Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-12T08:57:34+02:00

Joly wrote:
If your pool is diferent from your oponent you will get a random map and you still have a good chance of getting those.

No, you will have a map from the top selected maps. So if you have a map you don't like, it's still a map tha most people love.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 12 Feb 2014, 08:57

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-12T01:41:00+02:00

Joly wrote:
Lol. You basicly just dont know how to read. I didnt ask what I should do in those maps and I surely dont need any advice from you. I didnt get to top 20 ladder by magic you know?
And I dont have those maps in my map selection and I still get them. If your pool is diferent from your oponent you will get a random map and you still have a good chance of getting those. This comment of yours proves you didn't read or have any idea of what you are talking about

Well I'm sorry to have bothered you

I'm not in the habit of checking a players rank before posting a reply. Because, unlike you, I value a post based on the merit of its content. Not on the ranking of its author. When you start whining about "un-fun" maps it makes you sound like a noob.

As to a direct answer to your question: No I don't enjoy those maps. Frankly, I find Moonshine irritating. Because, I lost my first two games on it and haven't adjusted to the meta-game. The maps you put forward are examples of single pathway combat with zero tactical diversity. They are not good maps - so I would prefer not to play them at all. Having said this, and being assigned this map, I will play it.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 12 Feb 2014, 01:41

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-11T14:12:49+02:00

Hawkei wrote:
Joly wrote:What? So I am getting told by a 1100 player that I need to adapt to maps differently when I play them... Thank you for your precious tip...
Just look at the damn replays and tell me if any of that is fresh or intersting... Blackheart quiting on min 4 because he lost a tank battle is a especially good indicator of the quality of the map

Yes you are being told by a 1100 player that you need to adapt. If you ask stupid questions you will get stupid answers.

Now as for the replays, I have watched them. I don't like those maps either and I have removed them from my map selection... Perhaps you should do the same?

Lol. You basicly just dont know how to read. I didnt ask what I should do in those maps and I surely dont need any advice from you. I didnt get to top 20 ladder by magic you know?
And I dont have those maps in my map selection and I still get them. If your pool is diferent from your oponent you will get a random map and you still have a good chance of getting those. This comment of yours proves you didn't read or have any idea of what you are talking about

Statistics: Posted by Joly — 11 Feb 2014, 14:12

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-11T07:13:22+02:00

Joly wrote:
What? So I am getting told by a 1100 player that I need to adapt to maps differently when I play them... Thank you for your precious tip...
Just look at the damn replays and tell me if any of that is fresh or intersting... Blackheart quiting on min 4 because he lost a tank battle is a especially good indicator of the quality of the map

Yes you are being told by a 1100 player that you need to adapt. If you ask stupid questions you will get stupid answers.

Now as for the replays, I have watched them. I don't like those maps either and I have removed them from my map selection... Perhaps you should do the same?

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 11 Feb 2014, 07:13

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-11T01:13:08+02:00

Hawkei wrote:
Well having progressed somewhat from ladder and into GW. I have gotten much more accustomed to the idea of unknown maps. The OP seems to be suggesting that each map has some hidden tactic which requires intimate map knowledge to utilise. That there is some learning process which takes place between games.

However, I see no reason why this learning process cannot take place within the game itself. As your skill level improves you will be able to instantly size up a map as soon as the game starts. Which is exactly the kind of skill which GW players are required to perfect. The size, terrain, distances, water, types and locations of reclaimable, abundance of mexes and hydros and their locations should instantly tell you:
- What the gameplay is likely to involve;
- What strategies will work;
- What your force composition should be.

When you have this skill, and the ability to improvise. Very few maps will actually be un-fun. Each map has been designed, by its creator, with a specific gameplay style in mind. Really good maps put players in novel and uncomfortable positions - while at the same time providing for tactical diversity. These maps keep the game fresh and interesting.

What? So I am getting told by a 1100 player that I need to adapt to maps differently when I play them... Thank you for your precious tip...
Just look at the damn replays and tell me if any of that is fresh or intersting... Blackheart quiting on min 4 because he lost a tank battle is a especially good indicator of the quality of the map

Statistics: Posted by Joly — 11 Feb 2014, 01:13

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-07T06:24:49+02:00

Well having progressed somewhat from ladder and into GW. I have gotten much more accustomed to the idea of unknown maps. The OP seems to be suggesting that each map has some hidden tactic which requires intimate map knowledge to utilise. That there is some learning process which takes place between games.

However, I see no reason why this learning process cannot take place within the game itself. As your skill level improves you will be able to instantly size up a map as soon as the game starts. Which is exactly the kind of skill which GW players are required to perfect. The size, terrain, distances, water, types and locations of reclaimable, abundance of mexes and hydros and their locations should instantly tell you:
- What the gameplay is likely to involve;
- What strategies will work;
- What your force composition should be.

