6 replies to this topic

[ZimVader]

Can we get an option to opt out of 1 map, i.e it never appears in the 4 choices for qp?

[Mister Bob Dobalina]

As far as I have understood it, the Matchmaker puts together 2 groups with 12 pilots (on the the basis of Tier, temparature, the color of a boiled onion and, of course, the PGI-Randomizer 2000) and then throws 4 maps and to modes at the selcted players to choose their doom from. That would mean, that the Matchmaker would have an even more difficult job to pick players that have the same antipathy against certain maps (and susequentially propose the remaining possibilities or selct pilots as before and then see what maps have been vetoed by any of the selcted players and then propose the possible rest. I think the Matchmaker has a hard time already and (depending on daytime has sometimes quite a limited and matchready playerbase to pick from. And the latter possibility may end up in the situation that the Matchmaker may not be able to propse 4 or less maps, because with 24 people vetoing a map might end up covering pretty much all possible maps.

Counterproposal:
Instead of an active vote FOR a map and a mode I would rather have a possibility to Veto against a map or a mode. And I would stack up to 5 maps and 3 modes to choose from. Least vetoes wins. If there would be a tie, first vote wins. Ineffective vetoes stack up, so I would be able to place a multiplied value of votes on a certain map or mode.

[The Basilisk]

We had an opt out option once and it was removed due to certain ppl crying they never would get any matches or just after over 5mins of waiting....well if you rule out canyon, hpg, mining and crimson......

See where this goes ?

[Eisenhorne]

How about we have the option of ranking our choices, so if our first choice doesn't win our second choice does? There's nothing worse than seeing Polar Highlands and any other 3 maps, so I vote for one of the others, but then I see it broken down like Polar 40%, and two others at 30%. I'd rather have anything over polar, the only people who like that map are lurm potatoes.

[BTGbullseye]

Eisenhorne, on 02 February 2018 - 08:21 AM, said:

I'd rather have anything over polar, the only people who like that map are lurm potatoes.

And people who know how to drive on that map. Tons of cover against LRMs there, if you would bother to actually use it.

[ZimVader]

Eisenhorne, on 02 February 2018 - 08:21 AM, said:

There's nothing worse than seeing Polar Highlands and any other 3 maps, so I vote for one of the others, but then I see it broken down like Polar 40%, and two others at 30%. I'd rather have anything over polar, the only people who like that map are lurm potatoes.

Yep polar is the one I want to avoid. As you say, you know most ppl are gonna be splitting their votes on a couple of the others.. and polar gets up by 1%. Most times I just suicide run it and get to a proper map next game. Thomster's veto idea is great I reckon.

[BROARL]

if i could avoid polar highlands conquest in faction that'd be a start, it's a fighting game not hide and seek, may as well have another dropdeck with four mediums just for this nonsense it comes up so often...