The 1v1 Ladder and Matchmaker - Restart Thread

[Koecher]

So, this needs some love.

What need to be done?
We need to find a valid and solid solution, to prevent from having tons of whiners complaining about this.
And, maybe more important, once we got a solution, and you feel like whining about it, just STFU! Ofc you can make suggestions, but DONT CRY LIKE A BABY about it!

What are the discussion points?
We need to determintate how it should work, concerning Leages.
We need to determinate how much Maps should be in the Pool (might smaller pools for the lower ranked players?)
We need to determinate how the Maps should be chosen.
What is missing in the current system?
And probably everything I forgot about.

Why that topic?
Well, easy, we need to start with something. Lets find some ideas. If you respont to this, PLEASE refer to the points above! Make some suggestion! I'm looking foreward to make a poll after we collected some Ideas, so no need for Posts like "yeah, I agree to this!".

So, ladys and gentleman, lets get things rolling

[IceDreamer]

I made a thread specifically focussed on the Map Pool. I'm just going to take charge of that process for now, to get things moving much faster, and I will do it in as fair a way as I can without discussing everything in a committee.

[Koecher]

Good luck than

[Myxir]

So, this needs some love.

What need to be done?
We need to find a valid and solid solution, to prevent from having tons of whiners complaining about this.
And, maybe more important, once we got a solution, and you feel like whining about it, just STFU! Ofc you can make suggestions, but DONT CRY LIKE A BABY about it!

What are the discussion points?
We need to determintate how it should work, concerning Leages.
i prefer the system we had in the beginning, starting in a league at the beginning of a season sorted by 1v1 rating. the change i would do here is that you also lose 1 point when losing against someone of the same league, but you can't get less than 0 points

We need to determinate how much Maps should be in the Pool (might smaller pools for the lower ranked players?)
i would be more specific here:
- how many maps in total
- how many of them 5x5
- how many of them 10x10
- how many maps which are easy for aeon/sera can be allowed in the pool

taking 25 maps as total amout, i'd say there should be about...
9 5x5 maps
13 10x10 maps
3 20x20 maps
while making sure that not more than 3 maps should be lot easier with aeon/sera because of the early hover unit advantage
(like for example dark hearts arguably is right now)

We need to determinate how the Maps should be chosen.
i'd say, ask 10 players of the top 50 1v1 rating (just the ones who are online/playing a lot) to pick like 3 maps each, ask the top 3 players of each league to pick 3 maps each, and make a community poll of all players about the maplist you got.
each map should stay for 2 seasons, so only 50% of the pool change each rotation

What is missing in the current system?
something like veto / the ability to be able to NOT play 5x5 or 20x20 by default would be nice, but i don't think that it's really necessary

And probably everything I forgot about.
how often should the mappool rotate?
my opinion, once a month

Why that topic?
Well, easy, we need to start with something. Lets find some ideas. If you respont to this, PLEASE refer to the points above! Make some suggestion! I'm looking foreward to make a poll after we collected some Ideas, so no need for Posts like "yeah, I agree to this!".

So, ladys and gentleman, lets get things rolling

[pip]

1) IMO, there should be a map pool caretaker, someone in charge of choosing the maps, make sure they don't have problems and that the overall map pool is balanced and interesting for all factions. If people have complains, he will answer, try to find solutions, but he will decide, because that will be his task for which he would be empowered. It's impossible to please everyone, so someone needs to make decisions.
And he doesn't have to be the ranked winner of the season, or the highest ranked player, precisely because the most active players on the ladder will be biased even without acknowledging it.
Also, there should be new maps in the map pool, precisely to give new comers more chances against old players, because not everyone has played Open Palms x100.

2) I believe a good size for a map pool is 20 :
7 5x5 maps
10 10x10 maps
3 20x20 maps

Since Shadowknight made his thread, I'll post there too.

I think a map pool rotation should occur every 2 month, to keep things interesting and with at least 25% map rotation.

