Can we Pleaassee have 1 v1 random map only queue?

Lets see what people think and if the total amount of games goes up or not?

Because weirdly enough its been done and there is feedback:

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/3332/every-ranked-1v1-map-is-generated

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/2328/introducing-mapgen-week-on-ladder

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/2526/map-gen-week-feedback-thread

Not only does it disincentivize mapmakers from creating its not wanted by everyone. The goal needs to be a balance between curated maps and mapgen. Splitting the queue is unlikely to work as has already been pointed out.

The better solution to the different individual preferences is to implement map vetoes. Then everybody can tune the amount of mapgen to their liking (within limits).
The matchmaker team made a detailed concept, we just need someone to implement it. I can help with showing the ropes, so you know where to start. Overall it's not too complicated to implement. If anyone is interested in making it become reality, let me know.

@blackyps Because I do not think a week on/off is long enough for either to show a clear effect.

It doesn't have to be one or the other - could just have mapgen be more likely to occur in the existing 1v1 pool. Despite liking mapgen I wouldn't be keen on only mapgen 1v1 all the time.

I find mapgen only 1v1 very dull. The majority of maps generated are pretty trash B(

Mapgen is fun and diverse until you realise it generates only like 10 different types of maps with 1% variance in looks and gameplay within each type, and their quality peaks at like a 7/10

human-made maps dont have the 1% variance in looks and gameplay but atleast they exceed being 7/10 maps, and we have the ability to filter out the <5/10 trash, unlike with mapgen

I stopped stressing out because of random maps, and now we have something to do while the 1st factory is being built: studying the map.

The biggest issue with random maps is that sometimes you don't know if a unit can fit into this or that pass

Throwing in another idea: keep it just one 1v1 ladder, but add a (checked) box “Include mapgen”. Those who don’t like it can uncheck this box. The client can then match by rating, then pick a map based on whether both players allow mapgen.

@treos People playing the same maps only will have higher rating

Map veto or second queue seems to be the best way forward. I jut returned from a work trip so I have not been online for the last week. Did any progress occur on this?

@melanol said in Can we Pleaassee have 1 v1 random map only queue?:

I stopped stressing out because of random maps, and now we have something to do while the 1st factory is being built: studying the map.

The biggest issue with random maps is that sometimes you don't know if a unit can fit into this or that pass

Agree!!

map veto has been "in progress" for about 8 years at this point, so we can guess and say we are about halfway there in dev time

How often did i had to decide between tmm and custom, but in reality i just wanna start a game regardless of the map/type, maybe i had a favorite, but was also willing to play another map during non-peak-hours.

What if we open up the possibility to create one-time queue-able customs to all players?

Simplified flow:

1. Select a name, map, mods, restrictions, rating-range, min game quality etc.
2. Publish the game to the server/other players
3. You can join multiple lobbies, but only "host" one or two?
4. Lobby will be active till started or empty
5. Rating could be applied to global

@DGun you could just open up that 1v1 with all your desired configs and still be in queue.

Would love to get your opinion about that

MapGen has its limits and after awhile you will see patterns that lead to the same build orders and "meta" of human-made maps.

As far as visuals go, map gen is really dull and makes the experience just that...

I pretty much don't play team games anymore because it's all map gen so please do not do this to 1v1.

@clint089 said in Can we Pleaassee have 1 v1 random map only queue?:

How often did i had to decide between tmm and custom, but in reality i just wanna start a game regardless of the map/type, maybe i had a favorite, but was also willing to play another map during non-peak-hours.

What if we open up the possibility to create one-time queue-able customs to all players?

Simplified flow:

1. Select a name, map, mods, restrictions, rating-range, min game quality etc.
2. Publish the game to the server/other players
3. You can join multiple lobbies, but only "host" one or two?
4. Lobby will be active till started or empty
5. Rating could be applied to global

@DGun you could just open up that 1v1 with all your desired configs and still be in queue.

Would love to get your opinion about that

I think this would be too complicated for practical application. a 1v1 mapgen ladder is the simplest solution. One click. Done.

I think it would be really interesting to see who is the best in the world at 1v1 mapgen.

@morax said in Can we Pleaassee have 1 v1 random map only queue?:

MapGen has its limits and after awhile you will see patterns that lead to the same build orders and "meta" of human-made maps.

As far as visuals go, map gen is really dull and makes the experience just that...

I pretty much don't play team games anymore because it's all map gen so please do not do this to 1v1.

I agree visuals are superior in hand crafted maps. But there is just so much depth that goes into mastering a map.

I was watching the last tournament live stream. At one point the commentator mentions "Most people don't know, but these particular trees next to the base are super rich in mass, if you don't harvest them at the start you are at a major disadvantage". I think this perfectly illustrates the problem.

If you love memorizing stuff and perfecting a map then great. If you don't (like me) 1v1 current ladder is a pain.

When the starting position is truly equal - then the only differentiating factor is skill. Mapgen.

@ftxcommando said in Can we Pleaassee have 1 v1 random map only queue?:

map veto has been "in progress" for about 8 years at this point, so we can guess and say we are about halfway there in dev time

lol.

What is the bottleneck? Developer availability?

The original gpgnet client had veto and preference.

It's more like nuclear fusion. Map veto is constantly six months away.
The bottleneck is developer availability. A concept exists how map veto should work, but somebody has to implement it. If somebody wants to try, I can provide guidance.
The only real requirement is that you have some (any) sort of programming experience