3v3 Mapgen TMM queue
-
Many people like mapgen.
Many people like 3v3.
More people would play TMM more often if a mapgen-only 3v3 queue existed; let's add it!pfp credit to gieb
-
The issue here is the number of available maps that are 3v3.
Mapgen is only chance but that is either 10 by 10 or higher.
It was considered but due to lack of maps it wasnt done I believe. -
ready to sit down at the computer right now and start drawing cards for 3x3 players of any size, weight and beauty
-
@penguin_ said in 3v3 Mapgen TMM queue:
Many people like 3v3.
Wasn't there data showing that 3v3 was one of the least popular matchups?
-
This post is deleted! -
@penguin_
in general, this is a good idea.
You can add 3x3 instead of 4x4 (No share) -
If we add more queues the existing ones will have less players, seems like a net negative.
-
i just asked about the replacement for 4v4 NS in the matchmaking pool feedback thread. it'd be a shame if 3v3 wasnt played. i know 2v2 isnt too popular outside of a couple of friends queueing, but surely there are groups of 3 friends out there too. i know 4v4 can get quite popular in peak hours.
@SpikeyNoob i think different queues are worth a shot at least. nothing says they cant be swapped out or cut.
-
Just delete dual gap, crater and seton and you will have more people to queue mm
-
the romans make a wasteland and call it peace
-
@noc_n_o_c_noc said in 3v3 Mapgen TMM queue:
The issue here is the number of available maps that are 3v3.
Mapgen is only chance but that is either 10 by 10 or higher.
It was considered but due to lack of maps it wasnt done I believe.A mapgen-only queue wouldn't have non-mapgen maps, so that wouldn't be an issue..... Also, mapgen is not limited to just 10x10 or higher. It can make maps of numerous sizes, from 1.25 km up to 80 km. So, not only can we have mapgen maps like 10x10 and 20x20, but we can also have mapgen maps like 7.5x7.5 and 15x15.
@thewheelie @SpikeyNoob
People can multi-queue. Adding a new queue does not necessitate removing a current queue (though 4v4 NS is currently slated to be removed anyway). I'm not claiming 3v3 would be the most popular matchup, but many people do like 3v3, there is strong desire for a mapgen-only queue, 1v1/2v2/4v4 queues already exist, and 5v5+ queues are not currently slated for connection/lag-related reasons. Therefore, it seems logical to add a 3v3 mapgen-only queue.pfp credit to gieb
-
3v3 was about equal in popularity in terms of players to 2v2 which means you would expect .66 as many games as 2v2 gets which would probably make it a more variable version of 2v2 with the queue being totally dead beyond the peak hours. For comparison 4v4 had 3x as many players each month as 2v2 or 3v3.
Yeah maps are a problem. The most popular 3v3 maps are paradise bay, sandbox, wartime, and open palms I think. They’re all quite shit for 3v3 gameplay but paradise and sandbox can be decent intro ones, wartime and open palms are just bad overall. For high level you’re mostly just left with adaptive maps and hoping it’s ok but a lot of the time the slot setups are really bad.
-
@penguin_ The issue comes with people in pre mades, I think that a decent chunk of 4v4 queues are from teams of 3, if all the teams of 3 move to 3v3 then two things happen
- games will be hard to balance in 3v3 since parties are easy to fill so the game cant add a random to equal out the rating of the other parties in queue
- 4v4 will be more likely to be played by parties of 4 leading to the same issue described above for that queue.
You could say that multi-queueing parties of 3 will result in both 4v4 and 3v3 games its unlikely that a team of 3 will queue 4v4 since then they will have to deal with a random vs having control over who they play with. Overall I think adding more queues is a bad idea, we should keep it simple and not over load the player with too many queues (at that point play global).
-
I'm still of the opinion that there should just be 1 tmm queue which is capable of matching players in anything from 2v2 to 4v4, depending on balance, saves 6 dudes sat in the 4v4 queue forever condemned to not get a game.
Also 3v3 maps:
Twin Rivers
Desert Crisis
The Ditch
Painted Desert
TheAlpsV3
X6
Sands of Ablicka
pyramid 3v3 version
point of reach
Paradise 3v3
Mountain Lakes
Crash site
Icelands
3v3 Death Valley
Africa
DarkfallMost of those are no worse than your average adaptive map
-
@freedom_ said in 3v3 Mapgen TMM queue:
Most of those are no worse than your average adaptive map
y-yes
-
@freedom_ said in 3v3 Mapgen TMM queue:
I'm still of the opinion that there should just be 1 tmm queue which is capable of matching players in anything from 2v2 to 4v4, depending on balance, saves 6 dudes sat in the 4v4 queue forever condemned to not get a game.
Also 3v3 maps:
Twin Rivers
Desert Crisis
The Ditch
Painted Desert
TheAlpsV3
X6
Sands of Ablicka
pyramid 3v3 version
point of reach
Paradise 3v3
Mountain Lakes
Crash site
Icelands
3v3 Death Valley
Africa
DarkfallMost of those are no worse than your average adaptive map
This is the only solution IMO. Further dividing the TMM queue will just make games more rare. 4v4 FS already is only available during certain parts of the day. 4v4 No-FS never pops at all. Adding a 3v3 will probably just kill TMM altogether. There just should just be 1 TMM that allows for both 4v4 and 3v3.
-
The main thing is that user must have a choice to play, even there is not much 3v3 maps. TMM supposed to give any kind of gameplay with any team. #Add_3v3_queue kappa
-
You guys realize you can queue for more than 1 queue right? It is literally entirely illogical to say any queue would kill another unless one was just considered more fun for people to play. In which case, why would you get rid of the more fun thing to make the less fun thing viable?
It’s the whole reason the way it was implemented was built around multi queue from the start. It even subtly encourages solo queueing since you get to go into as many queues as possible.
