I like the random map (from a fixed pool) in ranked mm, and if we already doing that, I think we should follow the same idea with picking Civ - each match has 20 random civs pool to pick from (one civ could get picked multiple times)
This will result in better measurement of skill (no single-civ abuse - Cuman I’m looking at you) and more diverse number of civs in matches.
Put in a poll to see how people think about this.
All civs are available to pick (current behavior - 35 civs total)
Each match has 20 random civs pool to pick from (one civ could get picked multiple times)
Being too restrictive will likely annoy people (see the forced location pool topic). With 20 civs pool, if you only have 2 favorite civs you will get to pick them 82% of the time. 3 favorites civs make it 93%. With 5 favorite civs you will get one of them 99% of the time.
Being comfortable with 5-6 civs to play in different maps (so you guarantee a pick) is something most people will able to do in ranked in my opinion.
So 20 is basically the answer to the question “What is the pool size so people with 5 favorite civs can pick one 99% of the time?”
As far as I like the idea of a random civ pool to choose from, this would need some serious attention and tuning before implementing. There could be some map sets that leave some civs in absolute disadvantage to any other, this would need to be take in consideration to make that pool.
Because both sides are given the same pool of civs, and a civ can be picked multiple times, a total random civ pool does not give advantage to any side.
If a civ in the pool has a disadvantage on that map, it will simply not getting picked. Or if one player want to have a challenging match he/she is free to pick that civ. I do not see any problem here.
Exactly that. If a shortened civ pool contains obsolete civs for certain circumstances then it will become event shorter, therefore artificially lowering its potential. Aside from that, a untuned situation would punish even more newer players. Not only they would not be able to distinguish what civs work the best and the worst at those circumstances because the lack of experience, but also the game would be misseducating them into thinking that a certain awful civ for a certain scenario could be actually viable because its available on the pool to choose from.
I think you missed the purpose of the change - it is to increase the variety of civs on every map, not decrease it as you suggest. As long as it is fair, having non-optimal civs may be a good thing, as there will be room for non-ordinary strategies.
On the other hand, keep in mind that the suggested pool is 20 civ which is big enough for every map to have a couple of good, normal and bad civs. And the pool is generated for each match - it is NOT a fixed pool for every map.
Easy to understand, yes. That’s not necessarily the meaning of complicated. In this case, complicated means unnecessarily excessive. Going random has been pretty standard aside from in tournaments and show matches.
The devs must be busy to collect and analyze the data from ranked matches of all skill level intervals, and they need to know what the people’s favorites are. If some civs/units are OP they know what they should do.
From my observation the most popular civ for now is the Cumans, but it’s just my observation. Only the devs know the real situation so just give them time to collect data and make right decisions.