Can we move back to English? There is literally a cooldown on the translator after translating 3 posts it seems, so maybe not post in French too much?
1 Like
Ctrl paste and utilize google translate, itās not that hard.
I canāt be bothered though.
Sounds like a personal issue.
True. I donāt get why they have a limit on the number of times you can translate something in a row though. 
Same, hopefully they improve on their system.
Actually per forum rules you should only be posting in English
Before that it also states to be respectful to all members which includes those that didnāt take a look at the rules and use a translator to their native language. I personally did not know that sticking to english was a rule, so Iāll keep that in mind.
pour rĆ©fĆ©rence future, notez que la langue principale Ć utiliser dans ces forums est lāanglais. sāil vous plaĆ®t assurez-vous dāutiliser google translate pour poster vos pensĆ©es.
Pourquoi le forum a-t-il une option de traduction? Pourquoi les travailleurs dāAge of Empires publient-ils des annonces mexicaines?
True. And if Water Nomad fails to get into top 3 i swear i`ll stick to team games only until next rotation.
Jāignore leurs raisons. ils peuvent vouloir que de nombreuses nations jouent au jeu, mais les rĆØgles de leurs forums stipulent que la langue des forums doit ĆŖtre lāanglais pour une raison ou une autre. Je suppose que cāest parce quāils ne veulent pas embaucher plusieurs traducteurs.
1 Like
Sounds to me like youād appreciate ranked nomad lobbies the most.
I appreciate variety the most. So in my ideal world there will be a ranked matchmaking system just like the one we have now. With penalties for dodging. Without map rotations all the maps are in the pool all the time. No map bans. A star-based preference system wherre you`d rank maps 1-3 stars 1 being the maps you hope to avoid 3 being the maps you want to play the most.
Its not that i hate Arabia, i just feel its too mainstream so i always ban it. In the above-mentioned star system Arabia would always be a 2-star map for me. Of course there are a few maps id rather avoid too (cough*Socotra*cough) but ill just do my best if i have to play it (That`s how i learned to enjoy water maps in the first place. Losing a lot of my first water maps matches, watching replays of my opponents, analyzing their strategies and actually getting to enjoy water maps)
Cheers
1 Like
Iād agree with that, but I would also allow stars of up to 10-30% (or up to 51%) of maps as well as map bans available up to 49% of the maps.
The goal would be to increase stars to the point that the odds of a map both players selected being in the queue being rolled in, which increases enjoyment by both players.
And if both players somehow happen to ban eachotherās starred maps, well there was more than enough bans so the maps remaining are much more likely to be ones both players would actually settle down into playing rather than dodging due to it being an entirely different game mode, like nomad for instance.
And with bans being limited to 49% of the pool, there will always be a map available even if every ban by both players lists 98% of maps available into the rejection pile. Which means the queue times will be well and good.
The main problems with the current system are as such:
Insta ban separate game modes in the same queue which waste bans, as well as reduce bans available afterwards towards maps you might actually consider playing but would ban anyways followed by lacking further bans for the maps youāre forced to settle on due to that. Then thereās the limited star system where it only takes one ban to ensure the opponent gets 100% chance of getting their map while you get 0% chance or for that matter both ban eachotherās maps and both go into a map neither truly want. And finally, the very limited supply of maps to choose from.
All that being said, perhaps theyāre attempting to balance every map so they will someday be able to confidently place all random map scripts into the queue without game breaking issues. Maximizing the fun in each map, so to speak.
Time to switch fortress votes over to eruption to consolidate votes. 16 hours remain.
(Or runestones votes to both fortress and eruption so they may continue to grow together)
No. Changing votes to force out maps you donāt like isnāt reasonable.
1 Like
Less than an hour remains
Suggesting Runestones, cenotes and fortress.
Well, on the bright side - we have two insta ban maps; however, the rest of the map pool is actually decent, so might not even need the last ban. Well, aside from perhaps arabia if it still retains those claustrophobically close town center hills.