31 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

I like the new map voting system but it has some rather obvious flaws. Namely the fact that people keep voting for the SAME maps and gamemodes virtually every game. So what if the voting was somehow weighted based on how often the maps are chosen?


One option is random weighting. So if you have river city, frozen city, crimson straights, and terra therma. And river city gets 6 votes, frozen city gets 6 votes, crimson straights gets 11 votes, and terra therma gets 1 vote. Then youd have a 25%/25%/46%/4% chance for each map to get picked at random respectively.


Another more democratic option would be assigning extra votes to the least played map. Right now each player gets 1 vote. So thats 24 votes total. But what if the game itself pre-assigned 12 additional votes to the least played map in the 4 map rotation? So youd have 36 votes total, 24 from the players, and 12 from the game that go towards the least played map in the rotation.

So for example if Frozen City, Terra Therma, Crimson Straits, and River City come up as the 4 maps in the rotation. Terra Therma would be the least played of those so it would get assigned the game's 12 votes for the least played map. It would then require less players to vote for Terra Therma for to be selected since it already starts with 1/3rd of the total vote.

Edited by Khobai, 03 November 2015 - 03:30 PM.

[Bilbo]

This is why I like the idea of a weighted random selection better than the absolute vote we have been given.

[1Grimbane]

Khobai, on 03 November 2015 - 02:25 PM, said:

I like the new map voting system but it has some rather obvious flaws. Namely the fact that people keep voting for the SAME maps and gamemodes virtually every game. So what if the voting was weighted based on how often the maps are chosen?


Right now each player gets 1 vote. So thats 24 votes total.

But what if the game itself pre-assigned 12 additional votes to the least played map in the 4 map rotation? So youd have 36 votes total, 24 from the players, and 12 from the game that go towards the least played map in the rotation.

So for example if Frozen City, Terra Therma, Crimson Straits, and River City come up as the 4 maps in the rotation. Terra Therma would be the least played of those so it would get assigned the game's 12 votes for the least played map.

It would then require less players to vote for Terra Therma for to be selected since it already starts with 1/3rd of the total vote.

Because its really dumb to have like 10 maps if people keep voting to play on the same 2-3.

Does this say something about the other maps?i think it does... if the majority keeps picking the same maps that means the majority thinks the other maps suck... sorry same logic applies to gamemodes... good riddance terra therma i hope to never play on you again.. same goes for that god-awful map viridian bog

[Khobai]

Quote

This is why I like the idea of a weighted random selection better than the absolute vote we have been given

I would prefer a weighted random selection too.

But I believe the voting system was added to decrease the queue time. Because they can reduce the number of buckets for collecting players. They dont need three different buckets for assault/conquest/skirmish now they just need one bucket which then votes on the gamemode.

If the voting system is here to stay, they need to do SOMETHING to prevent the same maps/gamemodes from always being picked.

Quote

Does this say something about the other maps?i think it does... if the majority keeps picking the same maps that means the majority thinks the other maps suck... sorry same logic applies to gamemodes... good riddance terra therma i hope to never play on you again.. same goes for that god-awful map viridian bog

I fail to see your point. You can still only play on one map at a time. Players are forced to choose a map and will always favor certain maps over others. Even if Terra Therma and Viridian Bog were completely redone that doesnt guarantee theyll ever get picked. There's ALWAYS going to be less popular maps no matter what, and there needs to be some kindve voting mechanic put in place to help those less popular maps get picked more often.

Edited by Khobai, 03 November 2015 - 02:41 PM.

[Bobzilla]

Then why have a vote that attempts randomness?

[Bilbo]

Bobzilla, on 03 November 2015 - 02:34 PM, said:

Then why have a vote that attempts randomness?

To prevent what I predict will happen when I play later tonight. I don't believe I'll play a single game of conquest if my recent experience with MM correlates with player voting now.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Bobzilla, on 03 November 2015 - 02:34 PM, said:

Then why have a vote that attempts randomness?

To be able to shorten wait times and improve mm while pretending to cater for those OMG hate this map, OMG hate this mode people.

OP: I would go for random pick based on the % of votes. Each vote would be ~4% chance for selected map and mode. That gives real influence, but doesn't make unfavourable maps gone.

There are arguments about 'bad' maps, but tourmaline doesn't get picked either, because lasers.

One good thing, maybe they'll fix assault (rewards for capping) and conquest (rewards... for capping).

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 03 November 2015 - 02:43 PM.

[1Grimbane]

Khobai, on 03 November 2015 - 02:31 PM, said:

I would prefer a weighted random selection too.

But I believe the voting system was added to decrease the queue time. Because they can reduce the number of buckets for collecting players. They dont need three different buckets for assault/conquest/skirmish now they just need one bucket which then votes on the gamemode.

If the voting system is here to stay, they need to do SOMETHING to prevent the same maps/gamemodes from always being picked.



I fail to see your point. You can still only play on one map at a time. Players are forced to choose a map and will always favor certain maps over others. Even if Terra Therma and Viridian Bog were completely redone that doesnt guarantee theyll ever get picked. There's ALWAYS going to be less popular maps no matter what, and there needs to be some kindve voting mechanic put in place to help those less popular maps get picked more often.

dude IF THE MAJORITY PICKS MAPS THAT DON'T SUCK.. DON'T MAKE THEM PLAY MAPS THAT SUCK BY FORCING LESS POPULAR MAPS TO GET PICKED MORE... that defeats the purpose of voting down stupid mapsseriously why would you want to force less popular maps...MAJORITY RULES AND THANK GOD IT DOES

Edited by 1Grimbane, 03 November 2015 - 02:48 PM.

