[iCTF.I] Feedback: Map Elimination

[Monk]

This thread is a place to collect productive feedback on the map elimination system.

Do you think it worked? Do you think it was better than the old system? Would you like to see a different system tried?

For your reference, some stats. Note: Included in this are the three most popular maps selected by the map elimination process. This includes dev games where no 3rd map was played, and reg games where no tiebreaker was played, due to the fact that the tiebreaker was the 'most wanted' map (even for dev) due to the algorithm used.



The top end: The most popular 4 maps (Klondike, BrokenLimits, Command, Duku) accounted for over 2/3rds of all played maps (68%). The 5 most popular maps accounted for 81.4% of all played maps.
The lower end: The bottom 3 maps were played less than 2% of all maps played. DiamondSword was never played across the entire season.

As a reference point, here is GU.iCTF.V (not separated by dev/reg).



Slightly hard to compare as there were 13 maps in the list not 11. In this case, the top 6 (out of 13 this time) maps accounted for 73% of the total maps played.

The bottom 4/13 maps this time accounted for 10.53% of the total maps played.

P.S. Be constructive. "I told you guys this sucked 10,000 times and you're all idiots" is not helpful.

[Monk]

I'll start.

I thought that map elimination was an interesting idea, as it has been used a lot in other games with varying levels of success. Unfortunately, I don't think it really suits iCTF. Over 81% of all maps being less than half of the maplist is way too imbalanced. Of course in the old system, some maps were still played a lot more than others, but I don't think it was as extreme as it ended up during this season. The fact that you can draft a team that only needs to be good at 7/11 maps on the maplist sucks too.

Got a bunch of people who don't want to practice? Not a problem, just eliminate the new maps. I think it encourages people playing 'safe' maps, and this showed this season.

It was worth a try, and it didn't work. I'd quite like to try a system as proposed by n0b where by the first map is picked by elimination, and all other maps are picked by the team that lost the previous map.

[kylewins]

i don't like playing new maps in league play, I like how this map elimination process went. I don't need map variation in league play, what I need is teamwork and accountability.

[rev]

It definitely favors good, inactive players is the bottom line. Just need to decide if that's who you want to favor. I agree that it is more professional than just picking maps, but I don't think it outweighs the cons in this situation.

[RickJames]

Perhaps the best system would be map elim with a significantly smaller maplist?

Say you take out acrony, duku, klond, mesmerize because they are the worst turtling maps. Then take out complex and ds because they are clearly unpopular for most league teams (only predominantly american teams favor ds and complex just isn't very popular in general).

I'm trying to be be unbiased here. I have no problem playing any of these maps, but I think taking them out would a. help the league meta and b. help the elim system work better.

You're left with: command, brokenlimits, pryxon, grudge, rune

aka the 5 maps that both tend to play well in league play and are popular enough that they tend to see play time. And it's very convenient for elimination- each team eliminates one map and the order of the 3 remaining maps to be played is based on selected order of preference. It's very unlikely that all teams would be eliminating the same 2 maps with this maplist.

I really think such a maplist with elimination would solve so many problems with both the current system and playstyle meta, so I hope you guys will give it some thought. PS It doesn't have to be the exact maplist I proposed, I'm just using it as an example. Perhaps you could have 7 maps instead of 5, for example (although I think the smaller we can go while maintaining quality, the better).

[MP/5]

[rain]

I think the idea of it was good - however, I think the maps became really repetitive. All the games for the most part were fairly close though which was exciting, no one likes a blowout or watching a one sided game.

Going further I would suggest a potential smaller map list OR only giving a team 2-3 VETOs they can choose against each team. The other team then gets their choice of which map they would like to pick against the opponent, you could go further and not allow the team to pick the same map twice (the map list would have to be larger for this to work though obviously).

Either way, I'm quite happy how this season went and I'm sure a lot of teams that were 'euro heavy' were happy they didn't have to play DiamondSword every league game - it was a nice change that's for sure.

[Morpheus]

[NakedMan]

The elimination system is a good idea , it's execution wasn't very good imo. With all the discussion about iCTF being unplayable with everyone hitting 40 acc you can't have teams play the same 5 maps they've been playing for years now , especially when 3 of them are easy to turtle and dm and promote exactly the lame playing style you are trying to avoid. 3/11 maps weren't even played this season , grudge wasn't used for reg and most of the teams in the league could count on avoiding pryxon/acrony aswell.

The fact that 81% of the league was 5 maps(ridiculous) only maybe could work in a 3 week league , but in a longer league people would get tired of playing OT's in the same maps over and over again.

You either need to restrict captains control over elimination system or make the map list bigger(which I think is better) , so teams would have to get out of their comfort zone and stop playing the same maps with the same play style , its absurd that teams who can't play any of the other maps actually get rewarded for it instead of the opposite.

Sidenote 1 - Looks a bit weird that you removed the most popular map from last season , making the 'played' maplist even smaller , but I haven't played sprinta in league play so maybe there are some problems with it(maybe not). Still I doubt it's worse than duku/klondike/mes/acrony...

