Ladder Rotation/System Comments

[Louvegarde]

The other part of what makes a map bad is gameplay, and that is a bit more subjective, but I'd like to meet a serious person who thinks Sludge is worthy of being in the same pool with maps such as Loki.

Then hello. I am a serious person who thinks Sludge is worthy of being in the same pool with maps such as Loki.

[keyser]

Banned.

[ThomasHiatt]

snip

Thanks for writing the obese rant that I lost the motivation to write. I think you need to be on the ladder team.

[Blodir]

Thanks for fighting the good fight TantrumDesire.

[Petricpwnz]

Thanks.

[Morax]

This whole "ladder is an experimental pool for tournaments" deal is really upsetting.

I know that if you don't experiment, it excludes new maps, but after seeing a review done by Turin I really question how much effort is being made to recognize a map should simply be a flat-out "no."

No amount of writing and justification will convince me that some of these recent selections justify your methods. Clearly, there was a lot of time put into making the post on the front page, but if a quarter of that was spent to actually look at maps I don't think the backlash on choices would exist.

[Farmsletje]

Contrary to popular belief different people have different opinions.

If you ask voodoo he'd say moonlight mesas, balvery mountains, winter duel and sentry points are good maps.
If you ask me i'd say crazyrush is a good map (and devils landings worth being in the pool sometimes)
If you ask more than half the top ladder players they'd say that haven reef is insanely garbage and should be removed from existance
If you ask the average faf player they would say they want astro or dual gap in ladder.

So where do you want to draw the line?

The idea of the ladder team is that every map gets a rating according to its quality and maps that score too low won't be able to make it into the pool. The rating works exponentially which means that the lowest rated maps will only very rarely show up. However this system is new and therefore isn't perfect yet so that's why a map like zorg managed to get in the ladder pool. Things like increasing the minimum rating a map needs to have in order to make it into the pool (from 1.5/5 to 2/5) or making the exponential curve curve harder so that top rated maps appear more often in comparison to low rated maps are still topics of discussion.

This means that the hard line between "batshit awfull" and other maps you're talking about is already being worked on. It's just that it takes time to find out where exactly that hard line has to be placed.

Clearly, there was a lot of time put into making the post on the front page, but if a quarter of that was spent to actually look at maps I don't think the backlash on choices would exist.

Shame on us. If only we spend as much time as tokyto and the M&M team on this.

[Morax]

I think you failed to read the "no matter how much you try to justify it, putting zorg in the ladder showed a huge lack."

Yeah, the m&m team has been misled, but thankfully the person who was running things for maps, and lacked time , stepped down.

I can't tell people that more or less effort is needed on maps if you guys put stuff like fractal cancer or zorg into the pool. People look at the pool as if it's suitable for use.

I was giving feedback to someone and they said "why is my map not okay but these maps in ladder? "

There is no way I can set a decent standard if you guys need to experiment with that kind of content.

Saying you're better then Tokyto because you debate more doesn't justify things as the result is just as poor, or worse thanks to this awful selection of 5x5 maps.

[Farmsletje]

I think you failed to read the "no matter how much you try to justify it, putting zorg in the ladder showed a huge lack."

I can't tell people that more or less effort is needed on maps if you guys put stuff like fractal cancer or zorg into the pool. People look at the pool as if it's suitable for use.

I was giving feedback to someone and they said "why is my map not okay but these maps in ladder? "

There is no way I can set a decent standard if you guys need to experiment with that kind of content.

Have you even read my post

Saying you're better then Tokyto because you debate more doesn't justify things as the result is just as poor, or worse thanks to this awful selection of 5x5 maps.

Please quote where i say we're better than tokyto

[Turinturambar]

1st planet zorg was definetly a mistake and hopefully wont happen again. Though

This whole "ladder is an experimental pool for tournaments" deal is really upsetting.

I dont see why this would be an issue. Many maps are fairly unknown and its necessary to play them multiple times before they appear in a tourney or else it will just end in a shitfeast. also this is pretty much the only way to see what is the meta on an unknown map in order to see if it has decent gameplay or will end up being plain boring after 5 playthrougs.
also what is the issue with fractal cancer? its a decent-good map imo.