Login

russian armor

1vs1 Removing map from automatch

Which Map should get removed from automatch?
Option Distribution Votes
31%
57%
11%
Which Map should get removed from automatch?
Option Distribution Votes
28%
59%
13%
Which Map should get removed from automatch?
Option Distribution Votes
30%
53%
17%
Total votes: 288
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
29 Jul 2018, 16:30 PM
#1
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 4846 | Subs: 16

You can vote 3 time for the same map, like when you really hate the 1 single map.

You also can vote 2 time for 1 map, and your last vote goes for a second map etc.

When you vote 3 time another map, well then your vote is useless ;) ...

Lost glider, Westwall and Angovill got reworked, so they are not in the Poll.

We will look how the vote will end and there is a good chance, that 2 1vs1 maps will get removed!




29 Jul 2018, 17:01 PM
#2
avatar of Theodosios
Admin Red  Badge
Patrion 310

Posts: 1503 | Subs: 6

Appreciating the initiative to remove 1v1 automatch map. Waited a long time for it. :thumb:
29 Jul 2018, 17:12 PM
#3
avatar of vonAsten

Posts: 450 | Subs: 4

Minsk, Minsk, Minsk!
29 Jul 2018, 17:14 PM
#4
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3218 | Subs: 1

BURN THEM ALL!!!!!
29 Jul 2018, 17:15 PM
#5
avatar of The amazing Chandler

Posts: 1340

Please rework Kholodny ferma winter too, thanks :)
29 Jul 2018, 17:15 PM
#6
avatar of d0ggY
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 752 | Subs: 3

Minsk, Minsk, Minsk!


You mean, Minks Minks Minks
29 Jul 2018, 18:59 PM
#7
avatar of MajorBloodnok
Admin Red  Badge
Patrion 314

Posts: 10622 | Subs: 9

Minsk, Minsk, Minsk!


jump backJump back to quoted post29 Jul 2018, 17:15 PMd0ggY


You mean, Minks Minks Minks


All 3 :)

29 Jul 2018, 22:00 PM
#8
29 Jul 2018, 22:24 PM
#9
avatar of shoegazer

Posts: 10

ok but bring back some other maps for variety then. Caen?
29 Jul 2018, 23:23 PM
#10
avatar of vonAsten

Posts: 450 | Subs: 4





All 3 :)



Kholodny winter is also horrendous
30 Jul 2018, 00:32 AM
#11
avatar of Rosbone
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 908 | Subs: 2

I am not a fan of duplicate maps so Kholodny Winter is my pick to go.

EDIT: We can probably fix Minks,Minsk,Mikns more than we can make KFW not be KFS.
30 Jul 2018, 00:52 AM
#12
avatar of WhiteFlash
Senior Mapmaker Badge
Benefactor 119

Posts: 1099 | Subs: 1

This vote is a waste of time and makes no sense, use data to eliminate the worst maps.
30 Jul 2018, 04:19 AM
#13
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 22

Nobody votes Arnheim Checkpoint
30 Jul 2018, 04:34 AM
#14
avatar of WhiteFlash
Senior Mapmaker Badge
Benefactor 119

Posts: 1099 | Subs: 1

Yea...creating this thread doesnt make sense if the goal is to improve the map pool as much as possible, this kills me. These maps that are available to vote on arent even the statistically worst maps in the data compiled by SiphonX.

They seem to be pulled at random.

@sturmpanther, please end this antiquated approach to map pool improvement
30 Jul 2018, 07:50 AM
#15
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 4846 | Subs: 16

This vote is a waste of time and makes no sense, use data to eliminate the worst maps.


Yea...creating this thread doesnt make sense if the goal is to improve the map pool as much as possible, this kills me. These maps that are available to vote on arent even the statistically worst maps in the data compiled by SiphonX.

They seem to be pulled at random.

@sturmpanther, please end this antiquated approach to map pool improvement


Believe me,

I know the exact stats for all maps from 1vs1- 4vs4. Relic has his own datebase for that.
But we (Relic and me) saw no reason not to ask the communtiy how they feel.

Tho we are not only argument about stats. Reason: second most picked / played map is Road to kharkov in 2vs2 LUL

You see the problem? :P

Also some of lowest picked maps in 1vs1 got reworked again. You should know this...
Let's cross the fingers people will give the maps another chance.

And the maps are not random pulled!

Thank you for your NOT confidence.

