As most people know, the Alt-f4 bypass, used by players when they get a map that they don’t like, is a very painful thing to deal with. Although I am strongly against it, and in no way support the possibility of it, I do have a solution that, although it might work isn’t ideal. What if, in addition to the ban and preferred options that people have for the map pools, there is also an optional Force Map option. This would only pair them up with people who are either forcing the same map, or have it preferred. This would give them longer queue times, but it’s better than wasting other peoples time when they have to deal with Alt-f4, and at least it gives them an actual supported option. Maybe implement this as an interim measure until an actual fix is developed? Anyone agree?
For people who only want to play one map, this is mathematically equivalent to unlimited map bans, btw.
edit: Actually it is not equivalent, if people using a “force” option are only matched with other people using this option, and/or people using the preferred option. But you get the point. /edit
It won’t happen.
Things like that are requested since the release of the game.
True, but sometimes you can still get even banned maps.
I don’t like it much myself, I just like Alt-f4 a lot less.
Hmm this is at least better than the unlimited map bans idea. Personally I am fine with not catering at all to the assholes who altf4 though.
just give infinite bans
the answer is to not fight against the altf4s. just dont ban any maps and dont favorite any maps. leave the map choice up to the oponent and they will have no reason to leave
Bad Idea. Best is try to ban any 3 maps that aren’t arabia, this way you have the least chance to get alt+f4.
But if you ban arabia you have a high chance to get alt+f4. Cause people who don’t want to play arabia will always ban it, it makes no sense to leave arabia open if you don’t like to play it, cause you will get it a lot.
Anyways, best to solve it is indeed:
So far everyone I have talked to who wants unlimited bans has been unwilling and/or incapable of acknowledging there are downsides to that idea.
It’s the same as having a bunch of separate queues. Splitting one queue into many pretty much always increases queue times (unless matchmaking is loosened to compensate).
Unlimited bans will also kill map diversity.
It will also mean many people’s ranking is only indicative of their skill on a certain map, which means matchmaking becomes less accurate on the occasions that people do branch out of their chosen favorite map. Admittedly, this is probably already happening a bit to a lesser extent. The current system is already a compromise and let’s you play your favorite map (if it’s a popular one) most of the time.
Personally I think proposing splitting what is one queue, with a relatively healthy pool of players at the moment, into a bunch of queues is a non-starter if we care about queue times at all.
we already effectivly have infinite bans with altf4. standardizing it would only decrease time in between games as it would prevent the same players who dont want to play the same map keep queing against eachother and then altf4ing. the way i see it there are no downsides to unlimited bans compaired to what we have now
Exactly, the current system is completely broken and should be judged with that in mind.
The only way the current system can work for some is by banning a significant part of the playerbase.
Obviously every option has a downside, however only one of the 2 systems is reasonable.
Opt-in does not tell anyone how to enjoy the game. Opt-in does not value ones preference higher than anothers.
Not every downside is the same. The current system denies the fundamental right of the player to play maps they enjoy, opt-in only denies the unreasonable expectation of fast queue times on less popular maps. Anyone can play what they want as long as there is someone willing to play with them.
When alt-f4 becomes unnecessary and likeminded players get matched the whole system becomes faster and more reliable.
Diversity isn’t unique to the current system at all, only forcing it is. You are just ignoring what alt-f4 means, people do not want to play stuff they dislike. The problem is the irrational expectation which has been set by the current system, when you respect map preferences it is impossible to have similar queue times between popular and less popular maps.
However your statement is a big exaggeration as there is enough reason to be optimistic; there is a lot of interest for variety, the community has increased in size, the map pool encourages variety and it will be easier to host games than in a traditional lobby system since you are not stuck waiting alone for a lobby to fill. People who enjoy less popular maps constantly face alt-f4, for them being matched with likeminded players would be very beneficial. Everything put together there could not be a better time to introduce opt-in.
Most important is matching likeminded players in a fair way, which would work fine. People need to stop saying “how it should be” and rather facillitate what the community wants.
Averaging elo over all maps is just that, creating an average. That is creating an illusion of accuracy, in reality your elo doesn’t match any of the specific maps. People who really care about elo accuracy should ask for elo to be calculated on open/closed/hybrid ladders (not to be confused with seperate queues).
The Elo isn’t that accurate anyway by current system:
I know most people I play with only play one map such as Arabia or arena and then once a day might play every other map once sometimes if it’s a short session or few hours they only play their preffered map. if 80% of most people’s games are played on one map then we still aren’t ruining the true representation of Elo by giving unlimited bans. Right now people just do what they want this is why there’s so much alt f4 to begin with if we had unlimited bans at least people get what they want even if it is longer wait times.
I’d rather be in queue longer than face multiple alt f4. Can at least watch a video on YouTube or something while in queue and not constant disappointment of broken precgane lobbies. I also think that saying games will be unbalanced is not that big of a problem on the rare maps people only want to play the rare maps for fun or variety whereas everybody plays Arabia or arena for the win purely because those are the most competitive maps. I don’t see anyone caring too much losing a game on 4 lakes or any other “fun map”.
I get that it will be a nuisance switching from being a mainly Arabia player to arena or vice versa from an Elo standpoint but at least it wouldn’t be that common with most people playing one map most of time. I’d actually rather have less frustration of lobbies and time wasting than having a potentially unbalanced game for the one time I play arena once a day. Surely having people just play their main map which most people do most of time anyway just makes more games balanced since we play what we want most of time and get matched with people who also want to play sane map preferences as us. I do like variety myself when I do play I like to play as many maps once a day and then play Arabia the rest some days mostly arena but I really don’t mind unbalanced teams on more fun maps only on Arabia am I looking for a competitive game as a requirement for me to enjoy it. All other maps I enjoy either way from just doing a different build order or playing civs I wouldn’t play normally on Arabia
No purely clean solution without drawback I think but unlimited bans should be the best of all options I believe.