When you have this skill, and the ability to improvise. Very few maps will actually be un-fun. Each map has been designed, by its creator, with a specific gameplay style in mind. Really good maps put players in novel and uncomfortable positions - while at the same time providing for tactical diversity. These maps keep the game fresh and interesting.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 07 Feb 2014, 06:24

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-07T02:06:28+02:00

Joly wrote:
Again you are talking without having seen the replays or having any idea of what the problem is. Take a look at at the replays on those cancer maps and tell me if you can find a semi-decent game in one of those. This has nothing to do with being or not in confort zone. This is only related to the fact that there are a handfull of maps that are dogshit and you cant really play any decent games in there since there is only 1 viable tactic and its highly based on luck and not skill.

As well as maps with areas that give instant death being completely unknown to people, in other map it would simply be hill but this map is weird texture which your units die on before you realise what's happening

Statistics: Posted by Gorton — 07 Feb 2014, 02:06

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-07T01:52:24+02:00

Zorro wrote:
Plasma_Wolf wrote:This is what we had before, but without the ability to make your own pool from the general pool. Every time it was time for a vote, the forum was filled with raging players saying "why can't I play that map anymore?" or "what kind of an idiot put that map in?"

Regardless of whether you can make a selection from the general pool or not, this raging is going to happen again if you're going to let people vote on maps to go in or out.

I hadn't discovered FAF before the current system so wasn't aware of the history. Fair point on the raging voting.

Plasma_Wolf wrote:
Like Zep said, this game isn't about being in your comfort zone. It's fine to have one and to choose a series of maps you're good at, but your choice will not be the same as that of your opponent. That is not something to be mad about, it's something to work with.

True. And like I said, the current system favours those who play more & have more knowledge of the maps, reclaim spots, civs & whether they are hostile, etc. That's a form of comfort zone too. Take Arctic Refuge: hands up if you have built a few early arties and rushed to the middle to reclaim mass after using the arties to take out the T1PDs. Ever done this on Open Palms? No? Why? Well, because we all know there's no mass in the middle to reclaim. Comfort zone.

I've chosen maps that come with FA in the example above, but the principle applies just as well to the many maps players new to FAF haven't seen before (eg the reclaim in the middle mountains on Twin Rivers, knowing the civs are neutral in the middle of that map with hostile civs shooting at you at spawn). The point is, if you're not familiar with the map, you're at a strategic disadvantage. That's not the same thing as being out of your comfort zone.

The purpose of all my waffle is to explain, to very experienced FAF players who may have forgotten what it was like, why the learning curve on FAF is steep in ranked games beyond mere playing skill. Why care? If we want more people to play ranked, to stay part of the community, and help spread the word, maybe we should care. It's outside the scope of this thread, tho.

Saying to newcomers: "just get used to it" works for some people but others will be intimidated and leave.

I'm still here, btw

Again you are talking without having seen the replays or having any idea of what the problem is. Take a look at at the replays on those cancer maps and tell me if you can find a semi-decent game in one of those. This has nothing to do with being or not in confort zone. This is only related to the fact that there are a handfull of maps that are dogshit and you cant really play any decent games in there since there is only 1 viable tactic and its highly based on luck and not skill.

Statistics: Posted by Joly — 07 Feb 2014, 01:52

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-07T01:34:49+02:00

Plasma_Wolf wrote:
This is what we had before, but without the ability to make your own pool from the general pool. Every time it was time for a vote, the forum was filled with raging players saying "why can't I play that map anymore?" or "what kind of an idiot put that map in?"

Regardless of whether you can make a selection from the general pool or not, this raging is going to happen again if you're going to let people vote on maps to go in or out.

I hadn't discovered FAF before the current system so wasn't aware of the history. Fair point on the raging voting.

Plasma_Wolf wrote:
Like Zep said, this game isn't about being in your comfort zone. It's fine to have one and to choose a series of maps you're good at, but your choice will not be the same as that of your opponent. That is not something to be mad about, it's something to work with.

True. And like I said, the current system favours those who play more & have more knowledge of the maps, reclaim spots, civs & whether they are hostile, etc. That's a form of comfort zone too. Take Arctic Refuge: hands up if you have built a few early arties and rushed to the middle to reclaim mass after using the arties to take out the T1PDs. Ever done this on Open Palms? No? Why? Well, because we all know there's no mass in the middle to reclaim. Comfort zone.

I've chosen maps that come with FA in the example above, but the principle applies just as well to the many maps players new to FAF haven't seen before (eg the reclaim in the middle mountains on Twin Rivers, knowing the civs are neutral in the middle of that map with hostile civs shooting at you at spawn). The point is, if you're not familiar with the map, you're at a strategic disadvantage. That's not the same thing as being out of your comfort zone.

