I do play ladder but Ill respond anyways. When you loose in a 1v1 game, you only have yourself to blame. Alternative is to deny that and blame it on stuff like BO's, faction difference, map, etc etc. But in the end you can't fool yourself and get frustrated.

That is a big part of what makes 1v1 feel more competitive and stressful than teamgames and it's partly the reason why some people don't play it. Also 1v1 requires more attention and working memory from the player than teamgames.

That said, this thread may accidentally imply to people that ladder is somehow less played. It really isn't. It's actually a quite popular matchmaker and has been that way for years. That said it is true that the 2k+ bracket has all but died out. Prob because there is very few streamers playing or casting high level ladder the past 1 to 2 years or so, which induced a vicious circle of fewer high level players playing > longer que times > even fewer players playing.

I only read the original post from Jip, but it seems to me the problem mostly has to do with your own mindset, rather than the visibility of ratings. When I play a guy with higher rating than me I feel relaxed, because I have little to loose and alot to win. Also knowing the rating of the opponent is beneficial for tactics. You would create a situation where people will have to learn by heart the ratings of others. Lastly I believe a part of why people enjoy playing these type of multiplayer games is because there is a rating system that u can fight over. Take away the visibility of the rating and u take away some motivation to play for these people.

@azroc

I agreee Azroc. I have no idea who did what. But posting internal conflicts like this on the news page of a video game is about the most amateur thing you can do. But then again, it is an amateur project after all. I just hope all the childish play at politics doesnt discourage the awesome people of this community that contribute their time and expertise on actually maintaining this game.

Only Morax's pitch seems to make any sense and can compete with FTX's rationale. But since I have personally experienced Morax to display bouts of childish behaviour when it comes to losing his own games, resulting in him repeatably blaming me of being a smurf and threatening to get me banned, with absolutely 0 evidence or even the slightest reason to suspect me, makes me not at all inclined to give him any real influence. He might have good ideas but as far as FAF concerned he seems somewhat emotionally unstable, unreliable and incoherent. Also FTX did way more and better than can be reasonably expected of a role like this, so why change a winning team?

@captainklutz said in 1v1 map pool - feedback:

instead they will just give less reclaim, let me know if this is a good idea

Not something i would recommend. Less reclaim is even more misleading.. By now most people know what to expect. Prob don't want to change it to the next confusing thing

@sylph_

Sounds like you are an aspiring psycho then ^^

Ill try to remember, since I hardly ever use discord

I didnt read the whole thing, but in my experience it can be frustrating when in tmm u play against two opponents that have a high rating difference as the death (or disconnect) of the lower rated opponent often means an auto loss for your team. If its is at all possible to still get consistent enough games when the maximum rating difference (between two teammates) is capped at say 400 or so, that would be a good change I think. But I suppose that would depend on the amount of players in que.

Setons is a skill like any other. If someone happens to be more proficient at it, getting the map should help him get more rating. Removing it from the pool would be unfair for the setons player, who will not see his higher skill level translated into higher rating. Also its argueably one of the best maps for 4v4 (gauging from popularity alone), so it would be silly to not include it. If people ctr k at the start they should get banned for a few weeks. Simple.

1852 rating 4v4 tmm

If you have upvotes, you need downvotes as well. Or else you just get wrong information. Either get rid of voting as a whole or have downvotes as well. Besides, we are not 3 year olds that need to hear that everyone won in the drawing competition.

Yeah we'll go for max 3 20x20's instead of 4 for the upcoming pools of the trial.

@etfreeman

You are interpreting the mappool wrong. With 1600 ladder rating you will have 13 maps in your mappool. The misinterpretation is not your fault, the announcement post of the new pool contains an error. It should have been mentioned that you get maps from your own bracket + the bracket below that.

Consequently that means ~30% of your maps will be 20x20 and the rest will be 10x10.

Bermuda Locket and Crossfire Canal are indeed somewhat on the high side in reclaim. The reason for their inclusion is that there are not many suitable alternatives that allow for navy play for 1v1. But I agree that it is not optimal, considering the parameters that were set for this new format. If you have suggestions for other navy play maps for 1v1, that are more suitable, let me know.

Last, I don't think it was ever the intention to exclude 20x20 maps completely from this 1v1 trial format, but I understand your confusion, now that I reread Arch's announcement.

I agree that 30% 20x20 maps might be a bit much. Perhaps we can remove one.

@thomashiatt

There is nothing secret about it, when it was announced on the forums.

@sylph_

Sounds like you are an aspiring psycho then ^^

@thomashiatt

This is a really interesting take on ladder. It is definitely not the idea on which ladder is currently maintained, but definitely an interesting take. I think it warrants further discussion in the matchmaker team.

Also didnt i read somewhere there was work done allowing the fatboy to produce untis while on the move? I mean in that case, it will definitely be used more often

In my experience the idea of the exps being a mobile factory is very appealing to new players. Its a cool concept, but in practice completely useless as it is. Perhaps there is a way in order to make the feature actually viable. Perhaps by making the production of units free and lowering the build time?

@chenbro101

If you are 1200 rated, you will have played (in July) canis river on average 1/17th of the time. Not "half of the time".

Also, only 1/4th of the games you play will be on 5x5.

That said, if you prefer less 5x5 in 1v1 ladder, you will be glad to hear that atm we are going to trial a change this September (among other changes, read Arch's announcement about that at https://forum.faforever.com/topic/6433/new-1v1-ladder-map-selections) where there will be no more 5x5 for 1200+ rated players.

@lord_greg

Asymmetry is usually appreciated in maps, because it makes the gameplay less stale. Depending on your rating, you play on maps with a set amount of "slots". They are usually 10+ in total..