Is the 1v1 ladder map pool intended to drive people away from the game? That is its current effect. What we get is a succession of absolutely humongous maps. I doubt anyone, other than perhaps plus 2000 rated players, is able to manage these maps anywhere near correctly (in terms of expansion, map control and tech-ing up). Most of the people down at my playing level (each side of 900 to 1,100) express dissatisfaction every time one of these huge maps come up. And they came up almost every game. An occasional one would be okay but to heavily load the pool with enormous 4 v 4 (and bigger maps) is excessive. The map pool is too big and the maps are too big (on average).
Some maps are absurd in size and artificial layout like Bermuda Locket. Other maps like Setons are well -designed maps but simply too big for 1v1 play. A map like Roanoke is acceptable for 1v1.
Basically, 40x40 maps are altogether too big for 1v1 play and this is recognized. There are not any in the pool so far as I know.
Some 20x20 maps can be suitable for 1v1 play. Roanoke is an example. Because mexes are concentrated on islands and navies encouraged (along with air) it is a manageable map for 1v1. Setons however is too big, even though it also a 20x20 map. What makes Setons feel and play bigger than it is, is the number of mexes, the broad expanse of land and the amount of hinterland that player has to expand backwards into to exploit. With Roanoke, expansion play, attack and defense mainly happen on and around the main islands. With Setons play can happen pretty much anywhere and everywhere (except perhaps the distant corners of the seas). A map like Bermuda Locket is absurd, both to look at and play.
A lot of 10x10 maps produce good play, especially if well designed. 5x5 maps have to be very well designed to produce good play. You will notice that most good 10x10 and 5x5 maps have central obstacles (like Syrtis Major), judicious chokes and interesting terrain without being excessively dominated by long plateaus, long canyons or even worse long, dead-end canyons.
The map pool needs to be no more than 16 maps at any one time, IMO. These need to be distributed as 4 of 5x5 maps, 8 of 10x10 maps and 4 of 20x20 maps. What's more they need to be good maps, well designed maps. It's not enough for the map to be bug free. It needs to encourage interesting play, especially some battles at each tech level. Massive amounts of expansion micro and Eco-whoring are not interesting play for the average player.
Average ability players players are the biggest cohort of players. Think of the normal distribution. If the map pool is designed only for elite players only, it drives away average players.
Final note:- Too many of the large maps put too much emphasis on air and air-drops, especially for expansion. So many of these large maps become an early race for air control and a race to execute engie air-drops. This in turn introduces a large luck element. If one transport with six engies is caught early and downed, then it's often game over right there. The player who lost the air transport is usually wasting his time after that unless he outranks the other player by at least 200 rating points.