Question about maps
- princeofcarthage
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 8861
- Joined: Aug 28, 2015
- Location: Milky Way!
Re: Question about maps
@Rikikipu when you made vanilla mod, did you not actually made those maps available for rated game play using map sets with individual maps? apart from normal set you had 6-7 sets for esoc maps. 4-5 limit garja is saying looks bit low considering this idk abt tad though
Fine line to something great is a strange change.
Re: Question about maps
Yes you are right. The set limit has been a semi-legend for 2 years, but you can actually make as much sets as you want.
Re: Question about maps
For me, the mapset limit was the only valid argument against this change I've seen so far.
Everyone seems to fall into a loop of discussing something about map balance, while mapsets are clearly just a QoL feature that changes nothing about map balance. I don't understand why we need to force people to roll dices when they just want to test a particular strategy on a random water map/TP map/no-TP map, etc.
Everyone seems to fall into a loop of discussing something about map balance, while mapsets are clearly just a QoL feature that changes nothing about map balance. I don't understand why we need to force people to roll dices when they just want to test a particular strategy on a random water map/TP map/no-TP map, etc.
Re: Question about maps
EAGLEMUT wrote:For me, the mapset limit was the only valid argument against this change I've seen so far.
Everyone seems to fall into a loop of discussing something about map balance, while mapsets are clearly just a QoL feature that changes nothing about map balance. I don't understand why we need to force people to roll dices when they just want to test a particular strategy on a random water map/TP map/no-TP map, etc.
For that one has to somehow admit that its a legitemate opinion to prefer a certain sort of mappool. I tried to give those arguments, in part to show that there are surely people that would be interested in such a mappool as a no-TP mappool.
Re: Question about maps
If there's someone who claims TPs don't legitimately affect the kinds of strategies played, I'm just going to claim he's a madman.
Re: Question about maps
You really don't understand what I am trying to say, I think that topic starts to become useless, even more because it is not gonna change.
Feel free to make your own custom map set though, you really don't need us for that.
Feel free to make your own custom map set though, you really don't need us for that.
Re: Question about maps
It's not a principle in my case. Only in yours.Garja wrote:From a fairness perspective every civ should have a concrete shot at winning on every map type, being it TP, no TP, land, water, low res, high res, etc. Can't really make it a balance/principle argument for such map pool.
TP/noTP is just one possible split, not different from water/no water. I agree there wouldn't be nothing wrong in providing these subgroups of maps if there were infinite viable rated sets. But afaik we only have 4-5 sets to rename and they're all already used at the moment. So ye, just select a map or make a custom map pool and play unrated.
To me this is entirely a matter of popular opinion and pleasing as many people as possible. That's what we should aim to do.
Re: Question about maps
I think the conviction "it's not going to change" is a bad attitude to have, when you want things to be optimal.Rikikipu wrote:You really don't understand what I am trying to say, I think that topic starts to become useless, even more because it is not gonna change.
Feel free to make your own custom map set though, you really don't need us for that.
Re: Question about maps
Rikikipu wrote:TPs are not only the key parameter when it comes to balancing a MU. Things as Water, safe resources, size of the map are also big factors. So I don't see why we should particularly make a set for TP maps.
Agreed, I would like to see mapsets for all of the key parameters you mentioned.
Rikikipu wrote:Some strats are sub-optimal on no-TP maps and become optimal in TP maps, which means that you also got to adapt facing different strategies. That is why it is interesting strategically.
Agreed, that's why it would be good to make practicing those optimal strats easier on an appropriate randomized pool.
Rikikipu wrote:I assume it is self-centered, I'm in war versus land tp semi-ff boomie meta. And to be honest it is going well, this tourney was more interesting and diversified strategically than some previous ones,
I don't see how this change encourages TP semi-ff meta.
I can equally say that it encourages no-TP play as it will be easier to practice on a random no-TP map.
Re: Question about maps
Rikikipu wrote:You really don't understand what I am trying to say, I think that topic starts to become useless, even more because it is not gonna change.
Feel free to make your own custom map set though, you really don't need us for that.
I feel like the actual point is that you don't want your maps to be dusting in the attic of the "imbalanced mappool".
Re: Question about maps
Just make some custom map sets with each style. No one plays rated anyways.
mad cuz bad
Re: Question about maps
momuuu wrote:Rikikipu wrote:You really don't understand what I am trying to say, I think that topic starts to become useless, even more because it is not gonna change.
Feel free to make your own custom map set though, you really don't need us for that.
I feel like the actual point is that you don't want your maps to be dusting in the attic of the "imbalanced mappool".
ROFL, this topic is about no-TPs map set, I made only 2 no-tp maps, Garja made 6 no TP maps, what are you even talking about man ??
Re: Question about maps
Rikikipu wrote:momuuu wrote:Rikikipu wrote:You really don't understand what I am trying to say, I think that topic starts to become useless, even more because it is not gonna change.
Feel free to make your own custom map set though, you really don't need us for that.
I feel like the actual point is that you don't want your maps to be dusting in the attic of the "imbalanced mappool".
