Car il faut faire un choix et ces choix si tu veux grimper ces échelons, bah tu n’a pas le choix tu séléctionne les plus optimisés au détriment d’autres, il y aura toujours des cartes au Top, il y aura toujours des cartes en dessous de tout.
Le mieux est pour les dev de faire une rotation de meta et non meta pour renouveler l’intérêt de la plus grande majorité sachant que l’équilibre parfait n’a jamais été possible
One thing to consider is you say vast majority want change which is true- but most those maps were removed or are known to be displeasure due to mass dislike. Orinoco, andes, altas are treaty maps (im)famous for dragging games or being a dash for a choke all considered not suited for supremacy. They produce negative supremacy experiences for most. Many african maps (i personally like many) were hated because they favored soecific civs such as lake victoria favoring african civs or inca or haude much more. Many European maps were too asymmetric leading to many to balk at france or nomad start. Ranked is supposed to be somewhat equitable between civs people sont want bad change for the sake of change or to rehash hated maps again. There are some previously generally well received that could be added back, but not all.
They added dekkan and horn and the vast majority abhorred and still hate these maps. Infact these maps narrow civs selection as competitive minded people arent going to play civs that are potentially disadvantaged because of random chance. They did not fix any issue or improve things. Why would adding even more weird unbalanced maps suddenly make things “fresh?” Boost a few civs and force long choke point battles in a mode that doesnt prefer it? Thats going to elicit little positive engagement.
I think some maps should be rotated. However most games have a map pool ban or allow cuv selection after map is rolled because to foster a competitve environment you cant add weird maps that arent balanced and force people blindly to pick covs for it. To do so harms ranked far worse. Forcing players to play on badly balanced maps js not smart nor conducive to increasing ranked player retention. (did dekkan bring in any new players? I know it decreased quite a few).
The truth is if you want a new experience and dont care about balance, you can make your own lobby and allow others if interested to try. The ranked maps as is mostly are balanced or not hated, even if stale. Thats probably better than pissing off the remainder of ranked with unbalanced stuff just for the sake of change. Ideally, we get a map rotation in a patch soon but even then it will be a dozen or so changes not shortsighted mass change to appease the few non competitve players who could potentially enjoy it.
I was not talking about cards as a geographical area, but cards as a deck constitution because in French “carte” is used for the words card and map at the same time, hence the confusion
erratum
This is very confusing in english- did you mean carte translates to card and map/region?
Oui tout à fait c’est pour cela qu’il y a eu méprise et j’en suis désolé
What is happening? You want more/different maps in the ranked map pool? That’s not a crazy opinion but it’s being articulated very poorly if that’s all you are asking for.
No! He wants a more variety on the maps! For example, on the Andes and maybe somewhere else there are 2 variety for the trade route, There are also variety rivers! Andes are great example of how to make more variable. The Araucania have a many different treasures, is not boring! Or I did not understand?
In 3v3 games only 37 maps are used. At the same time in 1v1 games many more maps are used. And I don’t understand why the map pool for team and single games is different. Especially since as they said here in team games there should be more variability.
For example, I played the Horn map 5 times in 1v1 mode and NEVER in 3v3 mode. The same goes for other maps. They are in 1v1, but not in 3v3. And I can’t understand it. I mean, I played these maps even in Treaty (like Minas Gerais for example, although this map with a bunch of gold mines in one place was clearly made for supremacy). However, it appears only in 1v1.
The word “all” was why you got disagreement here. There are viable competitive maps that aren’t currently in the pool (when patches were more common the “shuffling” was nice, idk now. Maybe all competitive maps should be in the pool, but not all maps.).
Horn should be removed from 1v1 and shouldn’t appear in team either. It’s a horrible competitive map. Several 1v1 maps could be added to team.
Minas Gerais doesn’t appear in 1v1 ranked. Some maps (like Minas) just don’t work for team games (one player gets screwed or teammates are too spread or too bunched, etc. the game has sticky RNG especially with map selection and needs to be restarted to ensure proper randomization.
Deccan is a map that was popular in TAD and has you starting with extra resource crates.
Orinoco is a treaty type map because of one path into each others side of the map.
Unknown is a map that is just about having fun with all the crazy possibilities which makes it a popular map for Comp Stomps and should never be part of any kind of ranked games.
Not every map was made to be competitive especially for all game modes and there is nothing wrong with that. They could add some maps into ranked that don’t have trade routes. It would also be nice if they made variant versions of some maps that have less safe hunts in them.
It was an old school joke. However, I think that 100 maps out of 136 are great for team fights.
Great. It wasn’t easy but we came to the agreement that the team pool should be wider than 1v1. Now it’s the opposite and the difference is more than 50%.
If this map is not suitable for 1v1 or team play. Then what is it for?))))
I noticed this only recently acquired. Some cards are repeated twice in a row. But this is only the last month, there was no such error before.
Thank you! I didn’t know it could be cured.
There are no Treaty maps. Not every map is suitable for Treaty, but every Treaty map is suitable for Supremacy.
Of their 136 maps, only 37 participate in team play and 60 in 1v1. It is unclear what the rest of the maps are for.
Also
Is this accurate that there are 45 1v1 maps in ranked pool? I figure its right but not 100% sure
Not 60 or 100?
I counted on the wiki and there are 136 maps. And here in the ALL MAPS section there are only 129.
45 standard maps yes… ngl I didn’t read the thread so not sure where 60 or 100 came from
All good was just curious
Tbh 45 is more than i expected but as we know, unless you restart game its like 6 or so randomly rolled.
Wow, how lazy… that limits the variety a lot… 36 maps was the number of maps we had with TAD in 2007… that leaves out the African and European maps plus the ones they included in the DE… the ranking should be updated, we are no longer in 2007…
Historical maps don’t appear in “all maps” and some maps don’t appear in single player. But yeah we’ve got a buttload of maps (130+ sounds accurate but I’m not bothered enough to count).