@thomashiatt tbh yes
I dont understand why we have daroza but dont have 5x5 then
If we really wanna do a bit of "diversity" in map playstyles, 5x5 shouldn't be an exception
Matchmaker Pool Feedback Thread
The changes were made because there were good indications that this is the general preference. Also we voted on it as a team, it was not solely my decision. The current system is a sort of hybrid version of the old and the new. No 5x5's in higher pools but a bit more variance added back in again.
Whatever is being used to decide the size of the 1v1 ladder pool and the maps that are deemed acceptable currently is killing alot of peoples desire to actually play. Soul sucking experinece and has been for probably 2/3 years now, smaller pool with more familiar maps that arent complete cancer. Love you all.
Your ladder mappool is about twice as small as it was three years ago Xerxes. Also, learn how to play some maps that are post 2018 old man.
5-9 map pools per rotation so people who have hobbies and a job can have a chance of learning new maps. Im counting 20 per pool including gen cancer. Unless Im willing to sit for 10 hours a day to MAYBE get ten games, its all a bit OTT, trying to fix what wasnt broken has broken ladder, noone who comes in from work wants to sit down and play sweat fests like stella marris and lost wisdom cancer 1v1s, need a balance. Instead of endless 'wtf do i do here maps' that ultimately just ends with me playing another game that knows what it wants to be.
Ok jokes aside. The client does not show the correct mappool for you. Your mappool consists of 13 maps. See the announcement on the forum for an accurate description.
Still, it is true that ladder maps in your bracket have some macro heavier maps and I get your frustration by that, if that is not your thing. Feedback is always welcome. Do you think most players in your rating bracket share that view? If so, which players do you have in mind? I try to assess what the general preferences are within each rating bracket and adept the pools to that. It is not at all obvious to me that your view on this is representative of the general opinion within the higher rating brackets. Although I do know that you are definitely not alone in this. We (the matchmaker team) recently did a trial in which we had 4 months of ladder pools without any macro heavy maps. There was no clear indication that players of the higher brackets enjoyed this more or less than the format before that included more of these maps.
Also about your last question, there is work being done on a veto system. It would be really nice if the developers get that to work.
would loosening the rating required to match people in ranked games also be something willing to be considered as the time spent queing depending on your timezone etc can be alot, or even an unranked version of ladder and TMM where u can queue?
I don't know if this thread is really a good place for this discussion, I think a github repository with the list of maps or something would be better, but I would like to raise the issue of the matchmaking generating 4/5 player maps for 3v3 games. It doesn't ever really result in balanced games, especially in point symmetry. One player mostly get way less mexes than the others, and when matched with an opponent barely has any chance to win, because they simply have twice their mexes/hydros. It would make a lot more sense to increase the mex count on the map instead, but a 3 player game should be played on a 3 player map or at most a 6 player map, so that each player gets about the same number of mexes.
Asymmetric maps where one person has more mexes then their opponent is generally enjoyed more by players, especially at the higher rated brackets. This because it results in a less static game. But I have heard your complaint before, so some really dislike it. It could be good to make sure that there are more maps in the lower rated bracket, with an amount of player slots that match the amount of players.