A new map rotation

[Flarp55]

I was thinking that a lot of the maps are broken (War Garden, Foundry) or just plain boring to play (Peekaboo as Scallywags, Sweetie Plains). So I want to propose a different map rotation system. This idea could be implemented in Outwitters 1 or could appear in Outwitters 2; I'm not sure.
So basically, we start with a predetermined set of maps: 8 Gen I maps and 4 Gen II. Every month or two (this time could be changed), there is a new "map season." Basically, every season, Outwitters players design maps using an in-game map creation tool. This could be an in-game purchase for $3.99 or so. Throughout the season, they can design maps and if they want, nominate them as candidates for map rotation. They can also play on the maps they design. This could be free, cost a small fee (49 cents or so), or cost some amount of in-game currency. The next season, there are beta testers to test the maps (Another in-game purchase). Maybe the top 20 STs would automatically be beta testers. During all map seasons except the first, beta testers would be testing maps from the previous map season. There would be an option, along with "league game," "friendly game," and "pass n' play," called "beta game" that appears locked unless you purchase the beta testing pack. These beta games would be on the least-used submitted map, but a player can't play on a map he/she designed (so all maps are played an approximately equal number of times), and would not affect rankings (maybe a "beta" ranking?). After each game, The beta tester has the option to vote "yes" or "no" for the map. Note that while the beta testers are testing, other players are designing maps to be tested the next map season. At the end of this season, the 4 maps with the highest percentage of "yes" votes would advance (tie breaking can be discussed later). Maybe the players who designed the winning maps get rewarded and/or acknowledged somewhere. Then follows a 3-day or so voting session. Every Outwitters player in a certain league or higher can vote on 4 maps to be kicked out. The four maps with the most votes are kicked out of league rotation and can't be played anymore (They could become part of an in-game purchase for friendlies and PPs). The 8 remaining maps become Gen I maps. The 4 new maps become Gen II maps, for players who purchased the Gen II maps pack. This repeats every map season.

Using this method, new and fresh maps are introduced and all the bad maps get kicked, keeping play fun. New maps can come in every map season, starting at the end of the second map season.

[Mag!cGuy]

Why do you say War Garden and Foundry are broken? They are surely the most balanced maps of the game!

I like your idea, but you really can't judge a map after one or two matches. So a slight modification I'd add is that players play on beta maps during all the season, and at its very end they vote yes or no for each map, and could write feedbacks.

Edit: I actually disagree with something else: the fact that 4 maps are squarely kicked. The veto system of Starcraft seems wai fairer to me, because "bad" is only a subjective point. Obviously a map can be really messy and so on, but such a map wouldn't go through the beta phase. For example, you dislike Sweetie Plain, but I actually like it.

[Flarp55]

I agree with the beta testing idea.

For the maps kicking point, a possible alternate version: For each map, people vote "yes" or "no." Any map with at least 70% or so "no" votes gets kicked and the remaining spots get filled by new maps. If less than 2 maps are kicked then the 2 with highest percentage of "no" votes get kicked.

BTW what is the veto version of Starcraft exactly?

[HuskyPete]

I agree some of those maps you mentioned as broken create some of the most unique games. I would hate to see them leave.

[Flarp55]

The games may be unique, but I think that FTA destroys the game. Just my opinion. It seems to me like Mag!cGuy was joking though. It's hard to tell online.

But if 70% of people want to see a map go, then IMO it should go. Also, some maps will have to leave for new maps to come. We can't have an infinite pool of maps. I think changing maps keeps the game fresh and ever-changing. New strategies will develop instead of some strategies becoming over-used and/or OP.

[Mag!cGuy]

On Starcraft it's a personnal veto. ^^ Each players gets to pick 3 maps from 7 he doesn't want to play on. The maps aren't deleted of the map pool, simply each player plays where he wants, so everyone is happy. Also, it allows Blizzard to know when a map is really disliked (huge amount of vetos), and then remove it.

As for Foundry and War Garden, I wasn't joking, but we didn't talk about the same thing: I was dealing with the race balance, and not FTA/STA ^.^

I don't think there is FTA on War Garden, or I have been pretty lucky so far not to suffer from it! The known rush on this map has several counters (which is not the case on Reaper: you kinda only have one way to counter the mobi rush, so almost everyone is opening the same way as P2 on it). As for Foundry, there is clearly a FTA as for the sniper, but I think you can deal with it. You surely have more chances to be the attacker when you are P1, but a bad prediction, or an error, and the roles can quickly be reversed. It's kinda like the slight STA on Sweetie Plain, where P2 will more often be the attacker, but it doesn't make it imbalanced.

[Flarp55]

The biggest reason I wrote this post was because I wanted to see some player-designed maps. The system can have many variants, but the general idea is the same. I think player-designed maps would be really cool if it were implemented in the game.

---

yeah, race-wise, F and WG are definitely the most balanced of all maps. Also TG is totally Adorables-oriented.

[Mag!cGuy]

Sure, for the general idea I'm 100% with you: more maps would be more fun, a map rotation is needed to keep the variety of the game, and player designed ones would kinda implement a competition between all mapsmakers, it would be awesome.

[TheGoldenGriffin]

Thats the reason OMC was created. You can't play on them but you design them

[Chemoeum]

(12-31-2013 02:22 PM)TheGoldenGriffin Wrote:  Thats the reason OMC was created. You can't play on them but you design them

If only, right?

Well that, and occasionally for move testing on games. I don't understand why they would save them.