The purpose of all my waffle is to explain, to very experienced FAF players who may have forgotten what it was like, why the learning curve on FAF is steep in ranked games beyond mere playing skill. Why care? If we want more people to play ranked, to stay part of the community, and help spread the word, maybe we should care. It's outside the scope of this thread, tho.

Saying to newcomers: "just get used to it" works for some people but others will be intimidated and leave.

I'm still here, btw

Statistics: Posted by Zorro — 07 Feb 2014, 01:34

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-06T22:40:16+02:00

BTW since Voodoo played cluster freak vs Yama Dharma, does that mean that either voodoo or yama dharma have clusterfreak selected, or it is one of the most popular maps??

I dont have it selected for sure. But this map isnt the worst i ever seen. I completely dislike it, but it isnt broken that much. But yep Im up for removing it

Statistics: Posted by Yama_Dharma — 06 Feb 2014, 22:40

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-06T08:40:37+02:00

Vee wrote:
BTW since Voodoo played cluster freak vs Yama Dharma, does that mean that either voodoo or yama dharma have clusterfreak selected, or it is one of the most popular maps??

Clusterfreak is the easiest map to play. Zero tactical diversity for the first 5 min.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 06 Feb 2014, 08:40

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-05T20:24:15+02:00

BTW since Voodoo played cluster freak vs Yama Dharma, does that mean that either voodoo or yama dharma have clusterfreak selected, or it is one of the most popular maps??

Statistics: Posted by Vee — 05 Feb 2014, 20:24

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-05T17:53:11+02:00

ZLO_RD wrote:
can't we just consider Cluster freak and lava highground as bad maps for 1v1 ladder?
they are not just have that unusuall lava/void elements, they are bad in general
and only jerks/trolls pick it

also i never hard crazy rush in ranked, does issue with spawn points fixed? if no it has to be removed

funny enought that no one complain about sulphur mounds, that map is so bad that absolutely no one selected it, unfortunately some one have cluster freak and lava map selected.
I am not sure how we can deal with that... what if we remove them and people start complain about lack of unusual maps???

yeah maps like lava highground, cluster freak or moonshine never lead to interesting fun games so I doubt anyone would actually miss them.And for unusual interesting games we have crazyrush or hardffa.
I wouldnt consider sulphur mounds as bad as these maps. It's still a bad map but it's just a worse version of winter duel, and you can still have semi-decent games there.

Statistics: Posted by Joly — 05 Feb 2014, 17:53

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-05T17:36:34+02:00

can't we just consider Cluster freak and lava highground as bad maps for 1v1 ladder?
they are not just have that unusuall lava/void elements, they are bad in general
and only jerks/trolls pick it

also i never hard crazy rush in ranked, does issue with spawn points fixed? if no it has to be removed

funny enought that no one complain about sulphur mounds, that map is so bad that absolutely no one selected it, unfortunately some one have cluster freak and lava map selected.
I am not sure how we can deal with that... what if we remove them and people start complain about lack of unusual maps???

Statistics: Posted by ZLO_RD — 05 Feb 2014, 17:36

Re: Unfun ladder maps

2014-02-05T17:15:29+02:00

Zorro wrote:
If there's not going to be a veto system (which sounds a nice idea to me), can we at least have a rotation of the ranked maps with a voting of maps to add/remove?

This is what we had before, but without the ability to make your own pool from the general pool. Every time it was time for a vote, the forum was filled with raging players saying "why can't I play that map anymore?" or "what kind of an idiot put that map in?"

Regardless of whether you can make a selection from the general pool or not, this raging is going to happen again if you're going to let people vote on maps to go in or out.

Like Zep said, this game isn't about being in your comfort zone. It's fine to have one and to choose a series of maps you're good at, but your choice will not be the same as that of your opponent. That is not something to be mad about, it's something to work with. You can't always have what you want, but in this case you can see if your own preferences help you along the way. If they do, good luck for you and bad luck for your opponent, if not, tough luck for you and your opponent is happy. Never forget that there is someone on the other side of the game who wants something as well.

Straight out vetoing the maps would be a bad idea I think, if it even makes a difference with this preferences system.

1. You get to play on a map from the set of common maps in your and your opponent's map pool.
2. If the common pool is not big enough (It had to have a size of 10 I think?), then the most popular maps (the ones which are in all players' map pool the most) will fill the common pool up.

I bet that you will barely have to play on a map you would otherwise veto, considering the fact that the most popular maps are also in your list (Surely you have either Open Palms or Isis or Canis River?), while maps with equal love and hate (HardFFA - which probably has more hate than love) won't be in the popular map pool at all, so there would be no chance of that getting in the common pool if it's not big enough to start with.

Statistics: Posted by Plasma_Wolf — 05 Feb 2014, 17:15