31 Jul 2018, 00:01 AM
#16
avatar of WhiteFlash
Senior Mapmaker Badge
Benefactor 119

Posts: 1099 | Subs: 1

Before you read this I don't have anything against Sturmpanther or anyone in particular. The quality of the map pool is #1 here, the pace of innovation here is far below what is possible, there are better ways. Please keep that in mind as you read. Thank you.
_________________________________________________________________________

"I know the exact stats for all maps from 1vs1- 4vs4. Relic has his own datebase for that.
But we (Relic and me) saw no reason not to ask the communtiy how they feel."


You're not asking people "how they feel", you're taking a poll to pick maps to remove.

"We will look how the vote will end and there is a good chance, that 2 1vs1 maps will get removed!"
_________________________________________________________________________

The map pool has been worked on for over 5 years. The map pool has maybe 2 great 1v1 competitive maps out of 14. Lets call that number 4. That means COH2 has generated .8 good 1v1 maps per year. .8/year. This rate is so low we have to look critically at the format that Relic and the community has taken in regards to the map pool and maps in general.

This idea that if we take a small portion of the coh2 community who visits coh2.org and bothers to vote on a random poll from a random coh2.org admin (and relic assisting somehow? were not told how these maps were chosen?) with a random set of maps, this will improve the map pool quality. This without some explanation from Relic or Sturmpanther seems confusing at best.

If your goal is to improve the map pool this is not the way to do it. I've never understood why map designers in conjunction with Relics map designers don't work in conjunction to refine maps that are understood to be salvageable and dump the rest, then design new maps that can be injected into the pool. I understand this has been done at a painfully slow rate and yielded an even slower return of quality maps (~.8/year) so a more aggressive and well controlled solution should be put into action with a Relic mapper at the head of the effort that should stay in motion for the duration of COHs lifecycle. Get the best mappers together with the best Relic mappers or people of action, organize a focused group of testers who are willing to dedicate time to focused testing and reliably posting replays for mappers to analyze then make changes and repeat.
_________________________________________________________________________

For example:

Trics map recently got into automatch so he should be able to update the map as he observes games on it and updates his theories and understanding of his creation, there shouldn't be artificial limits on his, or Relics, or anyone's ability to implement improvements (within reason). Maps that have been in the pool for a long time but have shown sub-par quality should be removed without a second thought. If the map pool shrinks temporarily it doesn't hurt anyone, it removes the chaff from the wheat so to speak. Then new maps can be, after thorough design and testing, added to ladder to see how it does, while keeping a core of reasonably good maps to keep the pool strong.

This is a classic design/engineering problem that have clear solutions. One of those solutions is not to vote on designs with a small portion of the community. Data and experienced intuition drives development.
_________________________________________________________________________

And you Sturmpanther, to my knowledge, have never designed any COH maps let alone a high quality competitive map. With that in mind, have you or Relic involved high level mappers in the community in these 3 map choices that were put up? Or are you making decisions that you think are right, and if so based on what? It cant be the former because of this seemingly random 3 maps we have to vote on. You have to be more responsible than this if your goal is to improve the map pool as efficiently as possible. I'm mostly talking to Relic here as its their map pool not Sturmpanthers, he is just doing his best with the methods he is familiar with. I give him props for putting so much time and effort into COH as it is.

The potential here, as with most of COH is enormous and it isn't served with these exercises that have proven over and over not to yield results in a reasonable timeline. There are plenty of times to involve the community with voting, this isn't one of them. People already vote with their vetos in ladder, which translate to data that tells you how often maps are played, that coupled with balance data has to drive decisions here.



I'm not saying everything Relic has don't with the map pool has been bad, but this voting on maps to remove is confusing at best. We are very lucky that we have access to an enormous amount of data thanks to SiphonX.

"Tho we are not only argument about stats. Reason: second most picked / played map is Road to kharkov in 2vs2 LUL"
Elaborate

"Also some of lowest picked maps in 1vs1 got reworked again. You should know this...
Let's cross the fingers people will give the maps another chance."

True, but what is the time limit your giving the reworked maps to show weather or not they have achieved the quality that we all demand from the ladder map pool? Do we wait 3 months? 6? 12? Genuinely curious here. And how many times do you rework a map before you remove it? Limits should be set and metrics have to be established to generate a pipeline where quality can flow.

"And the maps are not random pulled!"
Elaborate.

