Matchmaker Team Sentons 4v4 TMM Inclusion

@bulliednoob said in Matchmaker Team Sentons 4v4 TMM Inclusion:

@chisato this same issue would persist if literally any 1200 cared enough to look at a high level game on any 20km map and copy their build order: they would crush a 1200 without one

yeah exactly but no one has a bo for any map that isn't setons, so they don't have anyone to copy from, there's isnt a map like setons (excluding dg and astro ofc) where people play them regularly and that's precisely why saying that "t3 air rush in senton is just like t3 air rush in any other 20x20 map" argument is invalid for brackets below 1500.

@chisato said in Matchmaker Team Sentons 4v4 TMM Inclusion:

yeah exactly but no one has a bo for any map that isn't setons, so they don't have anyone to copy from, there's isnt a map like setons (excluding dg and astro ofc) where people play them regularly and that's precisely why saying that "t3 air rush in senton is just like t3 air rush in any other 20x20 map" argument is invalid for brackets below 1500.

Eh I disagree, there are certainly BO elements to smth like metir air. Even beyond the fact you have an extra slot that is supposed to assist with t3 air, a 1200 that knows to make 2 land facs to scale bp for power and rock reclaim will be significantly ahead of a dude just plopping down 1 fac and maybe another at the expansion mex spot like it’s sentons. A person that has played the map a few times can definitely be a t3 mex ahead by the time t3 air production starts and it only gets worse from there.

And what about beetles air? That map has zero reclaim and if your air slot gasses itself trying to help win mid with t1 air or needless ints suddenly he’s at 2 t2 mexes at min 8 and your team isn’t looking so hot.

Im only 1200 TMM noob.

Dont support. TMM is filled with eco-air domination maps. If teams are not properly balanced - this is "first strat games", this is really annoying. Give more close combat maps pls!

In my opinion - every mapgen map in pool is really brilliant, cause human-made maps is about tiny-passages, mountains and other stuff what nerf land operations.
And now you ask, should we add one more? No. = )

let's consider this idea

By the way, it's extremely difficult to find good TMM maps, because the TMM team can't change player distribution (spawn locations), adaptive settings or even mapgen settings. With those choices removed it gets really hard to find decent TMM maps. The old maps that we used to play back in the day like canis, hilly, pyramid, etc. are quite unpopular with high level players these days. Times have changed and people prefer maps that are:

1. more comparable in mex count to 1v1 (12+ per player minimum) or relatively large reclaim amount
2. larger than 10x10
3. rotationally asymmetric (as opposed to pyramid)

Seton's is one of the only maps that satisfies these constraints as well as being good looking etc. It's a bit of wishful thinking, but if there were more good custom made maps (or we could modify adaptive settings to forcibly make them better) senton (and mapgen btw) would look at lot less tempting.

It’s not hard to find one in the custom games lobby at nearly any time, make it its own queue or don’t put it in at all

@blodir said in Matchmaker Team Sentons 4v4 TMM Inclusion:

By the way, it's extremely difficult to find good TMM maps, because the TMM team can't change player distribution (spawn locations), adaptive settings or even mapgen settings.

That is in part true, but with permission from the Creative team I have blanket authority to change some maps that are no longer supported - or unresponsive - authors for the benefit of upkeep and enjoyment of the service.

If you know of a map that has less than ideal spawns which would otherwise be great for tmm please contact me and I can adjust, create a “-FAF Version”

This was granted due to the lack of refined content that works with the matchmaking queue settings and we are happy to add more content if you believe it’s a good fit.

I have done this for a few maps already and have not been asked to revert, so please make requests!

@xayo said in Matchmaker Team Sentons 4v4 TMM Inclusion:

When I'm signing up for TMM queue, I don't want to commit to a potential 60-90min game

This is an important point.

The difference between 1v1 and TMM is huge, but 3v3 or 4v4 wouldn't be so significant. On the other hand, the difference between TMM rush maps and TMM 20k eco maps is big.

Can we maybe have these ladders?

• 1v1
• TMM rush maps (any team size)
• TMM eco maps (teams of 3+ players)

(If people particularly want 2v2, go ahead and argue for it. It appears to be the least popular option.)

Tbh, at this point I'm just wondering why won't all of you just go back to playing custom games if everything is just so bad.
This map bad, this map meh, not enough time, players are bad, the players are filthy tryhards. Like ffs, just remove the stupid global and make it the 4fun option. And leave TMM as the ultimate skill check where you play on a variety of good maps picked by their value as a map not for who bitched more.

@casternumerouno imo TMM should be only random gen B)

Well, I wanted to keep out of this thread - along with other matchmaker team members - to see what the community thinks first, but we seem to have garnered enough talking points to go ahead.

Some observations from myself:

1. I am actually surprised that the time/gameplay style of setons is less of a discussed point over the "skill gap." For me, the skill difference is something that exists on various style maps and is not a valid excuse to not include a map in the pool.

