Maps with "less then perfect" aspects (aka C.R.A.P.) like:
Maybe the admins where sleaping when choosing maps but I am even better of playing astro craters since I can build thanks that go from my base to the other side of the map.
@sheikah WHY, that does not sound smart thing to remove if you want to try to keep players from continue playing FAF.
We shall see how long this community will be able to continue. Number of players seem to drop already since last year. Not listening to your community is a good catalyst fot that proces 
This community makes me salty!
The map veto feature has been gone for many, many years now. I don't know why exactly it got removed, probably because it was broken.
It's not about not listening to the community. Nobody is against having map veto, we just lack manpower to implement it.
Map veto is also significantly more complicated now since it would need to be coded in a way that would fit all matchmakers which can include things like teams of up to 4 people and people that queue alone and become a 4 player team. It only being possible in a single queue just becomes unintuitive.
btw bermuda is a solid map, not every map is intended to be won by make tank and rally point into enemy base. Gotta make frigs and rally point them into enemy base and it’s the end of the world residentsleeper.
Glaciers sucks at high level, not for the reason you said tho. Good beginner 20x20 where the issue of mid island doesn’t really decide the game because the players aren’t playing efficiently enough.
@ftxcommando thank your for this clarification. Will keep it in mind when I am salty next time.
@saltyelbow said in How do I block horrible maps:
We shall see how long this community will be able to continue. Number of players seem to drop already since last year. Not listening to your community is a good catalyst fot that proces
This community makes me salty!
Yawn. Always good to throw in "felt" arguments if you don't have real ones.
The amount of monthly unique players is increasing every year. Double from 2017, +5000 compared to 2019.
We asked the players what they wanted. Just because it doesn't match your priority doesn't make it irrelevant.
#1 people asked for was fixing connection issues, we built the ICE adapter and it took us around 3 years. It doesn't solve all problems but many of them and even survives short time internet reconnects.
#2 people asked for is Team Matchmaker. We released the 4v4 version this month, 2v2 was around 12 months earlier. Total time again 2-3 years.
#3 people asked for is Galactic War. Work has been invested but we'll never know if it will ever be stable.
"Nerds have a really complicated relationship with change: Change is awesome when WE'RE the ones doing it. As soon as change is coming from outside of us it becomes untrustworthy and it threatens what we think of is the familiar."
– Benno Rice
@brutus5000 I asked for stable games as well. What do you think my picture is about. The zillion times there was a disconnect in ladder.
Still angry and salty about ...
IMO map veto isn't really required (with good choice of maps), but...
@ftxcommando said in How do I block horrible maps:
Glaciers sucks at high level
Glaciers simply sucks. Too much mass for 1v1. Like many of the GPG maps its seems to be designed for more than two teams and doesn't really translate to 1v1 — perhaps with smaller fewer expansions it would be better. It's also ugly. The main thing to get out of it for lower level players is learning early air control and drops on large maps.
Biggest issue here seems to be that you guys don't like 20x20. Mostly cause they don't play landspammy or because you feel overwhelmed by them? 20x20s usually are unpopular in the lower rating ranges. That's why we have only one for the <700 rated in the pool. But we still want beginners to become familiar to larger maps and not get into the case that they are absolutely overwhelmed once they make it above the rating thresh hold. Seraphim glaciers and roanoke are the easiest 20x20s we have to offer. Land 20x20s are way harder to play.
@thomashiatt said in How do I block horrible maps:
Seraphim Glaciers is a good map.
I've had some good games on the map, including big T3 navy battles, telemazor against an ACU, stealing islands, taking them back, etc. I don't remember specifically if I ever made a nuke or if I ever won by air snipe but those are obviously viable options. There's a lot of options on that map, not just for the endgame, but there are a lot of ways to try to catch up if you're falling behind. From the replays I've watched on that map, I see a lot of diversity in how each match unfolds. So I consider it to be a good map.
@arma473 I don't agree. I have never seen any usefull t3 navy battle with low rated players. Just one team wins because they got to mid first. They only thing it learns you is to make a perfect drop BO. Like dual gap but then way less fun. Because after a perfect execution the match is won and thus over.
If you ask me this map is there just to annoy people.
I totally agree with @arma473 . I have lost mid, and still won in crazy nonstop battles raging in land, sea and air. Where shooting and micro never ends 
While I absolutely hate Seraphim Glaciers and regardless of what I will say next I favor blocking maps...
I learned a lot from it. First I developed a ACU drop build that would reliably end the game quickly, pretty much 50% win rate. Sometimes these drops resulted in a base/Island capture without outright winning. This new situation allowed me to practice the "normal game" with a huge advantage. Ultimately I got comfortable with the normal game and now understand T2 navy better and T3 somewhat.
@valki I honestly think that 50% winrate bo is not enough try considering a bo with at least 70%.
Also thats not a bo but rather a game plan or strategy to win.
Also bo has a winrate against other bos and there are 2 ways of playing 20km
#1 airlock
#2 rush trans
"Good luck and a safe landing commanders!"