"Thank you for your NOT confidence."
Confidence in a peer is not given, its earned.
_________________________________________________________________________

Please reconsider this voting course of action and focus on a solution like any designer would in any other design environment with constraints and a clear goal.

I urge people to show support for this post on this thread if they care about the ladder map pool.
31 Jul 2018, 00:30 AM
#17
avatar of Blitzkrieg

Posts: 5

Before you read this I don't have anything against Sturmpanther or anyone in particular. The quality of the map pool is #1 here, the pace of innovation here is far below what is possible, there are better ways. Please keep that in mind as you read. Thank you.
_________________________________________________________________________

"I know the exact stats for all maps from 1vs1- 4vs4. Relic has his own datebase for that.
But we (Relic and me) saw no reason not to ask the communtiy how they feel."


You're not asking people "how they feel", you're taking a poll to pick maps to remove.

"We will look how the vote will end and there is a good chance, that 2 1vs1 maps will get removed!"
_________________________________________________________________________

The map pool has been worked on for over 5 years. The map pool has maybe 2 great 1v1 competitive maps out of 14. Lets call that number 4. That means COH2 has generated .8 good 1v1 maps per year. .8/year. This rate is so low we have to look critically at the format that Relic and the community has taken in regards to the map pool and maps in general.

This idea that if we take a small portion of the coh2 community who visits coh2.org and bothers to vote on a random poll from a random coh2.org admin (and relic assisting somehow? were not told how these maps were chosen?) with a random set of maps, this will improve the map pool quality. This without some explanation from Relic or Sturmpanther seems confusing at best.

If your goal is to improve the map pool this is not the way to do it. I've never understood why map designers in conjunction with Relics map designers don't work in conjunction to refine maps that are understood to be salvageable and dump the rest, then design new maps that can be injected into the pool. I understand this has been done at a painfully slow rate and yielded an even slower return of quality maps (~.8/year) so a more aggressive and well controlled solution should be put into action with a Relic mapper at the head of the effort that should stay in motion for the duration of COHs lifecycle. Get the best mappers together with the best Relic mappers or people of action, organize a focused group of testers who are willing to dedicate time to focused testing and reliably posting replays for mappers to analyze then make changes and repeat.
_________________________________________________________________________

For example:

Trics map recently got into automatch so he should be able to update the map as he observes games on it and updates his theories and understanding of his creation, there shouldn't be artificial limits on his, or Relics, or anyone's ability to implement improvements (within reason). Maps that have been in the pool for a long time but have shown sub-par quality should be removed without a second thought. If the map pool shrinks temporarily it doesn't hurt anyone, it removes the chaff from the wheat so to speak. Then new maps can be, after thorough design and testing, added to ladder to see how it does, while keeping a core of reasonably good maps to keep the pool strong.

This is a classic design/engineering problem that have clear solutions. One of those solutions is not to vote on designs with a small portion of the community. Data and experienced intuition drives development.
_________________________________________________________________________

And you Sturmpanther, to my knowledge, have never designed any COH maps let alone a high quality competitive map. With that in mind, have you or Relic involved high level mappers in the community in these 3 map choices that were put up? Or are you making decisions that you think are right, and if so based on what? It cant be the former because of this seemingly random 3 maps we have to vote on. You have to be more responsible than this if your goal is to improve the map pool as efficiently as possible. I'm mostly talking to Relic here as its their map pool not Sturmpanthers, he is just doing his best with the methods he is familiar with. I give him props for putting so much time and effort into COH as it is.

The potential here, as with most of COH is enormous and it isn't served with these exercises that have proven over and over not to yield results in a reasonable timeline. There are plenty of times to involve the community with voting, this isn't one of them. People already vote with their vetos in ladder, which translate to data that tells you how often maps are played, that coupled with balance data has to drive decisions here.



I'm not saying everything Relic has don't with the map pool has been bad, but this voting on maps to remove is confusing at best. We are very lucky that we have access to an enormous amount of data thanks to SiphonX.

"Tho we are not only argument about stats. Reason: second most picked / played map is Road to kharkov in 2vs2 LUL"
Elaborate

"Also some of lowest picked maps in 1vs1 got reworked again. You should know this...
Let's cross the fingers people will give the maps another chance."

True, but what is the time limit your giving the reworked maps to show weather or not they have achieved the quality that we all demand from the ladder map pool? Do we wait 3 months? 6? 12? Genuinely curious here. And how many times do you rework a map before you remove it? Limits should be set and metrics have to be established to generate a pipeline where quality can flow.