[TyphonCh]

How it should work, like many other games that have voting for gamemode and maps, is each vote towards a map or game mode is considered in the final selection.

Imagine throwing a 24 sided die

Map 1: 8 people vote

Map 2: 6 people vote

Map 3: 2 people vote

Map 4: 8 people vote

33% chance to select Maps 1 and 4, %25 chance to select map 2, and %12 chance to select Map 3, for example.

Same goes for the mode selection. This makes it easy for anyone to toss a vote at an undesirable map and have it turn up as a winner.

[Khobai]

Quote

dude IF THE MAJORITY PICKS MAPS THAT DON'T SUCK.. DON'T MAKE THEM PLAY MAPS THAT SUCK BY FORCING LESS POPULAR MAPS TO GET PICKED MORE... that defeats the purpose of voting down stupid maps

Even if all maps were equally good there still has to be a least popular map. Players are never going to vote for all maps equally. Especially when the voting isnt secret. People tend to vote with the rest of the pack. Thats just human nature.

Quote

How it should work, like many other games that have voting for gamemode and maps, is each vote towards a map or game mode is considered in the final selection.

Imagine throwing a 24 sided die

Map 1: 8 people vote

Map 2: 6 people vote

Map 3: 2 people vote

Map 4: 8 people vote

33% chance to select Maps 1 and 4, %25 chance to select map 2, and %12 chance to select Map 3, for example.

Same goes for the mode selection. This makes it easy for anyone to toss a vote at an undesirable map and have it turn up as a winner.

This could definitely work too.

Edited by Khobai, 03 November 2015 - 02:51 PM.

[Bobzilla]

So basically just no choice, total randomness would be better.

[1Grimbane]

most matches so far HPG manifold wins... next is mining collective, then canyon network... point is out of given choices i'm always happy the least sucky is picked and i was talking about the post with some yaahoo saying FORCE LESS POPULAR MAPS... that f-ing stupid logic.

Edited by 1Grimbane, 03 November 2015 - 02:55 PM.

[Torgun]

I think it'll be interesting after a week or two how it all plays out. I mean people could get tired of having played the same maps all the time and might pick some else for variation too. But if we're going to have a choice of maps, we actually should have a choice of maps. Giving least liked maps a ton of hidden votes just defeats the purpose of voting on maps.

[Troutmonkey]

Team Chevy86, on 03 November 2015 - 02:47 PM, said:

How it should work, like many other games that have voting for gamemode and maps, is each vote towards a map or game mode is considered in the final selection.

Imagine throwing a 24 sided die

Map 1: 8 people vote

Map 2: 6 people vote

Map 3: 2 people vote

Map 4: 8 people vote

33% chance to select Maps 1 and 4, %25 chance to select map 2, and %12 chance to select Map 3, for example.

Same goes for the mode selection. This makes it easy for anyone to toss a vote at an undesirable map and have it turn up as a winner.

I like this idea, but it will never happen. Too many people will complain after 23 people vote for one map but MM chooses the map that got 1 vote

[1Grimbane]

Torgun, on 03 November 2015 - 02:59 PM, said:

I think it'll be interesting after a week or two how it all plays out. I mean people could get tired of having played the same maps all the time and might pick some else for variation too. But if we're going to have a choice of maps, we actually should have a choice of maps. Giving least liked maps a ton of hidden votes just defeats the purpose of voting on maps.

i concur.... and hidden voting FORCING LESS POPULAR Maps is f-ing stupid logic and defeats the sole purpose of voting

Edited by 1Grimbane, 03 November 2015 - 03:02 PM.

[TyphonCh]

Troutmonkey, on 03 November 2015 - 03:01 PM, said:

I like this idea, but it will never happen. Too many people will complain after 23 people vote for one map but MM chooses the map that got 1 vote

It works great it a ton of other games. I'd rather this system than getting stuck on Frozen City Skirmish for an eternity

PGI just needs to stop listening to the whining masses once in awhile.

Edited by Team Chevy86, 03 November 2015 - 03:05 PM.

[Bilbo]

Troutmonkey, on 03 November 2015 - 03:01 PM, said:

I like this idea, but it will never happen. Too many people will complain after 23 people vote for one map but MM chooses the map that got 1 vote

As they did when they had this system, briefly, for game modes in the past. I still like it better than never seeing a game of conquest again.

[Inkarnus]

Hah make it so if you vote against the Most attractive obvious vote you get 2x Cbills
same with the map but 4x so its 8xCbills for beeing forced to play against your will!
let them have there boating contest screw them aslong as i do get to drive my light with a big profit margin is all i would care.  Would open up alot of possibillitys
I  mean cmon there is NOTHING more bs then getting dragged with a locust into a skirmish and making 50k Cbills because of it

Edited by Inkarnus, 03 November 2015 - 03:18 PM.

[Torgun]

Inkarnus, on 03 November 2015 - 03:12 PM, said:

Hah make it so if you vote against the Most attractive obvious vote you get 2x Cbills
same with the map so its 4xCbills for beeing forced to play against your will!

Much more likely we'd get 1/4 of the CBill earnings for voting on most popular maps and modes. Don't you know we're talking about MWO (Mech Warrior OuttaCBills)?

Edited by Torgun, 03 November 2015 - 03:16 PM.

[Troutmonkey]

Bilbo, on 03 November 2015 - 03:05 PM, said:

As they did when they had this system, briefly, for game modes in the past. I still like it better than never seeing a game of conquest again.

I usually have all modes ticked anyway. I don't mind Skirmish, but I like Conquest and Assault too. Same goes for maps. Will have to give it a go tonight and see if it's as bad as people are saying