thing? "The ride I want to ride" - as entries come in = more chewing gum for the eyeballs. And, all the platforms, theming, and time constraints would work itself out. Some type of realism constraint I can see, though.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

I think many of those things would be settled by the ‘pre round’ ride type vote.

As in asking all members before each round…

Which ride type should we build this month:

1. Multi Launch Coaster
2. Hybrid Coaster
3. Out and Back Hyper Coaster

That should in itself set the constraints

I do like the idea of different judging categories though.

Layout Realism, Element Creativity / Originality, and Overall would be the 3 I’d go for. I think asking folks to judge on build quality would introduce some bias again towards PlanCo and NL2… As the coasters just look better quality, if that makes sense.

I think it looks pretty settled that we’d all rather focus on layout, and be judged on that. Of course, some landscaped / styling isn’t an issue, but we’ll ask members to judge purely the layout.



EDIT: Now I'm on my PC I can elaborate:


So we will be asking members to pick which ride type we build each month, from a list of say 3, those ride types could have constraints, for example:

1. Multi Launch Coaster [Constr - Propulsion: Multiple Launches, Max Height: 199ft, Minimum Speed: 50mph]
2. Hybrid Coaster [Constr - Propulsion: Lift Hill, Max Height: 220ft, Min Inversions: 2]
3. Out and Back Hyper Coaster [Constr - Propulsion Lift Hill, Min Height: 200ft, Max Height 299ft, Max Inversions: 0]

Obviously I've quickly done those constraints off the top of my head, before we give general members a list of ride types to pick the one we're building from, we can have a discussion in here on the constraints for each of those ride types.

Once we've decided the constraints for the 3 ride types we're putting to the vote that month, we can then setup the poll / topic to ask the general membership which one we should build and compete on.

Once the general forum members have picked a ride type we can start the clock, and we get 2 weeks to build a layout, of that type, that meets the agreed constraints.

Once those 2 weeks areup, we'll need to submit our layouts for judging.

To submit we should create a video screen grab containing both off ride shots, and a pov.

That video can then either be uploaded to your own youtube, or emailed across and I'll upload it for you (it would be preferred if you can do it, but no worries if not.) Then posted to the voting / entries topic.

Once the entries are in, we'll ask people to vote.

We'll ask them to vote on the layout only in 3 categories. We'll announce a winner each month for all 3 categories.

However, we'll also keep a league table for each 'season' (6 months?) The league table will be based 'mostly' on the overall category, with the other 2 categories being used only to settle ties.

For the league, the top 5 overall layouts will score points, with 5 points for 1st, 4 points for 2nd, 3 points for 3rd and so on down to 5th.

Categories:

Layout realism
Layout / Element Uniqueness
Overall

I hope this makes sense, I intend to move quickly with this now we have some momentum, so if there's anything in that proposed structure you really do not like, speak now

Of course, this is a learning process, and can be evolved, with agreement, as we go too.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

So with the above in mind:

Please can you submit your 3 suggested ride types, and suggested constraints for each type.

I will then set up a thread / poll tomorrow evening for the members to decide which type we end up building.

I'm going to go with the ones I already suggested, so that I can copy and paste them...

1. Multi Launch Coaster [Constr - Propulsion: Multiple Launches, Max Height: 199ft, Minimum Speed: 50mph]
2. Hybrid Coaster [Constr - Propulsion: Lift Hill, Max Height: 220ft, Min Inversions: 2]
3. Out and Back Hyper Coaster [Constr - Propulsion Lift Hill, Min Height: 200ft, Max Height 299ft, Max Inversions: 0]

 

[Kw6sTheater]

At the moment, the one ride type I'd like to suggest is a Wooden Coaster. Some constraints could be a maximum height of 130ft, maximum inversion count of 3 and minimum speed of 40mph. This could lead to a wide variety of submissions, from classic PTCs to inverting Gravity Groups to wild Intamin Prefabs, plus everything in between. All the ride types you suggested sound appealing to me too, especially the multi launch and hyper, since they offer loads of creative freedom in terms of the elements and overall layouts possible (and could lead to some really unique and drastically different submissions).

What will the criteria for the "Overall" category be?

 

[Nicky Borrill]

At the moment, the one ride type I'd like to suggest is a Wooden Coaster. Some constraints could be a maximum height of 130ft, maximum inversion count of 3 and minimum speed of 40mph. This could lead to a wide variety of submissions, from classic PTCs to inverting Gravity Groups to wild Intamin Prefabs, plus everything in between. All the ride types you suggested sound appealing to me too, especially the multi launch and hyper, since they offer loads of creative freedom in terms of the elements and overall layouts possible (and could lead to some really unique and drastically different submissions).

What will the criteria for the "Overall" category be?

It will be done on a vote, put to all members of the forums, as 'the layout they'd most like to ride overall.'

I'll put you down for woodie, Multi Launch and Hyper as your 3 suggestions then

Cheers

 

[Hixee]

My three suggestions would be:

1. Mack Launched - 50mph, min 2 inversions, min 3 airtime hills
2. Maurer Spinning Coaster - must fit within an area (30x40m?) and be capable of running at least four trains
3. Gerstlauer Infinity Coaster - No launches, interlocking corkscrews, min 4000ft length

Something like that...

 

[Nicky Borrill]

My three suggestions would be:

1. Mack Launched - 50mph, min 2 inversions, min 3 airtime hills
2. Maurer Spinning Coaster - must fit within an area (30x40m?) and be capable of running at least four trains
3. Gerstlauer Infinity Coaster - No launches, interlocking corkscrews, min 4000ft length

Something like that...

God I love that gerst idea, if that doesn't get through this time, please keep suggesting it!!!! Longer than the smiler!!!

 

[Hixee]

God I love that gerst idea, if that doesn't get through this time, please keep suggesting it!!!! Longer than the smiler!!!

Whoops...

Pulled that number out of thin air - wasn't aiming for something to be quite as long as Smiler. That's no mean feat!

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Whoops...

Pulled that number out of thin air - wasn't aiming for something to be quite as long as Smiler. That's no mean feat!

No I love it... I went with more of a 'keep it realistic' angle with my constraints. You've gone with the 'let's make this a challenge' angle, without making it any less realistic. Definitely prefer your angle!!!!

 

[HeartlineCoaster]

I definitely need to get more practice in if we're looking at Infinity coasters already!

So far I like the sound of a combination of everyone's, so they can be my nominations:

Out and Back Hyper Coaster [Constr - Propulsion Lift Hill, Min Height: 200ft, Max Height 299ft, Max Inversions: 0]

At the moment, the one ride type I'd like to suggest is a Wooden Coaster. Some constraints could be a maximum height of 130ft, maximum inversion count of 3 and minimum speed of 40mph.

Maurer Spinning Coaster - must fit within an area (30x40m?) and be capable of running at least four trains

 

[Nicky Borrill]

So the votes as it stands are...

Wooden Coaster x 2
Multi Launch x 2
Hybrid x 1
Out and back Hyper x 2
Maurer Spinning x 2
Guerst Infiinity x 1

With the bold ones currently looking like our options....

I'll leave it a little while longer for anybody else that hasn't had chance yet. Then I'll set up a Poll for all members to pick which one we're building.

(P.s @Hixee I've merged your mack suggestion with mine, as I've no problem with it being a Mack, and we can merge the constraints somewhat too)