"And the maps are not random pulled!"
Elaborate.

"Thank you for your NOT confidence."
Confidence in a peer is not given, its earned.
_________________________________________________________________________

Please reconsider this voting course of action and focus on a solution like any designer would in any other design environment with constraints and a clear goal.

I urge people to show support for this post on this thread if they care about the ladder map pool.



^^^^

Option 1: use the LARGEST sample size possible; data

community input is great, but data doesn't lie. Everyone who played this videogame for the last few years voted with their actions: use the winrates and veto rates, that samples the entire community far better than any survey could

I'm assuming flash's data is correct... Relic should be outright publishing this data for us if we are going to be voting on it, it shouldn't have to be pulled out by community members on their own... and any vote made without the help of the data is an incomplete vote

Why is data that we admit we have being withheld from the community?


Option 2: use the BEST data possible

aka the opinions of our best players. Any players whos names appear omn the first couple pages of ladder or who perform best in tournaments should be asked what they think; ONE of their opinions is more valuable than the opinion of 20 of us bad player schlubs...

And my last point & personal opinion: why in the hell do we have two copies of the same map in the map pool? who thought that was a good idea? why is that necessary? you have to use two vetoes to veto one map, how does this make sense?

31 Jul 2018, 00:54 AM
#18
avatar of Rosbone
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 908 | Subs: 2

Data is great. It tells you some very cool things.

DEVILS ADVOCATE
It does not tell you who is vetoing the maps. There is a large range of player skill involved in the data. And there are players, like myself, who tend to not veto any maps until they have played them enough to find something they don't like about them. And that something may have nothing to do with balance. Balanced or not, sometimes a map is just not fun to play on.

Only the top 200 players (level 16) can truly speak to balance as they have played and strategized enough against players of their own caliber to get valid results. But even these players may not know why the map works. They just know how to get around its flaws in a way that fits their play style.

I think the poll represents these things:
- What Relic thinks needs to be removed?
- What the "inner circle" wants removed?
- (The vote) What the community feels when they play these maps?
- No one has offered any reason/desire to improve these maps?

There is one good reason to keep KFW. If the mods made to the summer version are disliked, players can veto the summer version and continue playing on the unmodified winter version.
31 Jul 2018, 00:58 AM
#19
avatar of WhiteFlash
Senior Mapmaker Badge
Benefactor 119

Posts: 1099 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jul 2018, 00:54 AMRosbone
Data is great. It tells you some very cool things.

DEVILS ADVOCATE
It does not tell you who is vetoing the maps. There is a large range of player skill involved in the data. And there are players, like myself, who tend to not veto any maps until they have played them enough to find something they don't like about them. And that something may have nothing to do with balance. Balanced or not, sometimes a map is just not fun to play on.

Only the top 200 players (level 16) can truly speak to balance as they have played and strategized enough against players of their own caliber to get valid results. But even these players may not know why the map works. They just know how to get around its flaws in a way that fits their play style.

I think the poll represents these things:
- What Relic thinks needs to be removed?
- What the "inner circle" wants removed?
- (The vote) What the community feels when they play these maps?
- No one has offered any reason/desire to improve these maps?

There is one good reason to keep KFW. If the mods made to the summer version are disliked, players can veto the summer version and continue playing on the unmodified winter version.


I agree this is the devils advocates position and approaching ideas as such, its just a very weak position

I dig the devils advocate approach <444>3 thanks Rosbone
31 Jul 2018, 01:06 AM
#20
avatar of Rosbone
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 908 | Subs: 2

I agree this is the devils advocates position and approaching ideas as such, its just a very weak position

I dig the devils advocate approach <444>3 thanks Rosbone

All arguments have pros and cons. I just try to get all the ideas out there so you smart guys can get it figured out from everyones perspective :)

You will also see me on here asking for transparency when these decisions get made. But it is hard to criticize when someones doing the work for free and Relic is at least letting the community make the game better. So I don't bark too much :P
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Oberkommando West flag N1cko
  • Oberkommando West flag Scotch1
  • Soviets flag Frosty
  • Soviets flag Beatricks Swire
uploaded by Frost

Board Info

310 users are online: 1 member and 309 guests
serg_codmod
90 posts in the last 24h
1196 posts in the last week
5218 posts in the last month
Registered members: 68586
Welcome our newest member, fverniced
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM