Forged Alliance Forever

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-06T05:30:54+02:00

TheKoopa wrote:
5x5 should be played as much if not more than other maps

Making mistakes is something a 2000 rated player shouldn't be doing, and getting away with them is impossible on a 5x5 map unlike on 10x10 or 20x20

Statistics: Posted by TestPlay — 06 Nov 2017, 05:30

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-06T02:06:40+02:00

Farmsletje wrote:
You don't mind because in your case it doesn't matter ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Where's the question mark

Statistics: Posted by TheKoopa — 06 Nov 2017, 02:06

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-05T23:52:54+02:00

I'M THE ONE ASKING THE QUESTIONS

Statistics: Posted by Farmsletje — 05 Nov 2017, 23:52

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-05T22:20:43+02:00

And you mind because you want to get away with these mistakes right?

Statistics: Posted by TheKoopa — 05 Nov 2017, 22:20

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-05T22:00:45+02:00

You don't mind because in your case it doesn't matter ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Statistics: Posted by Farmsletje — 05 Nov 2017, 22:00

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-05T21:44:14+02:00

5x5 should be played as much if not more than other maps

Making mistakes is something a 2000 rated player shouldn't be doing, and getting away with them is impossible on a 5x5 map unlike on 10x10 or 20x20

Statistics: Posted by TheKoopa — 05 Nov 2017, 21:44

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-04T18:22:55+02:00

Cerberus13 wrote:
TestPlay wrote:
Cerberus13 wrote:Edit - also, saying 5k maps are mostly luck based and you have no time to react to strategy is complete bull.

I do not see the point of 2 ACUs coming together at the start and fighting each other out just to get an advantage in eco/map control just for a 5x5 km small map? What strategy can you use other than land mass spam and a sudden "surprise strategy" (like a jester rush or something which may not be countered in time)? You would say that I should scout, but what if scouting had failed? Will you feel that it is boring if you were on the defending end and cannot react in time?

It is also the same when you bring 2 mantises to attack a mex point but you failed, when bringing 3 mantises would have gotten you a victory when the enemy brings 2 mantises of the same to defend too (or you should bring 3 mantises to defend a point when you only brought 2 mantises and lost). A boring game ensues that you will lose, when things like that do not go your way, which really depended on some level of "luck"?

The larger maps provide much more better options in recovery time if you were to lose units or even a base expansion. You could even go on and win the game, as compared to everything that you would lose on a 5x5 km map. You should be good enough to know this better enough than me...

I can say the same thing in regards to 20k maps.

I do not see the point of 2 transports rushing to either side and dropping off engis just to get an advantage in eco/map control just for a 20k large map? What strategy can you use other than air spam and drops... You should say I should scout for transports, but what if scouting failed...

It is also the same when you bring 2 interceptors to kill a transport but fail, when bringing 3 interceptors would have gotten you a victory...

You are describing the game. Of course if you dont bring enough units somewhere you will lose, of course if you over commit units you are weak elsewhere, of course if you scouted and you missed something you will be caught off guard. The same is true on any map. If you want to make an argument against 5k's, at least make an argument that cant be repeated for every other map on supcom :/

And even with all that besides the point, 5k maps are fun to play, They just take a different kind of strategy, A unique style of gameplay you cant find on other maps which takes time to learn. Just like it takes time to learn 10k land spam, 10k naval play, 20k air/naval play, 10k air/navy/water play, high reclaim maps... If you know how to play maps like loki, glaciers, vya, twin rivers, or Broken vows, you know that these maps each play completely different styles of gameplay, learning how to play 5k maps shouldn't be too difficult. We have 5k maps because some people like to play them, just like how I hate drop based 20k maps, yet we have those anyway because others like to play them. If you want to talk about maps where you can lose by minute 3, talk to me when an interceptor follows your transport through fog of war and you are suddenly behind on your expos by 3 minutes. your options for, as you say, 'recovery time' are non existent. 'You should be good enough to know this better enough than me' as you said earlier. And if you say "you can scout to prevent this, see my above statements regarding the absurdity of blanket statements, because you can scout for 5k's as well. If you want a game that does not have any luck involved, play chess.

I would say that there will be enough time for you to actually "expand out", even if your opponent does the same for 20k maps. There will be no "excuses" for any mistakes as there is more time to actually develop something. There is so much more strategy for a 20k map whereby you can "do so many more things" and defend/attack expansions in a standard 25-30 minute game rather than a 5x5 km map where games are ended in 10-15 minutes or less?

As I have mentioned, I do not mind to get a 5x5 km map once in a blue moon. But I have been getting it way too often. I have already gotten it 3 times while playing today. It is quite simply remarkable. I am not too sure if you would feel that there is much "fun" if you are getting the 5x5 km maps on such a consistent basis as I do...

Statistics: Posted by TestPlay — 04 Nov 2017, 18:22

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-03T16:32:47+02:00

ThomasHiatt wrote:
You can keep posting on the forums over and over about how you want a larger pool with veto, but it seems like you aren't going to get it unless you implement it yourself or pay someone to do it.

Nah, people address things after time if you keep fighting for it. It may not happen within a short amount of time if ever, but stuff did get addressed.

Case example: Tokyto stopped selecting maps for ladder pool that are bizarre ( for the most part... )

And I personally don't recommend giving up as that's just lazy. Get motivated or don't get anything. Put on the big boy pants and be patient, Thomas.

Statistics: Posted by Morax — 03 Nov 2017, 16:32

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-03T16:34:26+02:00

TestPlay wrote:
Cerberus13 wrote:Edit - also, saying 5k maps are mostly luck based and you have no time to react to strategy is complete bull.

