Ladder Rotation/System Comments

[Morax]

Maybe if you calmed down and and tried to engage in a conversation seriously instead of starting accusing us for all kinds of different things you could actually get somewhere

I tried to set up meetings with ladder team a few times now, but it's always ignored, or some excuse is made.

Hold to your word for once and I'll calm down.

[Blodir]

I respect that u guys are trying to have this elaborate map picking process with integrity and stuff. But clearly there's issues since it's not just me complaining.

Yeah mountain I'm sure it feels like I'm just picking my favorite ice cream like u said, and I guess to a certain extent that's what it is, but hear me out. I want every map to have a comparable skill floor & ceiling. I think the maps should be somewhat visually pleasing. I think the major gameplay elements such as reclaim and mex count should be somewhat consistent. I want maps to enable a reasonably diverse set of strategies and tech choices. I think maps should be balanced between all the races. I want every map to be visually consistent in a way that even if you are playing the map for the first time you wont be caught offguard by strange terrain that is not easy to identify. I think all maps should be consistent in terms of game mechanics (no aperture, no crazyrush, no old speed icemap).

Where to draw the line with this? I really don't understand why it's that difficult. It's clear that there's a set of standard maps that hardly ever get complained about: syrtis, loki, palms, craftious, theta, forbidden pass, twin rivers, roanoke, white fire etc. And then there's maps that get a lot of complaints like haven reef, daroza, crazyrush, high noon, melancholy hill. There's a lot of new maps that fall somewhere in between like that new morax map or abhor. Eg. Abhor has a comparable number of mexes to most standard 10x10 maps, it has 3 (or more depends how u look at it) attack paths and in general is fairly open. It's very obvious that this map falls within the standard category. Now look at stella maris 1v1: it has a lot more mexes than a standard map, it's also a 10x10 dropmap which has a high skill floor and can be kind of coinflippy. However its not super crazy. This map is certainly experimental but close enough to standard thay it could be considered for ladder. How about the dark heart? This map has had a lot of balance concerns with potentially sera and aeon being op on it, there's also a lot of reclaim wrecks with strange distancing. It's also a water acu rush map which is non standard. Matches on it are unlikely to reach a later stage because of sheer power of t2 navy on a map like this. The bottom island also adds to the coinflippiness. I think this map is a bit too out there for ladder !

[Mountain]

Your assessment of the maps is similar to what's done currently. There's no question some maps are really good. In fact the traditional popular maps make it to pool with 100% certainty.

But keeping only those maps alone would limit the variety of gameplay. Those maps are kept to appeal to the 10%, the 5%, the 16% or whatever number of players who enjoy those maps and would like to play on them competitively

The benefits of a rich and flavorful, diverse map pool outweigh the inconvenience that players might encounter with maps they dont like.

In a scenario with popular maps only there will still be complaints. We know this because it's been done before. Every map pool has complaints because every player has something like 1 favorite map and 5 maps they hate.

In a scenario with popular maps plus new maps we still get complaints but also new and interesting strategies and prior unseen games to watch between high level players. I don't want to see Adjux vs Mephi on loki for the 10th time. I want to see them play on some weird ass map that I have no idea how to play.

Maybe in competition there should only be 1 playable environment like in chess or soccer. Or a low diversity even. But faf has so much more to offer than that. It offers diverse environments, colors, textures, themes, etc. There may come a day when map pools are back to traditional maps only. I will look back and see how I enjoyed a time when ladder was alot more vibrant and interesting

[Farmsletje]

I respect that u guys are trying to have this elaborate map picking process with integrity and stuff. But clearly there's issues since it's not just me complaining.

Yeah mountain I'm sure it feels like I'm just picking my favorite ice cream like u said, and I guess to a certain extent that's what it is, but hear me out. I want every map to have a comparable skill floor & ceiling. I think the maps should be somewhat visually pleasing. I think the major gameplay elements such as reclaim and mex count should be somewhat consistent. I want maps to enable a reasonably diverse set of strategies and tech choices. I think maps should be balanced between all the races. I want every map to be visually consistent in a way that even if you are playing the map for the first time you wont be caught offguard by strange terrain that is not easy to identify. I think all maps should be consistent in terms of game mechanics (no aperture, no crazyrush, no old speed icemap).