2. If there has been a huge shift in wanting map design to be what Blodir outlined (12+ mexes, lot of reclaim, asymmetric), that is news to me: please provide some info / discussions with others to back this up. I think there should be a variety of maps that have all sorts of ranges of resources / reclaim rather have rules like this. I have not seen a single person write this in the matchmaker feedback thread.

3. Encouraging or wanting maps that are lengthy as NOC suggests is actually the opposite of what we want: sure it teaches the late late game mechanics, but most players are not going to desire this and it is perfectly fine to reduce that event.

4. Many of the maps like Lena River, Adaptive Delta Riva, Lost Archipelago, etc etc tend to go VERY lengthy in game time and see late-stage tactics so to be upset about Setons having that is a bit contradicting.

Given that, I drafted the next 4v4 TMM pool to include Setons. This will be discussed with the matchmaker team to conclusion so please continue to discuss here in aid to our thoughts.

@Morax for what rating bracket?

@jip said in Matchmaker Team Sentons 4v4 TMM Inclusion:

@Morax for what rating bracket?

1500+ of course! The current highest. And trust me, we are listening to feedback as Setons was going to be used for December:

We put the breaks on a bit after some debate but after reviewing think we want to see if it is more accepted this time around.

If we had some better content contribution we would have possibly opted not to consider it, but we are very, very low on maps to use and map authors willing to go to lengths to create high-level content.

I am not in favour of Seton in TMM.
Can see the usual seton players getting angry towards others for not knowing some particular seton BOs or understand how to play Seton in an 'expected' manner.
Seton is a good map. However, I fear the toxicity that comes with it. Same reason why I would never join any custom seton games anymore.

If you include it, its gonna be interesting. I wonder how many instant ctrl-K we will see this time.

Based on my experiences around the 1600-2000 rating tmm games over the last month, i feel like the willingness of players to instantly bail from a match they don't like (currently either because of some abhorrent dualgap like mapgen, or lag, or fields of ISIS) has only increased since the last time we had setons in the pool.

@xayo said in Matchmaker Team Sentons 4v4 TMM Inclusion:

If you include it, its gonna be interesting. I wonder how many instant ctrl-K we will see this time.

Based on my experiences around the 1600-2000 rating tmm games over the last month, i feel like the willingness of players to instantly bail from a match they don't like (currently either because of some abhorrent dualgap like mapgen, or lag, or fields of ISIS) has only increased since the last time we had setons in the pool.

We reviewed several of the maps last month and are adjusting. I’m going to be creating the pools starting again and will ensure there’s a better variety.

I agree that there should be a little as possible turtle / tech maps and continued feedback like this helps support that.

I haven’t played as much map gen in the past month. @Xayo when you say “abhorrent dual gap map gen” could you post a screen shot? There’sa whole set of map Gen types and it would be nice to see if there’s a particular type that needs Adjustment.

Here is a nice thread I made showing all the types of map gens and feedback from the community for reference: https://forum.faforever.com/topic/2526/map-gen-week-feedback-thread?_=1671194825596

Summary,
I am bad at the map compare to the people that play it, hence dont add it to the pool.

@morax said in Matchmaker Team Sentons 4v4 TMM Inclusion:

If there has been a huge shift in wanting map design to be what Blodir outlined (12+ mexes, lot of reclaim, asymmetric), that is news to me: please provide some info / discussions with others to back this up. I think there should be a variety of maps that have all sorts of ranges of resources / reclaim rather have rules like this. I have not seen a single person write this in the matchmaker feedback thread.

mapgen, especially 10km, tends to generate maps with low reclaim and ~6 safe mexes per player. all other mexes are towards the middle. this promotes gun acu gameplay.
Since gun acu is very powerful with a low skill requirement, there's not a whole lot a 2300 player can do to stand out from an 1800 player. this goes for man-made maps too, of course, if they have a similar mex layout

In other words, maps with low mex count per player kinda have a low skill ceiling and it seems odd to have a low skill ceiling (or at least depreciative skill value) in a high rank competitive game. at the very least maps where i dont have much to work with arent very fun, in my opinion.

was a bit short on time, so i'm editing this post now: lot of reclaim is optional, but its nice if theres atleast enough reclaim (~2k) to make decision between t2 mex/t2 land/t2 air (again, maps with barely any mass are usually dominated by gun acus)
asymmetric maps are nice because symmetric maps usually end up in stand-offs. i mean, what else can you expect when two equally skilled players are given an equal amount of resources. symmetric maps aren't bad, but i personally think asymmetric is more interesting

I would assume this stuff is graded on a curve, because in absolute terms every decent 4v4 map is a turtle/tech rush. The fact somebody is always rushing t3 air means everyone is on a time clock of getting t3 tech within a minute or two of that player. If they aren’t doing that, it’s because they went for t3 mexes instead.