Pro Tour 2 / The Pro Tour 2

You might be right... but I remember that he extended it like weeks before the first deadline, so you can't really use that as a basis for argument. But the principle behind it all has some merit.

And anyway, part of me is dying to beat you using whatever means necessary.

Are you allowed to submit a attraction youve build in a park of you? (if you haven't released that attraction).

I don't know if its just me but that question confused me.

Any way i gotta sit this PT2 out. I'm to busy with other solors

I'll have to catch PT3 when i comes round.

^

1- If their solo's it won't matter to anyone else much until you release them.

2- A design doesn't take that long to build.

3- It'll be another 12-18 months before another PT comes around.

Personally I would (will) enter.

ride6

I think he means that he has got a park with a attraction he wants to submit for the PT .
he hasn't releast the attraction and I think his questions is "am I allowed to submit this attraction" .

I think I'm going to try the Mine Train coaster next .

I'm getting antsy here.

Wake me when it's August.

You might be right... but I remember that he extended it like weeks before the first deadline, so you can't really use that as a basis for argument.  But the principle behind it all has some merit.

And anyway, part of me is dying to beat you using whatever means necessary. 

All I know is, I was like, 3/4 finished come time of the original deadline. That was after working continuously, from day 1.


I would LOVE it if we just got smaller workbenches, but I have a feeling I will get no support on that one.

It depends on how small you want it to be. 85x85 seems so reasonable.

Honestly, anything smaller than that could barely fit a coaster (for me).

I would go as low as 50x50. Fun little size. Also more of a challenge- see how much you could cram in.
But no one's going to go for that. I would be happy with ANYTHING smaller than the current.

I wouldn't mind smaller, seeing as how most of my completed parks have been 50x50 anyways. But I think I'd prefer 4 months with 85x85, just because 85x85 allows for a more distinct and full park, possibly with different areas. With more time I think we could see some much better entries. I know for me (assuming I get in) it would take at least 2 months to fill up the map with some decent stuff, a general layout basically, and at least one more month to get it great. But that's assuming I worked on it quite a bit, so an extra month on top would help a lot for getting it perfect.

Anyways, in recent news, I think I'll try for the inverted coaster prelim.

I'm hoping for 100x100. If you don't need it, don't use it. As long as judges don't penalize for a reasonable amount of filler.

The 85x85 maps used last time seemed perfect.
Most people were able to include at least a few themed areas without it being overcrowded.
Anything larger would require more time than necessary...
And anything smaller would be too small for a contest this "big".

Why mess with it when there weren't major issues last time, anyway?

Good question John.
Cause one or two people complained and so it started a trend. Well the benches will be BIGGER this year. That's all I'll say for now.

Actually I'll say that the benches will be 90x90. Not a whole lot bigger. No crying about it either.

I don't see how a 1/4 of a year isn't long enough? Any longer and this contest will just take over everything, and overall run for over half a year! I think it's a perfect size to complete, and there is enough time unless you have a really really busy schedule, which, I understand, some people do. It just depends on how many people would prefer longer, and how many people would like to just get on with it, get it in by the proposed deadline and see those awesome entries sooner, rather than later.

Metro

Edit: Just saw Iris' post.....forget what I said

What!
No offense iris, but what's the point of that? What's an extra 5 squares going to do for me? Nothing, that's what. The way I see it - if you're going to make it bigger, atleast make the jump a bit more significant. I guess 5 squares could mean a lot to some, but it just seems a little odd to me. I kind of agree with John; don't fix what isn't broken.

Actually, even adding an extra 5 is a significant jump in sizes. More so than you would first think.

[font="arial"]WTF!? it's going to be bigger? oh god, i hope we get longer.[/font]

Yay, bigger map, bigger chance of me not finishing...

Also, bigger, although harder, is better. Thanks Iris.

Actually, even adding an extra 5 is a significant jump in sizes. More so than you would first think.

Oh no, I know what's up. It's adding 5 squares on both the X and Y axis, yeah? I guess you could call that a big leap. But still, why not just go the full 100 if you're so interested in changing the size? I don't know, I just think the original 85x85 was perfect.

85x85 to 90x90 is a 12+% increase in squares.

Cool, thanks!