automatch/ladder map pool

[Mad`Mozart]

Anyone else wants to mention the "we need to bring old system back"?

[Iszh]

Yes!

Thats how the old system worked:

http://www.faforever.com/2013/11/lobby-0-10-93-new-matchmaker-function/#.VrLzZ0ylE28

THe big problems was here:

If there is no common map, you have 33% chances of having a map of your list, 33% of having a popular map (can be ones of your list), and 33% chances of playing the favorite map of your enemy.

And this was the reason why a very high percentage of everybodies maps have been 5x5. Lots of players obviously selected small maps and the few pro people decided they want more fun on big maps. I clicked 70 of those 80+ maps at least and tried to use it as a voting system to avoid a few terrible maps. Because if people selected more than 15 maps there was a very high chance that i will have those maps in my selection and avoid the most popular maps. I got very various maps in 1v1. Maybe the system works as it is but you need to force people to chose at least 60 maps before playing then it will work better. And maps will be very random

The problem is very easy if people select only 15 most liked maps and there are a lot of 5x5 they are in your mappool in enemies mappool and in the most liked. The big maps only a few people have selected ( since opinions about which map is good differ a lot here) will automatically be only in your mappool and not in enemies and not in most liked. Chance is terribly low. And the chance to get the 5x5 map is insane high it can be chosen in all 3 mappools. If you force people to select a very high number of maps it will drastically decrease this desaster.

[Exotic_Retard]

i too think that old matchmaker should be good - sure it didn't work perfectly, but that specific implementation does not mean the concept is bad.

just look how absolutely everyone has a different idea of what the map pool should be - a static system can never please everyone, and each person has 1 map they hate - and wont play ladder just because of that map. *cough* Tokyto EOTS *cough*

things that need to be included imo:
cant play on same map more than once every 5 games
veto function - could be anything from 1-5 maps to veto.

then have a static - manually decided map pool like now but reduced in size (very small, like 5 maps - at least equal to number of vetos) which you cant select.
the static pool will be the "default maps" and be used only when people dont have enough common maps in their list.
the number of maps you veto must be equal or lower than the number of maps you select -- this is so you can always ensure a match

the system picks the maps in this order, only going to the next option if the previous one gives 0 maps:
1. common maps from your lists
2. maps from either of your lists
3. maps from the common map pool

this way:
you can play current map pool by selecting 5-10 maps (this + default maps = 10-15 maps lets say in the map pool)
you can play a very small map pool by selecting 0 maps (you bscly either play the default maps or opponents maps)
you can play a modified map pool by selecting some maps you like and keeping the default ones
you can play whichever map pool you want by vetoing the default maps and selecting your own - this can be as many maps as you want - want a large pool? sure.

im a bit tired right now so this may be flawed somewhere...

but the point is that this system is far, far more flexible than having a static map pool. the essential bits are the veto system and the repeated map prevention (this could be more sophisticated than the once every 5 games and could work more like a shuffle, prioritizing maps that you have least played, ect.)
you could also have some advanced methods of categorizing similar maps and having soft vetoes (will try not to pick that map but will if there is no other option - this isn't key but i think this idea is really nice :3)

hope this helps

[Blodir]

The only reason I started playing ladder was because the map pool system changed.

[Apofenas]

The only reason i stopped playing ladder seriously was because the map pool system was changed. I had some friends who liked that ladder. Don't see any of them in FAF anymore. So as i don't see a lot of people with whom i got matched a year ago and don't get a lot of people these days so i don't notice that.

[Sir Prize]

Why can't the old system, or a broad map pool, be opt-in/opt-out? There are some elegant solutions that have been suggested that let people who want a small and/or static pool have one, and people who want variety, either by rotation or large map pool, to have that as well (either with vetoes and/or some other tweaks to the old system, opting in to a fast rotation or opting in to a monster map pool in addition to having a small, static pool selected by the player councillor).

Whoever the player councillor is needs to decide if they want a competitive, comparative ladder, then we need a map pool that's small and static. I think this also helps teach people to become better players if they persist with ladder, because map knowledge gets taken out of the equation and it comes down to skill and lateral/strategic thinking in more cases than where there's a dispaity in map knowledge. If we want an automatch system to be popular so people have fun on the server and that doesn't try to be perfectly comparative (but will still be pretty good for that), you need to give people choice, ideally without splitting the 1v1 community into what they've chosen, which would stop us getting games.

I actually don't have a preference, although it might be nice to get some basic code that stops you getting a map more than once every 3/4/5 games, no matter what. At the moment we have a system that is a compromise between variety and a small pool that, if I remember rightly, was only ever meant to be a stopgap when TA suggested it.

Badlands (they are both very overplayed, and are cancerous turtle maps)

I know this map better than any other map in this game, and in my experience it is reliably decided by T1/T2 land or drops, with the advantage already gained at earlier stages sometimes leading to the winner finishing the game off with T3/T4 land or air. It can also be decided by Harb rush pretty reliably, which is hardly turtle play and something that will be addressed at some point. If you don't raid, you're the one making it a turtlefest. It also definitely hasn't been in the core rotation since the new system.

Twin Rivers, yeah kinda I still like it though (as someone who likes to raid I'm not great at it unfortunately).

[Zock]

Hi,

Feel free to discuss different map pool systems, but please keep in mind that without anyone to implement them, we can only do so much. And that this is about the third thread of everyone pointing out their favourite fantasy concept in lengthy posts.

There is absolutely no downside (except it being slightly less competetive, but FAF is not in an position where this is the priority) to an opt-in system for more maps for everyone who chooses to have them, and its discussable to have some better version of the old opt-out system instead too, or any other kind of system with vetos/likes/voting..but 100 great ideas don't help without anyone that make them happen. So please don't be disappointed if the current system stays what worked decently in the past under TA, until someone finds time to implement a more advanced system. It is also what almost all other RTS games use, and what works for them, so it can't be completely terrible.

The old system had the problem of scaring people away because they don't want to learn 100 different maps that they would eventually end up playing and they'd just get overwhelmed by the choice they have themselves and the variety they get thrown onto them, even if this comes with a greater chance of playing their own favorite maps too. This applies especially to new players, which are important for the future of FAF

A static pool eventually leaves some people bored of maps, but we try to compromise between this two extremes with the map rotations.

[Sir Prize]

If I say it enough times maybe it happens one day I did have a conversation with Sheeo at one point recently about the pool, where he said any system is easy to implement if someone tells him what to do, although obviously he's busy with the server atm. Also, don't most RTSes have smaller, more static pools than this? Genuine question.

[keyser]

http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/M ... f_the_Void
7 map for each ladder for starcraft 2.

[Zock]

Afaik most (all? never seen a different system) RTS have a pool about 8-15 maps, that changes every couple of month, which is more static than what we have, yes.

But it's been a while since i played other rts, and there aren't that many anymore anyway..but at least the most successful one does it from what i know.