Matchmaker Pool Feedback Thread

@theweakienoob Ok, I didn't know that. But:

1. that's not a technical limitation and can be fixed
2. that's not an issue for a lot of mentioned maps at all or for the most part.

For example, Tourmaline has the air slot as the last one. So it will be fine at 3v3 map pool with no changes required. Same goes for Nomadiah and The Pyramid V2.

Adaptive Palundarium also has 4th air slot. Adaptive won't spawn air mexes? Ok, so'll be it. It won't make gameplay worse.

Now about spawns. Swapping them isn't a technical limitation or a big problem. It can be done under 15 minutes by any experienced map maker. It took be a bit more time. Here is example for Ablicka fix. First 6 spawns now.

Seems to work, I've started without crash. Similar thing could be done with any other map, if required.

Miracle and salembay and sands of albicka are definitely not good 3v3 maps, these are all make gun and walk into enemy base maps while one player goes t2 air.

If anything alicka is better as a 3v3 map with the 1-6 slot distribution now (I think top right vs bottom left?) than that distribution. The setup you posted could be fine for lower rated players, but that’s just horrible for high rated gameplay because the gameplay is insanely reductive.

@ftxcommando I'm not proposing them as 1500+ maps, we don't have any common maps in 3v3, even for <500 & 500-1000 bracket. Top vs bottom for Abliska is a good proposition and can be implemented by swapping spawns just as well. By default would leave all bottom 4 bases (2 on each side of the river) empty, which won't be good.

The one you posted is fine for 500-1000 since that bracket tends to dislike asymmetrical spawns

@sainserow
I do not have the knowledge if you can just re-create maps with spawns or if there are problems with the permissions to do that;

Overall usually the technical things are not the limit, the manpower is.
If you have any map suggestions, you can always reach out to me via Discord (Or another Matchmaker Team member), I'll take a look and if something seems good, I'll post it in the MM team channel. Applying is also always an option.
I'll stop posting here for now as I want to wait until someone with more knowledge than I do responds, just FYI so it doesn't seem like I'd just ignore you.

@Jip or @MadMax would know the rules

If the map has a license that allows you to do it then that's fine. All the maps of @IndexLibrorum , @CaptainKlutz and I think @MadMax and my own maps have such a license.

Otherwise you need permission of the author.

And in case of my maps, just send me a PM and I'll fix issues

@stormlantern Re changing the uneven mex distribution frequency, how much less often are we talking? I enjoyed the variety that the asymmetry provides and it encourages teams to work together more, so will be a shame to see it feature much less; I’m at around 1.3-1.4k. Appreciate you can’t please everyone so I was inputting just to avoid the risk of the impression that everyone at <1.5k dislikes the mapgen asymmetry.

Depending on the rating of those disliking the asymmetry could a scaled system be done instead (eg <750 average - very unlikely; 750-1500 slightly less likely; 1.5k+ as it currently is)?

@maudlin27

We'll be changing the two encircled maps to having 6 slots. So for your bracket that only means a somewhat added chance for getting a more balanced distribution of mexes. For the lower brackets the chance becomes almost 100%.