Matchmaker map rotation system

sort

isaach

5 years ago

Id like to formally discuss making a system where maps in matchmaker change at regular intervals in a way that the MM community agrees on in some way. I havent counted how many maps are in the current rotation but it seems like a good number. Im gonna guess its about 9 maps.

So id suggest we have 9 maps chosen as follows:

4 maps - nomination and vote in forum thread
4 always maps - Core maps that everyone knows that the game can be anchored around balance wise
1 wildcard map - a new, oddball or randomly chosen map

I think 3 months is a reasonable amount of time for each rotation both from a game perspective and the person organizing the map rotation.

Googlefrog said in the other thread its mostly a matter of just having someone organizing it so I was wondering if anyone wanted to volunteer or had any ideas of their own

+0 / -0

isaach

5 years ago

I went and counted and theres probably closer to 20 1v1 maps in the current rotation. Smaller pool may be okay if its changed more frequently or maybe not, what do you think

+0 / -0

GoogleFrog

5 years ago

This should help http://zero-k.info/Maps?mapSupportLevel=3&size=Any&sea=Any&hills=Any&elongated=Any&assymetrical=Any&special=0&isTeams=Any&is1v1=Any&ffa=Any&chicken=Any&isDownloadable=1&needsTagging=false&search=

+0 / -0

Aquanim

5 years ago
(edited 5 years ago)

There are fewer generally accepted and acceptable 1v1 maps than one might think.

I expect a binding vote to lead to poor results. An interesting and healthy variety of maps with broad appeal is unlikely to be achieved by a popularity contest.

As a starting point I'll suggest:
Out: Trojan Hills, Zed, Living Lands, Comet Catcher Redux, {perhaps something else but I don't have an obvious choice}
In: Thornford, Downpour, Insular Encounter, Incandescence, Fifteen Platforms

I am expecting a lot of baw about the additions though. Thornford seems reasonably safe but Downpour and Insular Encounter are knife fights in a phone booth, Incandescence is visually loud, and Fifteen Platforms breaks some rules (e.g. terraform is disabled).

This map seems like it isn't textured but the layout is interesting, although the wind is a bit crazy:
http://zero-k.info/Maps/Detail/55979

These maps seem like reasonable additions to teams:
http://zero-k.info/Maps/Detail/57342
http://zero-k.info/Maps/Detail/57372
http://zero-k.info/Maps/Detail/57479
http://zero-k.info/Maps/Detail/57312
http://zero-k.info/Maps/Detail/57403

+1 / -0

isaach

5 years ago

+0 / -0

isaach

5 years ago

After looking through the maps it does seem like there arent really that many maps possible for 1v1

+0 / -0

FFC

5 years ago

Out: Obsidian

+0 / -0

Fealthas

5 years ago
(edited 5 years ago)

Remove:
Zed,Obsidian,Living Lands,Shimmershore,Intersection, Gecko Isle

Add:
Titan, Cold Snap, Hideandseek, Iceland, Thornford, Into Battle, Quicksilver(eh maybe), Coagulation Marsh

Get rid of closed or porcy (or obsidian) maps and replace with open maps that allow for more raiding gameplay and air usage.

+0 / -0

Dregs

5 years ago

I had a chat with GF about this recently. I feel like the maps are alright, but not necessarily designed strategically to create a compelling 1v1 experience.

I've played on a lot of very well made / balanced 1v1 maps in other RTS games and have transferred their themes to a ZK friendly experience but would need the help of a map creator to get them in play. If anyone's interested in hearing these map proposals let me know.

+0 / -0

Fealthas

5 years ago

> not necessarily designed strategically to create a compelling 1v1 experience.

Very true. It seems like many maps are chosen purely because of tradition and not any other reason. Some maps are just terrible game-play wise. Theres a reason that sc2 eventually removed all tiny and huge maps from the pool. It just turned out that sc2 was most balanced on a certain size of map.

+1 / -0

isaach

5 years ago

Im definitely a fan of big open maps. I think Comet Catcher Redux is the definitive 1v1 map for *TA/ZK but id be suprised if no-one disagreed.

Maybe a simpler system would be to keep the pool of ~20 maps and every rotation a handful are voted out and replaced. So instead of coming up with a handful of maps we agree on, its probably easier to work out what maps we dont want and swap them out.

+1 / -0

Fealthas

5 years ago

Or we could just add a map veto system.

I've also noticed a tendency that maps that punish you for bad positing with terrain tend to be disliked.

+0 / -0

Anarchid

5 years ago

quote:
I've played on a lot of very well made / balanced 1v1 maps in other RTS games and have transferred their themes to a ZK friendly experience but would need the help of a map creator to get them in play. If anyone's interested in hearing these map proposals let me know.

Write them down, post them in a thread (or in #zkmap), then see if anyone takes any of the ideas.

+0 / -0

Aquanim

5 years ago
(edited 5 years ago)

> Some maps are just terrible game-play wise.

Opinions vary a lot though... I mean, you want to add Titan, Iceland and Coagulation, and I think the prevailing opinion is that these maps have never played well in 1v1.

Quicksilver would make my list if it were symmetric. Into Battle is fine as far as I'm concerned, although its startboxes might still need fixing? Hide and Seek was disliked but it could come back sometime. I have reservations about Cold Snap's combination of mountains and flat land in 1v1 but maybe it would work.

The definitive standard-play Zero-K map is probably TitanDuel or perhaps Red Comet.

+0 / -0

Anarchid

5 years ago
(edited 5 years ago)

Cold snap has no mexes in the mountains, so is entirely fine imo.

Into battle has cheese-related startbox rps that is fixable gameside.

Coagulation is obsolete; everything i wanted to do with it, Thornford does way better (except blood ocean, but i might revisit the clime with a new map after Thorn yields its lessons).

I would prefer Altair to Quicksilver.

+0 / -0

GoogleFrog

5 years ago

Veto system for MM sounds good, I think there is already a ticket.

@Sparkles you are better off saying things than asking for someone to prompt you to say things.

Watch out for

Fealthas in this discussion, he has strong preferences that he likes to phrase as facts.

+1 / -0

Fealthas

5 years ago
(edited 5 years ago)

Aquanim TBH, I found it much harder to find maps to add than to remove. Most of the good ones are in the pool already.
Only map I feel 100% deserves to be back in the pool is hideandseek. Into battle is like 95%. Thronford 90% because I'm curious to see how it plays. Cold snap at 80% because it deserves a chance. The rest are just better than the degenerate maps that should be removed(<--fact).

+0 / -0

isaach

5 years ago

After looking at the amount of options im thinking a better system would be to add 10-20 more maps to the rotation (if that many can be found) then let people veto ones they dont like. Or have smaller pools of maps rotated regularly from one 30-40 map pool.

+2 / -0

Forum index > General discussion >