I completely understand that. He then proceeds to say a better alternative is to allow one ban per party, which is a bad suggestion that would in fact increase altf4.
But alt f4 would fo no good and you wouldnāt have to revamp the algorithm much
Instead of making so complicated, I think another way would be to show statitics by map.
-
Then, players who have good stats but playing only on arabia will be visible and everybody know that they are not polyvalent at all and it will maybe push them to improve their stats on other maps. But it will make a maybe too big window of stats.
-
Then we could think about a way to make a stats of polyvalence. I need to sit and think about it, but there is certainly a formula based on the % of victory on each map and the % of games played on each map and the total games played.
It seems the majority of the problem stems from the lack of flexibility provided by the voting system combined with the extreme gravitation of players towards a select few maps. Almost everyone wants to play either Arabia or Arena. They favorite their choice, ban the other, and with limited bans ban a few other unwanted maps (usually similar between players) leaving them with maybe 2/5 popular maps and 3/5 they donāt want to play.
Many suggestion here seem unworkable: unlimited bans can result in a no solution scenario, increasing the map-pool with the same voting system wonāt fix the problem. And simply penalizing people for avoiding the chosen map seems harsh, since the map chosen is often un-wanted by both/all players.
I propose a more reliable solution. Replace this hibrid voting system with a full ranked choice voting system. A players orders the maps to his preference, maps are scored proportionally to their score, the map with the top score between all players is picked. When multiple maps have the same top score (in a case of a completely inverted ranking), a random map is picked among them.
This should provide a much more flexible voting system, with just a little added complexity. Increasing the pool size with also improve flexibility of the voting, but will increase complexity. And if we want to maintain variety, the map can be selected at random proportional to score (top scoring maps are just more likely).
This will ensure that players get at least a map they can stand most of the time, and there favorite map some of the time (as opposed to never). For those who want to still insist on breaking the system if they donāt get exactly what they want on the ladder, a punishment is still in order. I do think if you want to play a specific map go play in a custom lobby.
1 Like
My strategy is when I want to play Arabia, I ban other popular maps. Because I know that maps like Islands or Socotra are banned by other players.
If I want to play Arena, I ban arabia and other more popular maps.
It works 80%
For the other 20% = Aflt f4 sorry
Yes, and that very destructive behavior that we probably want to discourage or in the extreme punish.
The matchmaking systems pairs you with an opponent of similar skill. Unfortunately the system ATM canāt take into account your map preference. So the matched players need to come to an agreement. The current map voting system makes reasonable players come to sub-optimal choices for all.
Your extreme position is basically āif I donāt get it my way, Iāll take my ball and go homeā. Children like that should not be encouraged and empowered. And adults should already know better. So please, āgo homeā.
1 Like
My position is my position and I understand and respect other positions. Find a compromise for the 50/50% players pros/against choosing their maps is certainly the aim of this topic.
You refuse the otherās position, YOU are extreme.
3 Likes
I cannot agree more to this. I paid for this game and I want to play how I want to play it. I usually queue with my friend and he just cannot play open maps, he is not suitable for it. So every time we get like crater or a similar stupid map we just insta resign or ALT F4 and queue again, until we finally got a map we want to play. And I would also like to add that the custom game suggestion is a bunch of crap because sometimes you get paired with people that are either way too bad or way to good for our level.
Forcing people to play a game they donāt want doesnāt work. MS has to find a solution for all of us. I also respect people who want to play all maps, I fully understand, but this is not my problem. I am not wasting my time on things I donāt like. I donāt do that in life, and definitely not online playing video games.
6 Likes
I say: I want to play arabia.
You say: No, I want to play arena.
I say: Ok, how about african clearing?
You say: No, I want to play arena.
I say: Ok, how about crater?
You say: No, I want to play arena.
ā¦
Yes my position on punishment is extreme. But the current matchmaking system is build on compromise which you are unwilling to do. And you still insist on using it. Why? Can you please not? I know itās not ideal, but you can arrange your own games on Discord servers, you can compare your skill between friends to establish a hierarchy. You could potentially establish you own independent ranking (I know this is not realistic to expect from casual players, but it is possible).
A parallel ranking system might not be a bad idea. It would take more manual effort, but would be more similar to the voobly ranking.
