Map Vote Rotation

[UrsulaMejor]

Currently, almost every map vote ends up with the same map being chosen over and over again, dominated by whatever the thin online majority is at the time.

I think it'd be cool if every map vote was chosen between 2 randomly chosen options, and 1 "random" option that just randomly chooses from all available maps.

For instance you might see:

1) Horizon
2) Cog 2
3) Random

a winning vote for random would pull from all eligible maps for the population size, weighed evenly.

This way, not every map is available for every single round and we can help mitigate map burn out + even the chances to play around with the cool map specific gimmicks, like Horizon's SUPER GUILTY button and pipe transit system (which never gets funnily abused because peeps don't spend enough time on it to really get the map knowledge to use it) or Cog 2's hidden crime holes.

[salix_catus]

hmm I do agree, however, I reckon there's a good reason the same maps get chosen
oshan and cogmap1 are the only maps of that medium size.
everything else is either cramped or too big, which is good for high or low pop, but for you average round?

that being said i haven't played horizon much, but it actually looks like a reasonable size. I reckon that one of either oshan, cogmap 1 or horizon should always be available

[Skornzy]

I disagree with this idea because limiting the maps that can be voted on to three completely random ones lessens the freedom that our voting system already has. The reason the same maps get chosen in a row is because they're the ones the community collectively likes to play on. People vote for a map because that's the map they want to play on. Others don't care what map they play on, and don't vote. If you want to change things up then convince everyone over comms to vote for the map you want. I've seen campaigns work out with great success, and they're always a good voting motivator.

[warcrimes]

I've been known to be of the opinion that the current map should be either excluded or have their votes halved during the vote, just to encourage at least _some_ variation. Not sure about twisting it down to such a limited set,

[UrsulaMejor]

I don't have the data in front of me, but I often feel like the breadth of choices actually limits our freedom. there's usually 1 or 2 maps that win several rounds in a row because the majority agrees that they want to switch maps, but can't actually agree on *which* map to switch to, so the current map will get 5-7 votes and the other 6-9 get split among the other choices.

overall, I think that playing the same map 3 or 4 rounds in a row, especially when you're wanting to play something different, encourages the players who want to see something different to just log out, further skewing the polls. first past the post voting almost always encourages apathy and nonparticipation as its clear winners because it's such a beatdown to lose repeatedly that you end up forming a two choice system (like we currently have with oshan/cog1).

like, eventually you start voting **against** the current map rather than **for** the map you really want to be on.

I dunno, I just don't feel like the current system works out very well and I'd like to see a change. maybe we could do an alternate voting system with 1srt, 2nd choices?

[cyberTripping]

why not just do ranked votes, they kick ass and help prevent the exact problem described with more votes spread across a wide variety of options

[Sundance]

why not just do ranked votes, they kick ass and help prevent the exact problem described with more votes spread across a wide variety of options

Ranked voting is a good idea, but it might be a bit counterproductive if players can barely make the effort to click 1 button, never mind several ones to rank their vote.

How about weighted voting? Granted, the voting machine concept where you can rig the vote to change the map is a more IC version.

So like when people have their "favorite map in their settings" vs actually voting, I think the players who make the effort to vote should have their votes weighted. E.g: Actually voting = worth 2 votes (or maybe 1.5, but grr decimals) while just having your favorite map in settings nets you 1 vote.

Another idea altogether is to have 1/10 rounds be "Wildcard" where voting is disabled (or if that makes people salty, the vote carries over to the round after next) and a map is just randomly selected, discounting low/high pop maps depending on how busy it is.

[salix_catus]

I reckon you should be able to see the number of votes at all times, with a "current winner" That way you wouldn't get the problem of people split into different maps.

[UrsulaMejor]

why not just do ranked votes, they kick ass and help prevent the exact problem described with more votes spread across a wide variety of options

Ranked voting is a good idea, but it might be a bit counterproductive if players can barely make the effort to click 1 button, never mind several ones to rank their vote.

How about weighted voting? Granted, the voting machine concept where you can rig the vote to change the map is a more IC version.

So like when people have their "favorite map in their settings" vs actually voting, I think the players who  make the effort to vote should have their votes weighted. E.g: Actually voting = worth 2 votes (or maybe 1.5, but grr decimals) while just having your favorite map in settings nets you 1 vote.

Another idea altogether is to have 1/10 rounds be "Wildcard" where voting is disabled (or if that makes people salty, the vote carries over to the round after next) and a map is just randomly selected, discounting low/high pop maps depending on how busy it is.

preferred map voting is already weighted at 0.25 of an in game vote