Where to draw the line with this? I really don't understand why it's that difficult. It's clear that there's a set of standard maps that hardly ever get complained about: syrtis, loki, palms, craftious, theta, forbidden pass, twin rivers, roanoke, white fire etc. And then there's maps that get a lot of complaints like haven reef, daroza, crazyrush, high noon, melancholy hill. There's a lot of new maps that fall somewhere in between like that new morax map or abhor. Eg. Abhor has a comparable number of mexes to most standard 10x10 maps, it has 3 (or more depends how u look at it) attack paths and in general is fairly open. It's very obvious that this map falls within the standard category. Now look at stella maris 1v1: it has a lot more mexes than a standard map, it's also a 10x10 dropmap which has a high skill floor and can be kind of coinflippy. However its not super crazy. This map is certainly experimental but close enough to standard thay it could be considered for ladder. How about the dark heart? This map has had a lot of balance concerns with potentially sera and aeon being op on it, there's also a lot of reclaim wrecks with strange distancing. It's also a water acu rush map which is non standard. Matches on it are unlikely to reach a later stage because of sheer power of t2 navy on a map like this. The bottom island also adds to the coinflippiness. I think this map is a bit too out there for ladder !

You literally just described the same proces what the ladder team has done:


(can't see average score since i sorted on my name and that broke the doc)

also you haven't drawn any line aside from "enough people have to like it" which isn't a clear line at all.

Maybe if you calmed down and and tried to engage in a conversation seriously instead of starting accusing us for all kinds of different things you could actually get somewhere

I tried to set up meetings with ladder team a few times now, but it's always ignored, or some excuse is made.

Hold to your word for once and I'll calm down.

What word did i not hold unto? Please explain
Also i don't know anything about a ladder meeting aside from that i heard it was supposed to happen after it was supposed to have already happened.

[Morax]

The benefits of a rich and flavorful, diverse map pool outweigh the inconvenience that players might encounter with maps they dont like.

Not really... I dare you to say that in Aeolus and read what people say in return.

[Mountain]

You're not understanding what I'm saying. One person's inconvenience is another's motivation to play. Thus the benefits of having more maps that are favorited outweigh the reality that more maps can only be positively correlated with more disliked maps

Scenario 1: more maps ~ more liked maps + more disliked maps + diversity

Scenario 2: fewer maps ~ fewer liked maps + fewer disliked maps - diversity

[Blodir]

I prefer depth of knowledge over breadth of knowledge.

Imagine if in fighting games everyone had to play random character. In pro tournys everyone would be doing basic stuff with none of the strategy and incredible mechanical excellence that exists in actual fighting games, because of the massive burden of knowledge of having to understand 100s of matchups. Maybe you could say that the best player of random character has the greatest understanding of the game, but I think that's wasted potential, because the game has so much more to offer.

Would you rather watch a triatholon of chess, go and bridge or just go watch the actual pros? I'd rather watch the latter. I've been high level in many games ! But you'd rather watch serral play sc2 even though he's only good at one. I'm not interested in who is the best at crazyrush, the ditch and senton. I watched gala replays like everyone else because he was the best at senton hands down. Yea he might not have been good at haven reef, but who cares? I want to see someone who is a god at something, not a bunch of dudes who can kinda half ass all kinds of weird maps.

[FtXCommando]

lol, 4 new pages of discussion and no movement in actual solution.

Hey guys, we can literally do what you want. No matter what your “”””””philosophy”””””” is, the map sheet needs to exist to provide a “concept” of the “best” FAF maps. If we want to do some stupid 30 total pool to pick from, we only pick from maps with 3.75/5 total rating rather than the current 2/5. Wow lots of discussion for such a simple thing.

Also nice memes about ladder team lack of work ethic or whatever. I’d respond to it but I’d get reprimanded for uncouncillor-like behavior. I can’t think of a group of people that care more abot FAF and I’m glad to work with them and hear their opinions. Any problem you have with them is a problem with the way I organized them so I’d rather you don’t shitpost their capability.

[Blodir]

Ye I don't care how u do it kid, I'm sure the system in place is great. I just want results

[Mountain]

Unlike fighting games and character selection, in faf your 1v1 skills transfer across maps. Team game players also do not need to put in much more effort to gain competency in 1v1s so we see it happen all the time.

I would compare faf more to fps shooters and of course other rts games which all feature a robust selection of maps.

In faf most games on a given map play out similarly. I watched one game out of the adjux vs nexus bo15. The appeal comes from ability to adapt on different maps, not playing out the same strategy again and again but a little better or different each time

Again its my opinion. I value your perspective and i can definitely see why it can be more interesting to see for example gala dominating on setons