Nominations for the new Councillors

[Kalvirox]

Also i totally disagree with Blodir's view on ladder. Strategy and unit choice in this game heavily depends on a map even within certain map groups like navy/land/etc, so its not smart to limit players to little amount of maps. More variety -> higher skill cap -> better competition. Its not startcraft where you can execute your strategy on any map.

You have a good point. Maybe 10 maps is too small of a number.
We definitely need a greater variety of maps in the pool though. Its mostly 10x10 land spam maps (granted they are the most common type of map).

I mean, Crossfire Canal just got added back to the map pool. Its a map that takes some skill and practice to play with some weird and wacky tactics possible on it. We need more maps like this and less like regor or syrtis which are very standardised.

[Mad`Mozart]

You have a good point. Maybe 10 maps is too small of a number.
We definitely need a greater variety of maps in the pool though. Its mostly 10x10 land spam maps (granted they are the most common type of map).

I mean, Crossfire Canal just got added back to the map pool. Its a map that takes some skill and practice to play with some weird and wacky tactics possible on it. We need more maps like this and less like regor or syrtis which are very standardised.

Also going back to your 2 reasons people are put off the ladder, there is a good solution for a second one (people not liking some maps). Introduce a fair veto system that was asked for for a long time

[Kalvirox]

Also going back to your 2 reasons people are put off the ladder, there is a good solution for a second one (people not liking some maps). Introduce a fair veto system that was asked for for a long time

In which case we would want the map pool slightly bigger anyway to take account of the veto'd maps.

[Kalvirox]

but at least he was capable to put in a replacement system. Was a better choice and many people liked it, just lacked some maintenance which is obviously easier to do with big automated map pool vs small rotation every 2 weeks

Forgive me, I was under the impression that the current system that we have was the more popular one since there was a number of threads ect in the past that lead us to the current system we have. Although, I don't want to take what you said as the truth.

Therefore we must have a poll!
http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=56 ... ccafb44a8b

I left out the option of vetos because that can be discussed afterwards, assume that whatever your preference towards veto's is included.

[Blodir]

I heard sooo many times this arguement about top players being a minority but its just horribly wrong and let me explain why. Its as simple as counting from 1000 to 1. There is literally no scenario where top players would be a majority cause you cant fit say more than 50 people it top 50 list. I find it extremely stupid disregarding or giving less value to some player group opinion/needs only because there are not enough of them. People are leaving the game cause they have no reason to stay here but i have never seen some higher ups say they care about it. On the contrary, top arguement in every change discussion is making new players experience better so they will stay. Every stick has two ends.

Hey I absolutely agree, the top level playerbase should be on even grounds with all the other playergroups even though it's a smaller portion of the player pool. My point was that we should not disregard newer/average players even if they are not very vocal.

Also i totally disagree with Blodir's view on ladder. Strategy and unit choice in this game heavily depends on a map even within certain map groups like navy/land/etc, so its not smart to limit players to little amount of maps. More variety -> higher skill cap -> better competition. Its not startcraft where you can execute your strategy on any map.

Again I agree! Maps play a much more important role in FA than they do in SC2 for example. However I think this is all the more a reason to take out the extremes and have a nice map pool that everyone can learn to play satisfactorily in a relatively short amount of time. I don't think it's very enjoyable to play a game that is one sided one way or the other. We need to find a good balance between basic and experimentative. Maps like Pyramid and the original Seraphim Outpost (with jammers) are examples of maps that I feel like are too far from the basic 1v1 map to be included in ladder.

I like strategic diversity and you can be assured that any map pool that I create will support this notion. However I do not think that weird/gimmick maps add to strategic diversity in any meaningful way.

[Exotic_Retard]

there should be 2 systems to preserve sanity:
1. dont play on the same map more than once in the last X games
2. veto Y maps you dont like

the minimum map size to accommodate both is pretty simple: 2*Y+X
for example thats 15 maps with 5 vetos each and same map at least every 5 games.

and that is the basic premise of a sane ladder system. on top of that you can add a ton of features and details - such as how the map pool is picked or how the individual maps are picked, ect.
those will require more work and might increase use complexity but they are non-essential also.

Spoiler: show

the map pool can be picked like it is now - by someone who thinks they can pick a nice pool.
then you have this core system to keep people sane, and on top of that include any or all of the following:

1. expandable pool - you can pick more maps than in the base pool - letting you play maps which you really like.
2. map ordering by preference - you can rank maps in order of most to least liked, then the system picks the ones which a. follow the core system rules, b are the most preferred for both players.
3. map reroll - map preview shown before the game launches - if both players say they want to reroll - then map is added to the list as if you've played it and then system re-picks the map.

all of these are not mutually exclusive and are simply how far you want to take the mechanics.

some people want to play 1v1 ladder like its something super competitive but really its played for fun. just look at how popular it is(nt) among the top players atm and how it has a grand total of ~20 games per hour, most of which are 1k games. those who want it to be competitive are the minority. and saying they are the most important players is true, but the competition is dead already there, it requires proper leaderboards and statistics to be revived, not a BO-whoring map pool. (also consider that with a proper system you will get preferred maps most of the time anyway.)

[Apofenas]

/me notes to vote against Blodir and other people who will support small map poll for ladder

I think i played more winter duel/balvery mountain/shloob1 per month in old ladder system than i played serious ladder games total in current system. This is my attitude: winter duel>current ladder. Lol i really said that.

Ladder measures people's ability to play 1v1 on any map: small or big, defencive or aggressive, land or navy, no matter. In current system you just learn how to play 10x10 land map, pick cybran and play same thing with little changes depending on map. People should learn to play game, not to play maps.

I'm not even talking about people map preferances. There is no way PC could please everybody with 15 map poll and you want to make less maps? May be i liked current system more if TA wouldn't put maps, the way so i like max 4 maps out 15.

I had enough fun from insta-leaving(or not leaving ) maps i dislike in ladder and watching people's reaction, but this is kinda boring already.

Spoiler: show

SirPrize and Electrician are funniest

The big map poll could please everyone and let everybody have fun from it, but didn't need as much baby sitting and community working.

[Blodir]

I have noticed that there are more complaints about which maps ARE included in the pool rather than which are not

[Kalvirox]

Well, this quickly became a ladder thread instead of what it was supposed to be.
I think we should create a new thread for this discussion. As well as throw the poll that I made around a bit more to get a representative sample.

[Mad`Mozart]

Well thats for 2 reasons, ladder was always a big concern for many people and they mainly see PC managing ladder above everything else.