What’s the point of ranked play after the latest patch?

The latest patch has completely defeated the point of having ranked matchmaking with the new map pool.

The whole point of ranked play is to have a pool of maps that follow the same core gameplay / structure but with enough variability to enable differing tactics. Just look at Starcraft 2 as an example. This is the difference between Arabia or highlands, for example.

What we now have is a map pool where Im potentially playing on maps like Arena and Black Forest, with map reveal defaulted, stone walls preventing any kind of early pressure or an endless choke point for walling. These maps are great but they are designed for the casual gamer. Adding them to a ranked map pool that limits map vetos eliminates of any kind of competitive gameplay


Isn’t a map like Black Forest another tactic variation?
I’d say mixing in gameplay types would be good, more variety is more to master.


I agree about Black Forest but Arena was always unexplored. Also Arena has pretty much the second biggest following after Arabia. Why shouldnt it be there? People have developed so many unique and interesting strats in Arena.


I also don’t like the changes to the map pool. The problem is that most of the maps are very specialized maps where the gameplay is fundamentally different to other maps - so you are forced to learn completely new gameplay. I honestly would need 5 bans to totally enjoy that map pool^^

On the other side I think maybe it’s a good thing to get rid of 3 of those maps and then just learn something new and maybe I’ll start enjoying those kind of maps - and if I dont, there are still 3 more to try (those I banned until that point). So I think it will be okay.
I still wish they had kept things like Ghost lake and Cenotes…maybe made it 12 maps and +2 bans.

I surely will not touch teamgames though. 1 ban is definitely not enough for such a special map pool.


Honestly i can only somewhat understand the complains about the map pool. For ranked/competitive gameplay nomad and megarandom are way too much RNG but the rest of the maps are decent. Maybe bf sucks too^^

What ppl seem to forget is the fact that its a ranked ladder, so the map pool has to represent competetive gameplay as would be needed to become a pro. Pros play land, water and hybrid maps all the time and have to learn the different playstyles. So its only logical to get maps like Team Islands, Steppe or Goldrush cause they are very often played in tournys nowadays like Arabia and Arena since years. BF is more of a crowd pleaser cause like 80% of HD and 50% voobly TGs are played on that map^^

I know its not an popular oppinion but if you dont like the ranked maps (that are based on highlevel players which should be for ranked) dont play them. If you want to get on an elo ladder in a game you have to play all its competetive aspects. Like you cant play other games competetive without learning all rules.

Maybe it would be a solution to get a ranked system for each major aspect of the game (land, water, hybrid, boom, rush, mixed) but that would mostlikly be to much for Devs/MS. There just isnt a way to please all ppl and if you want to make a single ladder for all you just have to get all the playstyles represented.

PS: Dont compare AoE2 and SC2 for your argumentation pls. those games have like nothing in commen except the genre.

It’s more complex than you make it out to be. BF and nomad isn’t really used in competitive play.

Arena and steppe are fine and all on voobly or when played occasionally in tourneys, but when people get to choose civs, these maps become much more repetitive than more standard open maps. You either choose one of the few best civs or you’re in trouble.

all i wanted was to select map arabia and que in the mm for it. or black forest. instead its the same ■■■■. you will randomly get some map you dont want to play. sucks. and i still dont play it.

more bans would mean longer queue times.

You realize this is what custom lobbies are for?

custom lobbies are ranked? and are they official servers or peer to peer?