1 Like
I want to drive a Mercedes OR Red Bull OR Ferrari. These cars are available and I want to pay for them, but the rental company only allows me to drive a HAAS or Williams.
I would like to propose a temporary solution to this problem:
When one of the player alt-f4ās, the server detects the non-responsiveness from that player and puts everyone else (excluding their partymates) back into the queue immediately. They would also have the benefit of time already queued so that they can be matched with higher priority.
This argument is somewhat valid if you are playing alone. But here having paid for the game doesnāt automatically entitle you whatever you want. You are playing with someone else and hence have to make a compromise with them. Also everyone has paid for it. What your argument amounts to is that you are willing to pay for extra map ban slots.
The 4 bans are usually enough to cover the type of maps most people donāt want to play. However the current matchmaking system doesnāt work well for solo players queueing for team games. They only get 1 or 2 bans. This can be fixed by giving every party their 4 bans. It also doesnāt help those who only want to play one map. This can only be fixed by giving unlimited bans. Both of these require a good rework of how the matchmaking works.
The only map I really donāt want to play is Arabia and Iām assuming the only map you want to play is Arabia or a very similar map. One of us is not going to be happy if we get matched together. Lots of people share our respective preferences so this happens all the time. The only way I see around this issue is to split the queue in some manner, but this is going to make queue times much longer.
Those guys you matched with 3 times for nomad were not āforcingā you to play nomad, they probably just didnāt want to play Arabia or an open map. They probably thought you were trying to force them to play your map of choice, which you were by using Alt F4 repeatedly.
My point is this, everyone has to compromise and be flexible with the maps or we get this toxic situation. I waited for close to 30 minutes to get a match without someone hitting Alt F4 today. Waiting that long is a lot more whack than any map you might get. I only ban one map (Arabia) when I queue for TG by myself and if any other map comes up I accept that fateā¦ even if itās BF. If everyone dodges all but their favorite map or two, as you seem to be defending then very few games will ever load. Therefore, if you have a very short list of maps you like then youāre going to have to play maps that are not your favorite sometimes.
Stop being selfish by cheating the system and wasting peopleās time just so you can have your way.
We definitely need a way to punish map dodgers and I donāt think it should be about elo. Map dodgers waste peopleās time, I think it would be a fitting punishment to penalize them with time locked out of MM. I propose if you Alt F4 after you see the map, you cannot queue again for 15 minutes.
3 Likes
I 100% agree. My favorite maps dont come up often
Socotra
Forest costal
4 lakes
I would almost never play if i only played these maps. I play others and let someone else have fun and slowly improve. Its actually a surprisingly large difference in skill with those maps and something like arabia.
Do you have stats to back up this vast majority claim? I for one donāt like Arabia and I am definitely not alone. A lot of people like variety and plenty more want maps that are not so practiced and sweaty as Arabia.
If a vast majority agreed on maps we would not have this Alt F4 problem, would we?
Specific queues could work, but it would make queue times much longer. There definitely could be issues from a time penalty for map dodging, like legitimate crashes being extra frustrating, but I donāt foresee any that would be worse than this Alt F4 issue.
1 Like
If you give 4 bans per people in team match so they can be 8x4 = 32 ban mapsā¦ so more than the available. It doesnt work tooā¦
The only solution is to allow people to choose the map they want to play in QUICK GAME and keep like this in ranked game.
For those who cry they loose their time because of people who alt f4, itās nothing in comparison with quiters in the lobbies or quick games. These issue is really loosing our time by playing 20 min and give up after the first battle. These people must me punished by penalty same like in counter strike.
More map bans may not work with the current system. But it can work with a different matchmaking algorithm. The queue times may get longer because of it but at least we are then guaranteed that people will not be alt-f4ing because of map. The total time before getting a playable game may go down sometimes.
aoenexus should have what you are looking for.
Ummā¦ that is literally how Arabia goes. Map is very punishing so itās pretty obvious when youāre too far behind to bring the game back.
You either have 20 min cc or 2 hour villager hunt. Pick one.
This combined with people not being complete pocket pussies would be nice. I hate Arabia but my friend likes playing it and we get it way more than BF which is the one he hates and I like. I think if we had and open map queue, closed map queue, and hybrid/megarandom/nomadā¦ most people would be happy with that. Or heck, just an actual random map with random civs would be fun.
1 Like