ROFL, this topic is about no-TPs map set, I made only 2 no-tp maps, Garja made 6 no TP maps, what are you even talking about man ??
What I feel like is true. Obviously doesn't have to represent the truth. What's the core principle behind your motivation to not make a slightly altered mappool? I don't get it to be honest.
Re: Question about maps
zoom wrote:It's not a principle in my case. Only in yours.
To me this is entirely a matter of popular opinion and pleasing as many people as possible. That's what we should aim to do.
one should know what map is being played when picking one's civilization, from a fairness perspective.
This is a matter of principle.
Anyway, you're kinda under the impression that everyone wants this but I'm pretty sure lot of people simply don't care.
With that said, if we can make infinite map pools then a split TP/no TP can't harm. Same for water/no water. However, it would be appropriate before doing anything, to have a custom map image for such sets.
I must admit tho, that making such rated map pool when the vast majority of maps is already of the wanted type is kinda a waste. Especially if it is for practice purposes (just make a custom set on your own and play unrated).
Bear in mind that that the moment we were to decide that there will be a ladder pool, that must contain all competitive type of maps, thus including no TP ones.
Re: Question about maps
Garja wrote:zoom wrote:It's not a principle in my case. Only in yours.
To me this is entirely a matter of popular opinion and pleasing as many people as possible. That's what we should aim to do.one should know what map is being played when picking one's civilization, from a fairness perspective.
This is a matter of principle.
Anyway, you're kinda under the impression that everyone wants this but I'm pretty sure lot of people simply don't care.
With that said, if we can make infinite map pools then a split TP/no TP can't harm. Same for water/no water. However, it would be appropriate before doing anything, to have a custom map image for such sets.
Bear in mind that that the moment we were to decide that there will be a ladder pool, that must contain all competitive type of maps, thus including no TP ones.
It must contain all competitive type of maps why precisely? Just because you think so it must be so?
Re: Question about maps
Because it would be the ladder pool and thus it should test all kind of play and also ideally not have bias toward any civ.
It's not even my idea really, it's the same logic on which the standard maps pool is based.
It's not even my idea really, it's the same logic on which the standard maps pool is based.
Re: Question about maps
Garja wrote:Because it would be the ladder pool and thus it should test all kind of play and also ideally not have bias toward any civ.
But with the current approach to balancing a map pool with only TP maps would have the least bias towards any civ. Besides, you're still stating an opinion. Ladder pools don't inherently have the aspect that it must test all kind of play or that they must not be biased towards any civ.
Re: Question about maps
Garja wrote:There is no such thing as approach only with TPs.
that'd be an incorrect statement.
Re: Question about maps
No. It would be a correct statement. Also another correct statement is that you believe there is one because you base balance only on the dominant meta, which is a very narrow minded approach to balance.
Re: Question about maps
Jerom, make your custom map pool if you really feel it is to horrible to rehost, thus you will have what you want, end of the story. This is what made diarouga, you should take him as a model here, really.
Re: Question about maps
I play on RE if I play at all so I don't give a shit. I always thought EP was a patch for the community, and if there's serious reason to believe some people would prefer this sort of map pool, then there's reason for EP to make that sort of map pool available. Instead of telling me to make my own custom map pool (why would I care) you could also not dodge the question.
@Hiddy_ I would prefer not to flame riki and I'm not even doing so, but he's just giving zero reasoning except that "he does not want it" and he won't even elaborate properly as to why.
@Hiddy_ I would prefer not to flame riki and I'm not even doing so, but he's just giving zero reasoning except that "he does not want it" and he won't even elaborate properly as to why.
Re: Question about maps
Garja wrote:No. It would be a correct statement. Also another correct statement is that you believe there is one because you base balance only on the dominant meta, which is a very narrow minded approach to balance.
It's not "narrow minded" but smart. Balance as few factors as possible so that you can create the optimal result. Let me pose the following axioms:
- The balance team is failing to reach perfect balance. They are struggling to reach decent balance
- Balancing the game with no TP maps in mind too is harder
If you accept these axioms, then the conclusion is that the balance is better if there were no maps without TPs. Therefore, I don't think it's 'narrow minded' to suggest this approach to balance, but rather wise.
Also, I have another set of axioms for you:
- Otto is not a good civ on no TP maps, not even on RE
- Otto has been nerfed repeatedly on the EP
- At some point otto was close to being balanced on TP maps (if even slightly too strong). If say their winrate hovered around ~55% on TP maps, their total winrate bearing in mind that 1/4 maps is a no-TP map would be much lower than 50% yet they were still nerfed
I then conclude that the EP team does not consider no TP balance unless one can make changes that affect the no TP maps balance without messing with the TP maps balance too much. That is too say, the EP team balances with TP maps in mind.
A more conclusive way to reach consensus would to to ask @zoom
Re: Question about maps
This. We want to cater to as many people as possible, and this is indeed a popular map niche. No one is arguing balance here, are they?momuuu wrote:I always thought EP was a patch for the community, and if there's serious reason to believe some people would prefer this sort of map pool, then there's reason for EP to make that sort of map pool available. Instead of telling me to make my own custom map pool (why would I care) you could also not dodge the question.
...
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests