Thanks for your responses and all your awesome work. I'm just coming back to the game this year after not playing since 2009! And it is just sooooo good!

@ftxcommando said in Suggestion: Map preferences for ladder:

end user experience of having to monthly fill out a preference list

It could be non mandatory and the effect of the preference list could just be a minor weight against the existing algo, like %30 or something. So the user experience would the same for noobs and anyone that is just happy with any map.

@magge said in Suggestion: Map preferences for ladder:

I personally would like a 1on1/4on4 random map only ladder. I think that was tested for one week and was a success as far as I can remember.

I love this idea!

I enjoyed your rawness and your stream. Thanks for being real and streaming your matches, was a great insight on how a pro controls the game board.

Given the success of 3v3 could we have a 1v1 queue for random maps only?

The thing about random maps is they don't require memorizing a build order or perfecting a map. It is just pure skill to assess the terrain and think on your feet and the playing field is level regardless of how many times you have played a map. Some people like memorizing stuff. I don't. Many don't.

I love 1v1 format, but just don't like premade maps.

As it is just 1v1 it does not rely on a lot of players being online at the same time in order for it to be possible.

What do people think?

Cheers!

I think there is a logical fallacy here.

I'm suggesting AND logic not OR logic.

The faf client can queue multiple queues at the same time - no split just another queue "1v1 Random Map".

If there are not many players online just queue both. We just give the players more option.

@karlhoffman 3v3 is pure map gen and very popular now.

@blackyps I have cloned the repo and am having a poke around.

Are there any instructions for building for linux?

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

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

I could probably have a crack at it. Is it on github?

@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.

@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.

@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.

@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 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?

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

I think having a few random map gens in the lower bracket is a good idea.

But maybe I didn't make sense in my previous post, is any of my logic wrong or questionable? Otherwise could we please trial a 1v1 mapgen queue for a month that is pure mapgen regardless of bracket?

Wow so much good conversation.

I think making 1v1 only map gen was a bad move as a lot of people love the maps in rotation, and enjoy perfecting a map. Just look at sentons. A certain type of player loves memorizing and refining a build. A certain type of player hates memorizing and wants a purely level playing field and reading a map on the fly.

When 1v1 was set to mapgen only we were excluding a type of players preference so it is understandable that the game count when down. This also supports my theory that game count will go up if there is a mapgen only queue that complements the standard 1v1 queue.

I think 3v3 ate into 4v4 because it is fresh and new and if people queue both 3v3 will match first. Less chance of a single lagger messing up the game also.

Could we just try a 1v1 mapgen queue for a month and see what happens?

Facilitating players to more accurately express the game that they would like to play through queuing cant be a bad thing?