I do not see the point of 2 ACUs coming together at the start and fighting each other out just to get an advantage in eco/map control just for a 5x5 km small map? What strategy can you use other than land mass spam and a sudden "surprise strategy" (like a jester rush or something which may not be countered in time)? You would say that I should scout, but what if scouting had failed? Will you feel that it is boring if you were on the defending end and cannot react in time?

It is also the same when you bring 2 mantises to attack a mex point but you failed, when bringing 3 mantises would have gotten you a victory when the enemy brings 2 mantises of the same to defend too (or you should bring 3 mantises to defend a point when you only brought 2 mantises and lost). A boring game ensues that you will lose, when things like that do not go your way, which really depended on some level of "luck"?

The larger maps provide much more better options in recovery time if you were to lose units or even a base expansion. You could even go on and win the game, as compared to everything that you would lose on a 5x5 km map. You should be good enough to know this better enough than me...

I can say the same thing in regards to 20k maps.

I do not see the point of 2 transports rushing to either side and dropping off engis just to get an advantage in eco/map control just for a 20k large map? What strategy can you use other than air spam and drops... You should say I should scout for transports, but what if scouting failed...

It is also the same when you bring 2 interceptors to kill a transport but fail, when bringing 3 interceptors would have gotten you a victory...

You are describing the game. Of course if you dont bring enough units somewhere you will lose, of course if you over commit units you are weak elsewhere, of course if you scouted and you missed something you will be caught off guard. The same is true on any map. If you want to make an argument against 5k's, at least make an argument that cant be repeated for every other map on supcom :/

And even with all that besides the point, 5k maps are fun to play, They just take a different kind of strategy, A unique style of gameplay you cant find on other maps which takes time to learn. Just like it takes time to learn 10k land spam, 10k naval play, 20k air/naval play, 10k air/navy/water play, high reclaim maps... If you know how to play maps like loki, glaciers, vya, twin rivers, or Broken vows, you know that these maps each play completely different styles of gameplay, learning how to play 5k maps shouldn't be too difficult. We have 5k maps because some people like to play them, just like how I hate drop based 20k maps, yet we have those anyway because others like to play them. If you want to talk about maps where you can lose by minute 3, talk to me when an interceptor follows your transport through fog of war and you are suddenly behind on your expos by 3 minutes. your options for, as you say, 'recovery time' are non existent. 'You should be good enough to know this better enough than me' as you said earlier. And if you say "you can scout to prevent this, see my above statements regarding the absurdity of blanket statements, because you can scout for 5k's as well. If you want a game that does not have any luck involved, play chess.

Statistics: Posted by Tex — 03 Nov 2017, 16:19

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-02T23:17:33+02:00

You can keep posting on the forums over and over about how you want a larger pool with veto, but it seems like you aren't going to get it unless you implement it yourself or pay someone to do it.

Statistics: Posted by ThomasHiatt — 02 Nov 2017, 23:17

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-02T18:48:21+02:00

Farms's description sounds like the best solution. With 15 maps in the pool you will be put on one out of at least 9. 9 if you and your opponent have no overlap in vetoed maps and previously played maps whatsoever.

With maximum overlap it's going to be 12 maps. If it turns out that that is too many you can always reduce the map pool to 13 maps so the effective choice for the system is 7-10

Statistics: Posted by Plasma_Wolf — 02 Nov 2017, 18:48

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-02T16:25:55+02:00

Large poll with veto, please.

Statistics: Posted by Morax — 02 Nov 2017, 16:25

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-02T12:20:33+02:00

IMO 5x5 has a place but is more of a niche play style so should probably be played less, yes. of course horrible to be on the wrong end of a successful raid, as already said on 5x5 this small swing can be enough sometimes to mean a comeback is very low %, compared to the larger maps. This is more relevant the higher the rating, better rated players will know their advantage and will most likely punish opponent for it

By same token, some players don't like the 20x20 transport rush drop style maps however again there is a place for this. The ladder in my view needs a bit of everything so to be good or higher rated you are not just great at T1 land spam however great at a lot of different aspects of the game.....

I'd be happy to stay as it is, more maps (yes my opinion has changed on this now) with the exclusion that i cant play same map twice in a row. At least then if I play against the same player 3-4 times which is easily possible at least the map will be different. God knows how frustrating it must be at the top with only a handful of players they can be matched up with....

Statistics: Posted by partymarty81 — 02 Nov 2017, 12:20

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-02T00:41:32+02:00

Farmsletje wrote:
> Mappool with 15 maps
> Can veto 2 maps
> 3x 5x5, 10x 10x10, 2x 20x20
> implemented system of no totally random map selection to avoid repeating the same map
> Rotate 5 maps (1x 1x1, 3x 10x10, 1x 20x20) every 2 weeks.
> Maps have to stay atleast 2 rotations to avoid having certain maps stay in the pool for a long time (except for the first rotation since this won't be possible)

~ L A D D E R _ D R E A M S ~

Yeah yeah we had this before, then Blodir and CC went like, lets make it 5 maps that way it will produce more skill blah blah.
At least people who are bad at this game like it tho (and some weirdos)

Statistics: Posted by Mad`Mozart — 02 Nov 2017, 00:41

Re: 5x5 km maps should be played less often in ranked?

2017-11-02T00:20:21+02:00

> Mappool with 15 maps
> Can veto 2 maps
> 3x 5x5, 10x 10x10, 2x 20x20
> implemented system of no totally random map selection to avoid repeating the same map
> Rotate 5 maps (1x 1x1, 3x 10x10, 1x 20x20) every 2 weeks.
> Maps have to stay atleast 2 rotations to avoid having certain maps stay in the pool for a long time (except for the first rotation since this won't be possible)

~ L A D D E R _ D R E A M S ~

Statistics: Posted by Farmsletje — 02 Nov 2017, 00:20