I'm fully aware of your meaning here, but what you need to understand when you use rule #2 is that only a certain percentage of your player base "like it and have fun on it". I would submit that there are far more people who would rather have a serious game of ONS than map after map of the random spamfest type games. When someone is looking to game and sees one of that type of map on they may still join even though they hate it with a passion if only to get to the voting screen and the next map in the queue. If this isn't the case why else would you be having player drop issues? As you've noted in other posts, when long maps are up on other servers those servers are nearly always full.ToxicWaste wrote:You can look at "bad map" in one of two ways:
1. It is a poorly deisgned map where the rules for good ONS map making were thrown out
2. It is a poorly designed map where the rules for good ONS map making were thrown out, but for some reason people like it and have FUN on it.
From a design perspective, yes there is only one way of looking at things and for that you are right. But I am looking at it from an admin perspective and for me, rule two prevails.
Because the last time I checked this was supposed to be an ONS server, not a DM or free for all server. You can couch this in whatever terms you wish but when the casual new visitor joins your server they are expecting a game of ONS. Perhaps they'll "go with the flow" and start manta running with the rest of the crowd but that wasn't why they joined initially.I know that as perfectly as you do, but who cares? Why do you care? Why does it irk you that people are having fun on a less that "perfect" ONS map?
And calling the maps I've cited as "less than perfect" ONS maps is quite rich you know. Even as a map for other gametypes most of the problem ones wouldn't cut it. For ONS play at this level they are laughably bad examples of exactly how NOT to make a map that works for 32 players. It's like the author sat down and said "ok, how can I make the gameplay here as tortuous as a root canal?".
Oh I have a fair idea. I've already suggested numerous ones you should try here and there are others out there that are worth a look as well. As one of the big servers, your selection of maps is decidely mixed - some good ones but far too many that should be gone.Do you have any idea what maps some of the other "big" servers are running?
Ok, we may have a breakthru. Let me stop you here as it's clear you're not understanding my definition of a bad map. I don't mean maps that are over quickly - witness Dremus as I feel confident in saying that that one will never be over quickly such as the under 2 minute games I've seen on some of the other offenders. Dremus is not a bad map because it's over quickly, it's bad because of the following:And lets say "Good Map A" comes up next and lasts two minutes, you are still going to lose another 8 people. Has nothing to do with the quality of the map just played, it's just just psycology.
1. Unbalanced -> non-mirrored terrain has to be carefully done to get the balance right and this one sooo doesn't have it.
2. Poor weapon lockers - bases are very weak, low ammo on most of them. Not enough link anywhere, waaaay too many mines available on a small confined map.
3. Poor powerup placement - redeemer on one side only? Heh, yeah good idea.
4. Poor vehicle loadouts and placements - too many Manta's on a map that seems designed for running and not enough counters.
5. Terrible 5 nodes in a line link setup. Just a pure random spamfest, no strategy or skill needed.
There's more but my point should be clear by now. More goes into the making of a bad map than just the length of a typical game on it.
Well... I kinda just did didn't I? So you've seen < 2 minute games on say Volcanohigh? Ahebban? Nevermore? Must have been some seriously unbalanced teams as I have a hard time seeing quickies happen on those types of maps. Then again, I suppose anything is possible if you get enough high-skill but non-fairminded people playing at once who won't balance teams either for numbers or skill levels.And don't tell me that a "good" map cannot end in two minutes because I will not hear that.
Which reminds me of something I've been meaning to mention - you should probably look into running one of the auto-team balancing mutators. I haven't been on much this past week but the little I was on I saw endlessly unbalanced teams with the server full of people unwilling to switch to even them. I think I switched 4 times on one map just to try to keep the skill level / numbers somewhat close.
In any case, given those personality types I mentioned above voting for the types of maps I consider good ones enough times in a row to empty the place isn't likely to happen, so your "three good maps in a row that clear out a server" scenario is even harder to buy. The basic premise is rather flawed really as a good map is not one that will typically empty a server out. For one of them to cause that to happen I'd suspect other factors first - late night or connection issues perhaps.
Well I obviously still don't think this will be helpful but I'm big enough to admit that perhaps I'm wrong. I'm still planning on going thru your map list and making suggestions and comments on most of them so I'll add in some goalscore and round time recommendations if it would be helpful.And as it turns out, after I thinking about it, I would rather REDUCE goalscore on some maps rather than increase. And as of yet I have not done more than two or three maps, because I am not sure it's a good idea yet and I was putting it out there for discussion
See above.How about a subject "Let's fix map A" and three bullet points on what needs to be changed to get some discussion rolling? If someone wants to roll with it, great. If not, it dies and the map is removed, or stays as is.
You're trying to make me kill myself aren't you? That might just do it.If they want to play tankmeup 47 times in a row who cares? Why should you?
That line makes it seem like it is only me who doesn't like a certain type of map running here. Simply perusing this thread should show you that the truth is quite the opposite. Watching for player drops when a particular map comes up or even reading in-game chat messages should show you more of the same. Even if you're quite busy and unable to get in the game you can still sit in webadmin and read what people are saying.
I live to serve. After my place closed up shop and some of the other big ones did so as well I kinda became a homeless wanderer of a UT player. Given the traffic you had (and still have) I couldn't let some of what was happening go on without passing comment.Without your help, we would still be running default node layouts and some "crap" maps.
It's all releative anyways. As you said people find differentt types of maps fun. My overarching point was simply that you have more than is healthy for a server's playerbase of a certain type of map than there are of other types.You can run the best, purest ONS maps on the planet, but if people don't have fun on them, they're not going to play there. And I know your argument will be that only pure ONS maps make fun, but that's not obviously always the case is it?
Hmmm, perhaps this wasn't as short as I figured it would be. Oh well, hopefully this was a useful post and not hot air from yours truly. To be more on the constructive side I'll work on that map evaluation post I've been meaning to get to hopefully soon.