Sidenote 2 - Problem is not necessarily with stacked teams , klondike and duku were turtled and ot'd in dev games aswell.

[MP/5]

[Steel]

I liked the idea, and the execution was fine aside from week 1, but playing the same maps got incredibly old. I strongly favor a larger maplist with maps being assigned to a given week. It forces teams to play, adapt, and be efficient on all maps. We did it in a few MLIG seasons and I highly enjoyed the turnout. I'd rather pick a map that I feel we have the best chance to win from a subset of the maplist than simply play what is left of the maps that either team doesn't want to play.

[kylewins]

[ramdrop]

You will never know what these systems are like until you try them, its good that it was tried and tested, but I don't think it worked very well for points NakedMan stated that the same maps were played repetitively.

I had a think and came up with this.
On the night of the matches, before the match times a LIVE draw takes place and the three maps are randomly chosen using an algorithm or simply from one of cool hats, that way, no team has any way of knowing what they will play and it will, potentially, create more variety with maps being played, but I feel that if this method was used a much larger maplist would have to be implemented, maybe up to 15 maps or so to be feasible and work.

But as I said above, good job on testing it, you don't know until you try these things.

[Darkside]

we knew kyle was an old man but woww it's blatant! I understand the view of raw competition, teamwork, etc where map knowledge doesn't distract from gameplay/talent - but please get with the times. The map does not make the player. YES - some players are better at some maps but that is why the best players strive to be great at all maps; why drafting great/active players is better for a team.

1. new maps are an answer to create spontaneity in this 15 year old game/gametype.
2. the majority of the players are stuck in their ways that they fail to accept new maps and wahwah all the way home.
3. map discussion every season with, ultimately, same results (ie: "this is bad. i like this better" "this map sucks")
4. toxic attitudes towards maps (or anything new. ie: sdom) eliminates growth of community/competition.

[Morpheus]

[Darkside]

adding boostpads/lifts to back corners of the flag room of Sprinta was discussed in a mapping thread. There wasn't enough time to implement this before the season. After the season, i'm sure one of the mappers could easily adjust Sprinta to fix the standoff issue.

[kylewins]

soccer is played on the same field every game, I don't see players whining about needing more boost pads and it still seems pretty popular...

i guess maybe i enjoy the competition and teamwork more so than seeing a different box in the middle of the map

[kud]

command, complex, brokenlimits, grudge, (insert new good map)

^best maplist. each team gets a veto and a pick

[RickJames]

Kud has same basic idea as me, except I personally wouldn't put in complex over pryxon or rune.

I also want to add that this general idea (5 or 7 maps with elimination) would work especially well in the upcoming sdom season, for a lot of reasons.

[Sauron]

[blackout\\]

[miracle]

you might as well add Extortion to the list. At least in Extortion you can get out of the base with a nice monster kill and not have 3 people jump on your head as you are leaving the base.

LETS BRING RAINBASE BACK TOO PLEASE..


lol. ok ima make some points

1. Turtling or no turtling if the community hated overtime so much, why would the top 4 maps be turtle maps?, OO I KNOW, because this is the age and generation at the moment and say to this what you will.... their is no reason that the top 4 maps should be removed due to overtime when their picked the most in all pugs all matches and in prior leagues as to the gu ictf 5 stats.
2. I didn't like map elimination, it was nice at times to not play a map a team is significantly BETTER on.. like bbz, steel, and some other crazy teammate with diamondsword lmao. But, it ended with the same maps if you want differnt maps well the original way worked better but you would be overpowered on some maps unlike map elimination.
3. my favorite idea was one someone mentioned earlier and I played in a league where it worked amazing, and that was to pick 3 maps each week and every team has to play those maps. release the info ahead of time, the teams practice or pug those maps since WHO PRACTICES NOW? and they can learn the maps. It also helps to change up the gameplay
4. I also like the idea of 5 maps of non turtle maps, BUT WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT, do u really think the maps arent capable to b turtled? I mean when you got ppl falling back on you 24/7.. any game is likely to go into a ridiciously long overtime if both teams are stacked.. I don't care what map it is, broken limits, grudge, command they are all the same when it comes down to it.

disagree or agree but those are my 2 cents.

[d3R]

[Sauron]

Just throwin it out there, BL is extremely easy to turtle after getting the lead. 4D on BL is damn near impossible to cap on, and extremely easy to cap (or at the very least, keep pressure) with 1O against a team with 5O.

[Sauron]

[kud]

[d3R]

[Monk]

[ramdrop]

[finalzje]

In my opinion the maplist should be reduced to 7 maps and done with a live veto, thats how it goes in other competitive games. Example: (Starcraft II & CS:GO)
Maps can always be rotated around for the next season, don't like a particular map? suck it up and veto it.

Having a maplist consisting off 14-21 maps is not an idea im fond off, besides who has time to learn 21 maps inside & out?
I'd like to think that it might work out if the community could vote on 7 maps and those will be used during the season, then when next season comes around 4 of the 7 maps are replaced and so on.

My €0.02

edit: Have a look at how Starcraft II maps have been rotated throughout the years, i don't recall alot of drama due to vetoing and using this system.