Remove Atlas From Rotation

[Spoodle]

I think Atlas ought to be removed from rotation. In essence, it's a map designed for very low population, that requires a fair amount of players online for it to work; an oxymoron.

Originally, Atlas was created as a low-compile-time test map, but had its purpose invalidated by Lummox's compile time patch. The map was still got completed in the end; but then, it was added to rotation.

One of Atlas' main features (besides it being uncomfortably cramped) is its lack of resources. A map designed for low-population that has a lack of resources does not work. Most of the time there's seven people online, and none of them have access to the resources (QM). That makes the map nearly unplayable; unless the people break in of course. But then what's the purpose of things being locked behind QM anyway?

Well, it was to encourage player interaction (from what I've gathered). But that idea is flawed: you can't have a map relying on interaction with players that have access, when with its intended population, it very rarely has any players on with that access.

That problem can be relieved by three things:
People breaking into places.
People playing jobs they don't want to play.
Having a large population.
Reworking Atlas

As previously stated, if players break into places (like what normally happens), then you might as well just not have important things locked behind doors.
If players are forced to play jobs they don't want to play, that removes the entire point of playing a game to have fun.
If there's a higher population, then the map feels even more cramped than it already does, and you might as well just play on Clarion or Destiny.
The one solution that I think could work, would be having Atlas be reworked. Every map has potential, but at the moment, Atlas is un-fun to play on under every circumstance.

Therefore, I think it ought to be removed from rotation (even just for the time being).

[Frank_Stein]

One thing I've always thought about low pop, small maps is that the standard station job access is counter productive.

I feel it would helpful if IDs worked across departments, meaning you only need one person in each department to have a fully staffed station

[Studenterhue]

One thing I've always thought about low pop, small maps is that the standard station job access is counter productive.

I feel it would helpful if IDs worked across departments, meaning you only need one person in each department to have a fully staffed station

It's definitely doable. On many /tg/code, servers, certain jobs have additional access levels if the server pop's low, like a Miner getting access to Cargo so they can sell their ores in the absence of a QM. On this codebase, Security Officers have more access if the map is Destiny, so it can definitely be map-based.

I personally would like some options being locked out or only available at certain server pop thresholds. So, for instance, Atlas would be removed from the list of map choices if there, say, more than 15-20 people during roundstart, and if there were 30+ players on board, Cog2 and similar would be available. The two problems I see are 1) deciding what thresholds each map should get and 2) "lag" between the map changes and server capacity (e.g. many players joining a round with Atlas after the server votes to continue being on Atlas).

[Sov]

Could just add a little thing about size in voting menu

Atlas (Tiny)
Cog1 (Medium)
Cog2 (Large)

[qwertyquerty]

Why not just disable it on high pop, and make slight changes to it's access and layout. I don't think it should be in rotation in its current state, but it is definitely salvageable.

[Roomba]

I don't think there's any way to salvage it other than 'scale up everything by an order of two or more'. It's claustrophobic and unfun, there's no room to sort out all your stuff and lay it out properly, and the tiny cramped rooms create all sorts of friction within departments. It's just unpleasant to play on, and the lingering negativity carries over to the next round even if it's on a different map.

[Zamujasa]

Atlas is fun if you have a big bomb and horrible in every other case.

[warcrimes]

People vote for this map en masse. Who are they, what are they getting out of it?
Cater to that crowd and try to figure out exactly what is driving them, because as loud as its detractors are, Atlas is more popular per-round than Destiny and Horizon, and on some days even Cog2.

In other words, if people keep wanting to play rounds on it, even at high pop, it might make some people exceptionally salty, but there's at least a simple plurality who at that moment, considder it the best option to play. That's grounds for keeping it, but doesnt invalidate the complaints.

Something it has is filling a need.
It might need work, but it's far from the dramatic disaster it's being made out to be.

[Joefesok]

If nothing else, Atlas rounds tend to go really particularly fast. Maybe it appeals to some players who want to play a turbo-mode round?

Or it's people voting for the map to upset every other player on the server

[NateTheSquid]

i vote for it cause its new and cute

[KikiMofo]

Whenever Atlas round is up we lose players. People pick Atlas as a joke when we have a high pop and then after the round we lose like 20 people and it stays like that the rest of the day/night. It seems like its just a trolling pick.

[poland spring]

I love Atlas especially on highpop rounds because nothing quite captures the original SS13 experience like a bunch of screaming spacemen in a tiny station with not enough equipment

[The Gorog]

I must admit that I am one of those people that vote for it on high pop, just for how silly it is and quickly turns into utter chaos.
But even on low pop I dont think it is an enjoyable map, with how cramped and lacking it is.

I would rather play on another map like Cog1 on low pop, where I have everything available.
Atlas doesnt even have a test chamber or monkey dispenser for science, or a good amount of materials for engineering and mechanics.

[Kubius]

Atlas needs at least one of these three things (preference in order top to bottom):

- Improvements to the map to increase supply accessibility. This could consist of a QM modification to let the AI deliver crates by people using either the MULE or a conveyor belt (the latter of which I have mocked up), or straight-up restructuring departments / adding supply wall closets to improve the complement where it's lacking.

- Modification to the access system to improve accessibility when population is low (as an example, cargo can access mining when there are no miners and vice versa) - has the benefit of also potentially being usable for Oshan.

- Removal from map rotation.

I quite like Atlas' overall design scheme, and having toyed with the hull myself I think the map is far superior as compared to, say, Chiron or Mushroom in terms of fundamental workability; removing it from rotation would be a poor substitute for fixing its issues, one I would happily work to avoid.

[Spoodle]

...removing it from rotation would be a poor substitute for fixing its issues, one I would happily work to avoid.

Fixes can't be made in an instant, and in its currently bad shape, its still in rotation. Hence why I think it ought to be removed now, fixed, and then it could be put back into rotation.