67 replies to this topic

[Trauglodyte]

Quite frankly, I'm not sure that people are even voting most of the time. But, for reasons that I can't explain, people LOVE Tourmaline and Frozen City. Which, makes no sense given the fact that it is laser vomit central (i.e., added heat doesn't do well for those builds) and Frozen City negates the whole benefit of the meta range builds.

Take the whole voting away and make it so that, when you want to play, you choose an order of 1-2-3 for the match type and map preferences. IF you don't match up after a certain time, you get dumped into something that you didn't want. But, you still get to play.

[Chuck Jager]

I like the game within a game. I still get the worst map for my assaults (if) I ever choose to play them.

It also lets the passive aggressive folks feel like they may have some control. If I see it swinging back and forth and then it lands on conquest anything or terra/alpine. I now have a "bad feeling" about what to expect.

I think PGI has settled on an obviously exploitable system for complainer/exploiters to get what they want.

Unless it is 2 ranked groups of the same skill level, the winner on just about every map will be the group that picks the simplest route to the most time proven point and uses meta builds without chain firing. Winning with other methods usually involves multiple errors on either team. At the least the vote system has some complexity/randomness to it.

[Alex Morgaine]

geodeath, on 18 January 2016 - 04:44 PM, said:

Get rid of map voting and let us que up 4 ready mechs to choose when the map is selected.

Oh hey, something to make camo worth using instead of "I got my jungle camo on...in artic. Ok since people like cold maps I'll do a whitish glinty like ice style... and get terra therma... green olive generic?"

[Lightfoot]

Makes no difference. A choice is made.

[El Bandito]

Prosperity Park, on 18 January 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

Very simple - if Map and Mode voting were blind, then people would not be able to game the system since they would have no way to tell if their multiplier-farming effort are going to pay off.

If people cannot game the system with blind voting then they will be more likely to vote on maps like Frozen City, Mining, and Canyon. We will see far less maps like Mordor and Bog as they are partly byproducts of failed gaming of the voting system.

You know what, I like that, implement blind voting.

[VorpalAnvil]

Prosperity Park, on 18 January 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

Very simple - if Map and Mode voting were blind, then people would not be able to game the system since they would have no way to tell if their multiplier-farming effort are going to pay off.

(To clarify, blind voting means you don't see the vote percentages)

There is no reason to show the vote percentages unless you are deliberately trying to encourage gamers to vote according to what's been voted for already.



Edit:


You mean "let others vote first, then farm your multiplier" ?

How does that stop farming? It does the opposite! It guarantees the farming success of the late voters.

Blind votes make farming cometely uncertain, and will curtail that behavior.

Seriously, this is a big deal to you morons? And when you get your way, what boogeyman will you blame for still sucking? The meta? Muh premades? Of all the problems in this game, this (alleged) one is the one you choose to harp about to no end? Cryhards PLZ GTFO!

[Kaeb Odellas]

I like farming the multiplier because it gives me the ability to avoid Terra Therma. I don't care which map I play, as long as it isn't Terra Therma or Alpine Skirmish/Assault

[MrMadguy]

I agree. Some trolls are stacking multiplier to make people angry via voting for Therma. I stack multiplier to prevent this from happening and succeed in most cases. But do we really need this mini game? Isn't the intent of map voting system - to vote for your favorite map? I want to simply vote for my favorite map - not to stack multiplier and keep it especially for Therma. With blind voting I won't be able to intentionally stack multiplier, but trolls won't be able to do it too. Everybody will still be in equal conditions, but we'll get rid of this stupid mini game.

[Kilo 40]

hide the percentages AND lock the votes.

[MrMadguy]

Kilo 40, on 19 January 2016 - 01:32 AM, said:

hide the percentages AND lock the votes.

Locking votes won't be necessary, if percentages will be hidden, as there is no reason to change your mind, if you don't see, what map is winning.

Edited by MrMadguy, 19 January 2016 - 01:37 AM.

[Kilo 40]

MrMadguy, on 19 January 2016 - 01:36 AM, said:

Locking votes won't be necessary, if percentages will be hidden, as there is no reason to change your mind, if you don't see, what map is winning.

locking the votes wouldn't hurt anything either.

[Ratpoison]

The chaotic nature of the "minigame" randomizes the end result enough so that ALL maps actually manage to see play, as opposed to before where those who like the less popular maps would simply be outvoted every single game, and map selection became horribly stale and repetitive. If you're going to take that away, you have to offer something else that fixes the problem to be put in its place. Blind or locked voting will only set things back to how they were, with half the maps never seeing play. Those of us who actually like any one of the less popular maps, or simply enjoy having a diverse map pool, are not going to be okay with that.

Despite what some of your egos have convinced you, a decent number of people actually do like the maps that you don't, and it isn't some kind of trolling scheme against you. A simple majority vote doesn't give you the right to take half the game away from the rest of us. So I'm going to keep using large vote stacks to manipulate the voting pools towards Therma, Bog, Alpine, and whatever else doesn't seem to be getting voted in, because playing on more maps is simply better than playing on less, and I don't need have my personal favorites voted in every single round to have a good time. Perhaps if you actually accepted the challenge of playing on maps you don't like instead of pouting about them like children, you'd actually get good enough at them to know how to play them.

Edited by tortuousGoddess, 19 January 2016 - 01:40 AM.

[JC Daxion]

Khobai, on 18 January 2016 - 03:43 PM, said:

because how are you supposed to know if your map is gonna win or not if you cant see the votes?

thats the point... If you if you keep not getting the map you want, then that vote will increase.. If you are playing maps you wan't then it does not need to rise. You don't have to vote on every match. In fact that is how people most often stack votes IMO.. I just pick the map's i want and if they win, great! if not, i get a stack. eventually the time i pick the map wins. Makes sense and would make things a lot easier..

Blind vote and lock it.. i like it, the people will not be gaming the system, and it still should help people play maps they want on occasion.

Lastly, Sorry if you miss click on accident on occasion i really don't think you should be able to change it. This is a game with using a mouse moving tiny little movements to hit tiny little targets.. and you can't hit a Box 4 inches across?? Deal with your wrong vote one match and move on you are not voting for king of the world.

[MrMadguy]

Kilo 40, on 19 January 2016 - 01:39 AM, said:

locking the votes wouldn't hurt anything either.

As it doesn't affect anything, it is better for it to stay, as people may missclick or change their minds in some other way.

[Kilo 40]

MrMadguy, on 19 January 2016 - 01:45 AM, said:

As it doesn't affect anything, it is better for it to stay, as people may missclick or change their minds in some other way.

misclicks happen. deal.

[Duke Nedo]

Prosperity Park, on 18 January 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

Very simple - if Map and Mode voting were blind, then people would not be able to game the system since they would have no way to tell if their multiplier-farming effort are going to pay off.

(To clarify, blind voting means you don't see the vote percentages)

There is no reason to show the vote percentages unless you are deliberately trying to encourage gamers to vote according to what's been voted for already.



Edit:


You mean "let others vote first, then farm your multiplier" ?

How does that stop farming? It does the opposite! It guarantees the farming success of the late voters.

Blind votes make farming cometely uncertain, and will curtail that behavior.

In principle I agree, also suggested this initially, but when I think about it the problem with hidden votes is ironically that we'd get proper voting... which in practice means less variety than now. Like it or not, the influence farming game has the side effect of less popular maps sometimes winning.

[Hades Trooper]

Prosperity Park, on 18 January 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

Very simple - if Map and Mode voting were blind, then people would not be able to game the system since they would have no way to tell if their multiplier-farming effort are going to pay off.

(To clarify, blind voting means you don't see the vote percentages)

There is no reason to show the vote percentages unless you are deliberately trying to encourage gamers to vote according to what's been voted for already.



Edit:


You mean "let others vote first, then farm your multiplier" ?

How does that stop farming? It does the opposite! It guarantees the farming success of the late voters.

Blind votes make farming cometely uncertain, and will curtail that behavior.

http://mwomercs.com/...08#entry4947808

we have a thread about this already

[Alistair Winter]

I changed my mind about this topic this morning.

Look at it this way:

In a hypothetical match, let's say the options are: Polar Highlands, River City, Caustic Valley and Mining Collective.
Before voting, let's say that...

• 40% of the players want Polar Highlands
  
• 25% want River City
  
• 20% want Caustic valley
  
• 15% want Mining Collective

In other words, 40% of the players want Polar Highlands, 60% of the players want other maps. And let's say that those 60% are sick and tired of Polar Highlands and would prefer any of the 3 other maps rather than another game of Polar Highlands.


If blind map voting was implemented, the people who wanted Polar Highlands would win every time. Everyone would vote for their #1 choice of the 4 options. However, with the current system, after everyone votes for their #1 choice, the 15% who voted for Mining Collective might vote for River City instead. And then both River City and Polar Highlands have 40% and the guys who voted for Caustic Valley get to decide whether their #2 choice is Polar Highlands or River City. In the end, the majority who desperately wanted to avoid Polar Highlands would be able to negotiate about what map they should play instead. If the majority of players desperately wanted to avoid Polar Highlands, they would get their wish.

TL;DR - Blind voting ensures the majority get their #1 choice, but it doesn't necessarily maximize the number of happy players. It's not just about your favourite map, it's also about your second favourite, third favourite and least favourite.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 19 January 2016 - 02:00 AM.

[Ratpoison]

Hades Trooper, on 19 January 2016 - 01:54 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...08#entry4947808

we have a thread about this already

No, you bumped a dead thread and reposted it here.

[MrMadguy]

Alistair Winter, on 19 January 2016 - 01:58 AM, said:

I changed my mind about this topic this morning.

Look at it this way:

In a hypothetical match, let's say the options are: Polar Highlands, River City, Caustic Valley and Mining Collective.
Before voting, let's say that...

• 40% of the players want Polar Highlands
  
• 25% want River City
  
• 20% want Caustic valley
  
• 15% want Mining Collective

In other words, 40% of the players want Polar Highlands, 60% of the players want other maps. And let's say that those 60% are sick and tired of Polar Highlands and would prefer any of the 3 other maps rather than another game of Polar Highlands.





If blind map voting was implemented, the people who wanted Polar Highlands would win every time. Everyone would vote for their #1 choice of the 4 options. However, with the current system, after everyone votes for their #1 choice, the 15% who voted for Mining Collective might vote for River City instead. And then both River City and Polar Highlands have 40% and the guys who voted for Caustic Valley get to decide whether their #2 choice is Polar Highlands or River City. In the end, the majority who desperately wanted to avoid Polar Highlands would be able to negotiate about what map they should play instead. If the majority of players desperately wanted to avoid Polar Highlands, they would get their wish.

TL;DR - Blind voting ensures the majority get their #1 choice, but it doesn't necessarily maximize the number of happy players. It's not just about your favourite map, it's also about your second favourite, third favourite and least favourite.

That's why vote multiplier is here. We just don't need intentional stacking of it to bring/avoid special maps, like Terra Therma. Intention of vote system - to vote for map, you want to play. If Terra Therma needs 12x to bring it (if there are no people, like me, who can bring 8x-12x to counter it) - it's problem with map design - not vote system problem.

Edited by MrMadguy, 19 January 2016 - 02:10 AM.