3) The current system could be tweaked a bit with a bonus / kickstart to players depending on their 1v1 rating, in order to spread out veterans more across the board:
ladder rating under 1100 : scout league
ladder rating between 1100 and 1400 : t1 league
ladder rating between 1400 and 1700 : t2 league
ladder rating between 1700 and 2000 : t3 league
ladder rating over 2000 : t4 league

- If it's not possible or too complicated, alternatively the points required to rank up seem to be too high even for long term ladder, so maybe the required amounts to progress to the next division inside the rank should be cut in half or so (5/7/10/15/25 instead of 10/15/20/25/50). That way, people with more skills and playing more will rank faster and "conquer" the ladder faster, making the points system more relevant when you face lower or higher ranked opponents.

[Invisible]

pip, I like your idea regarding a map pool caretaker, however I think it should be taken further.

Instead of just one person, have a map pool committee, again, not necessarily the highest ranked players in each division, but you could get people from a wide range of global ratings, and they just diplomatically decide on which maps get placed into the pool.

Although this requires a lot more people and effort involved, it should also remove some of the bias in the pool (if the single caretaker plays one faction, he might be more inclined to add maps favoring said faction

[iZZy]

I have another suggestion for the matchmaking system, which is independent from the map pool size.

How about let every player choose x(say 3) maps he likes and x maps he dislikes from the map pool.
If there is a matchup and the map is selected by the system it should be done like this:
1) every map has an initial score of 1.
2) for every like from both contestants the map should get a bonus score of 2.
3) for every dislke from both contestants the map should get a malus score of -1.

-> Based on the scores of all maps, a map can be selected by biased chance.
Maps that are liked by both players are most likely to be selected.
Maps that are liked by only one player are next most likely to be selected.
Maps that are liked by one player and disliked by another are still more likely to be selected than maps that have no likes/dislikes at all.
Maps that are disliked purely will never be selected.

This suggestions favors likes over dislikes. Of course the bonus score may be equivalent to the malus score to cancel that and make likes and dislikes equal. My suggestion is not about the numbers presented but about the general idea.

What do you think?

[Ze_PilOt]

What about no map pool at all?

Let me explain:

Both player choose his maps (any number) from wide list. Could be the whole map vault, but it need some filtering for survival, 81x81, ...
Let's say about 300-400 maps.

The system take the list of both player, if there is a selection of map common in both, the server will choose a map from that.
If not, it will choose randomly one map of both list combined.

If some players like only 5 maps, they select 5 maps. Against someone who like a lot of map, chances are that he will get one of these in the common list.
If not, chances are that the other player list is short too, and the chance that he get one of his map is rather high.

Some possible variation of the system could be a selection from the average size of your list and the one of your enemy.

[lextoc]

What about no map pool at all?

Let me explain:

Both player choose his maps (any number) from wide list. Could be the whole map vault, but it need some filtering for survival, 81x81, ...
Let's say about 300-400 maps.

The system take the list of both player, if there is a selection of map common in both, the server will choose a map from that.
If not, it will choose randomly one map of both list combined.

If some players like only 5 maps, they select 5 maps. Against someone who like a lot of map, chances are that he will get one of these in the common list.
If not, chances are that the other player list is short too, and the chance that he get one of his map is rather high.

Some possible variation of the system could be a selection from the average size of your list and the one of your enemy.

This sounds fucking great and I'd actually even donate some sexy monies for it, still have some left on paypal hehe

[D4E_Omit]

What about no map pool at all?

Let me explain:

Both player choose his maps (any number) from wide list. Could be the whole map vault, but it need some filtering for survival, 81x81, ...
Let's say about 300-400 maps.

The system take the list of both player, if there is a selection of map common in both, the server will choose a map from that.
If not, it will choose randomly one map of both list combined.

If some players like only 5 maps, they select 5 maps. Against someone who like a lot of map, chances are that he will get one of these in the common list.
If not, chances are that the other player list is short too, and the chance that he get one of his map is rather high.

Some possible variation of the system could be a selection from the average size of your list and the one of your enemy.

That would actually be a great system, because the probability of having a match on a map a player dislikes would be waaaay smaller than it is now, a map pool with like 50+ maps, It'd need a heck of a lot of bug filtering tho..