+21
Approved

Map Voting

Gabriel Valentine 3 months ago in All Platforms • updated by untitledfolder89 3 months ago 12

Please add a voting system after a match ends instead of cycling maps. Not infrequently, lobbies stack on maps players deem undesirable (ex. Champagne) and many players leave the match as a result. Giving players more control over what map they play would resolve this problem.


Implementation suggestions

Three choice system (à la Call of Duty):

[same map]
[next map in cycle]
[random map]


All maps voting (à la Rising Storm 2):

A list of maps on the left, which can be clicked to vote. All votes are tallied on the right.

Game Version:
...
Reproduction steps:
...
Output Log:
Gameplay Matchmaking/MainMenu
+2

I vote for the COD system, personally. As I'm in favor of playing the maps in a south-to-north cycle.

E.g. Match is on Flanders, the next map would be Vosges, Douaumont, then Champagne, etc.

Also, I like the idea of having a choice of a rematch.

+2

Another thing, the random option probably shouldn't select the next map in the cycle or the same map.

E.g. Finished a match on Vosges, the players vote for Random. So, it wouldn't select Douaumont nor Vosges again.

P.S. Maybe it wouldn't select Flanders either? Just a thought, but if I was playing and just went through the first example above. I personally wouldn't want to go back to Flanders.

P.P.S. If no one votes, the game continues the cycle. (Or should it go random?)

I agree with Ironstorm, it would also stop the 3-map rotation where we see Vosges and Argonne almost every time.

With a voting system, every game would be on de_dust2, lol.


Seriously, good idea!

Approved

On our list somewhere.

I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I strongly believe its a bad idea to have map voting. Here's why:

First let me just start by saying like everyone else, there are maps I like better than others, and often I wish I could skip one. So I understand where everyone is coming from. But that's not based on facts. That's just personal feelings.


The problem is that in every FPS game with a voting system, the same maps end up being voted over and over, reducing the variety. I have seen hundreds of times 5 maps being picked out of a 20 map list, I can only imagine how bad it might get in Verdun which has way fewer maps.


People are quick to take habits, and people only vote for what they know and the maps they are most used to. If they know only 3 maps, they will vote for only 3 maps. To get used to a map, you must accept the discomfort of sucking at first and then adapt.


Also when people see others voting for one map, they will vote for it as well without thinking about what they want. Link to this classic psychology experiment https://www.spring.org.uk/2007/11/i-cant-believe-my-eyes-conforming-to.php proving my point.

It is way more fair to have a rotation that plays all maps than to have a voting system that will encourage those who are experienced in certain maps and have loud mouths enough to get the herd behavior going -- and penalize those who are good in other maps. There's always going to be a map you don't like, and its usually because you do worse on that one. That doesn't mean it should be played once a year. That might be an acquired taste. That might be somebody's favorite map.


If you want voting, add it in private matches where people who are too rigid to try maps they dislike can do whatever they want.


P.S.: War isn't supposed to be pleasant anyways. You don't go cry to your NCO because you wished for another assignment. You carry out your orders. I guess what I'm trying to point out (in a funny way)  is how much realism are you willing to give up? Do you want a game like all the others?

I have had the same thought/worry cross my mind as well, regarding map voting. However, that's why I voted for the CoD style mentioned above:  Where you can't vote for a particular map.

-1

Let's face it, there's just not enough maps for it to even make sense. And as for Champagne, fix the damn lag and I probably will start to like it (that map systematically lags like hell). Instead of responding to feelings caused by game issues, devs should focus on fixing the core technical issues. That's my 2 cents anyways...

-1

Lag is not the issue most players have with Champagne. Nor is it that we don't do well on it or that we aren't used to it. It just isn't a fun map. Many vets would not mind Champagne simply being removed altogether (not suggesting that should happen, just a fact).


As for "technical issues," that has nothing to do with this and the devs can do both (that's why bugs and suggestions are different sections of this site).

I am willing to give up 100% of the "realism" of playing a bad map that people don't want to play. As I said in the original suggestion, right now, players simply leave lobbies on maps they don't like. This kills lobbies. Wow, such "realism." I agree that several maps would get voted and played more often. This isn't because of group-think, it's because they're the best and most popular maps.

Adding map voting in private matches but not public is basically not adding map voting and I'm strongly against it. Also I'm pretty sure you already can set map in private (I may be wrong because I, like 98% of players, never play in private matches). If anything, the minority who want to play unpopular maps should go to private matches so they can experience their "acquired taste."

And honestly, in my opinion, corner-prone-camping MP18 users who like Champagne should be penalized for having a no-skill play style.

Anyway, the majority opinion is clearly that it would be a good thing and the suggestion has been approved.

-1

Champagne kills laptop GPUs. At least mine and many other players I have talked to. Also you prove my point : the opinion of a small clique (veterans) being imposed on everyone else. Even if you take the 20 people who have voted for this post it's extremely far from representing "most players".


The whole reason why I say voting should not happen is because feelings and value judgement is not a reliable and fair way to deal with things -- and they constitute 100% of your post. Champagne is not a "bad map" YOU don't like it. If you cannot distinguish facts from personal feelings, there's a problem. But then again that's exactly why the map vote is a terrible idea : you're not the only one who mix up facts with feelings, and so there needs to be a neutral system.


As for pleasing players, I've said it I'll say it again, focus on the WHY and fix the issues, improve the maps. You think there are issues with Champagne? Point out what elements need improvement. I encourage you to make a post about Champagne if you think there are gameplay issues. Saying something is "good" or "bad" is just not helpful.

Your posts are based on your feelings, too. It sounds like you feel voting/democracy isn't a fair way to pick maps. I disagree but neither of our opinions are factual. I also don't think the feelings of players should be discounted or ignored because they're "feelings" and therefore somehow less valid than someone else's opinion. I don't like Champagne and I'm up front about it from the start but that doesn't make my points less valid.


People leave lobbies on maps they don't like and a match with 10 players is not fun. That's the problem (not my specific gripes against a certain map) and you aren't offering a solution that will stop that from happening. It doesn't just happen on Champagne, this happens on Douaumont, Vosges, and other maps also.


You're the only person to vote against this topic, which was made after a discussion on Discord and no one voiced a dissenting opinion there. In any case, it's up to the devs, and they've signaled this feature will be implemented. That could change. This will be my last post in this thread.

-3

Like I said in my first post, experience has shown me that voting system for maps, especially if you can see the number of votes as the vote is going on, leads to less maps being played. That's fact not feeling. You know, you could just say you don't mind playing less maps and just be done with it, since that's the thing I address here.


If you want voting so bad and understand my objections, you could come up with a plan to make sure maps are not being played less. Well, anyone can. For instance, here's a simple one : vote for the next map but be forced to play all the maps in the rotation once before you start over again.


And by the way, don't make this personal. I just pointed out flaws in argumentation and that doesn't mean I hate you or anything. Trying to single me out is a bit low. Instead, just go back to my first post -- which had nothing to do with you at all -- and see if there is something there that might give you ideas to improve something.


Who said you had to either take everything or reject everything?......