I think the question of veto-ing or not is mixed up with the question of putting new maps into the rotation or not.

If you put in new maps and the veto-system, I could imagine that the new maps will virtually never be played. Sure, one team, might train and perform a new map as speciality, but I guess there will be an equal amount of teams, who veto the new maps, just for the reason, that they are less familiar with it (and to foil any "we-trained-that"-strategies of their opponents).

So, for the sake of seeing more new maps next season, I'd like to push the veto-system into the play-offs and fix the maps for group phase.

Also, I would rather opt liberally on which maps should be in and which not. I think some of these maps are very close of being good enough. The interest of the community in these maps and by that also feedback for them will greatly increase, if we put them into the rotation. This should give the mappers the motivation and information they need to make them really good. Otherwise we might have to wait many more weeks, months, seasons, to see them in a good state.

Let's be a bit experimental here and play some maps, even, if they are not 100% perfect. Because, honestly, none of the ones we are used to play on are either.

tudy says

Also, I would rather opt liberally on which maps should be in and which not. I think some of these maps are very close of being good enough. The interest of the community in these maps and by that also feedback for them will greatly increase, if we put them into the rotation. This should give the mappers the motivation and information they need to make them really good. Otherwise we might have to wait many more weeks, months, seasons, to see them in a good state.

Let's be a bit experimental here and play some maps, even, if they are not 100% perfect. Because, honestly, none of the ones we are used to play on are either.

That was tryed in Season 3 with Caged
was tryed in season 5 with Kodiak

and till today nobody likes to play these maps
i dont think we need more "unpopular maps"


i rember back in the day when jambi or summit was new
on summit it was instantly: "thats probly the best map and its community made" (to be honest that was even beta day :)

and on Jambi everyone was its not perfect but its ok.


so im trying to say there is some "first sight judgement" that is important.

Valve with CS:GO worked around newer maps not being played. While they could be vetoed, the last map was between two maps chosen at random. Alot of players did dislike playing cobblestone, but ´cobblestone got played and developed further.

Ixian says

Alot of players did dislike playing cobblestone, but ´cobblestone got played and developed further.

Still ass tho

Cr4zy_ says

swalk no

You're not even playing are you? gtfo cr4zy :P

LyDDa says

I changed my mind about the veteo system. The maps should be set before and use the veteo system during the playoffs

+1 LyDDa - Veto system could be interesting during the playoffs, but it would cause maps to be overplayed if you also have it during group play.

Durkmons says

Ixian says

Alot of players did dislike playing cobblestone, but ´cobblestone got played and developed further.

Still ass tho

Actually plays pretty well at the moment.

idea for this seasons map setup


Veto system: each week 5 maps are picked to be in a pool each team bans one of the 5 maps (2 maps banned) then each team picks a map ( 2 maps picked) from the 3 that are left


example

Map Pool for week whatever (MAP POOL CHANGES EVERY WEEK)
Veil
summit
tram
biodome
Descent

veil - banned
summit- banned
tram (wasnt picked)
biodome - picked
descent - picked

Is this something everyone would like?

@Map pool:
Would indivulaize the matches. I like it at least.

Tico says

Is this something everyone would like?

No, because no one(or only very few) would ban summit/tram/jambi/veil and we would see those maps played at least 90% of the time. The remaining maps would be played 10% or even less.

Teams don't bother learning/playing new/uncommon maps unless they are forced to do so.

The scenario you put up is very wishful thinking, that two teams would ban summit and veil and pick biodome and descent over tram. C'mon, do you really think of that as a realistic scenario? Even if the map pool would change every week, there would still be some of these maps in every week and those would be the only maps that get played.

True variety during group play. Please.

We already have map picking during playoffs, but the veto idea could be applied there, to bring in some more pre-game strategy like vetoing a map that you know your opponents are strong on or have practiced alot recently.

I do like the idea that different divisions have different maps during the same league-week though, as long as all teams play the maps the same number of times. On the other hand, this would split divisions even more when it comes to PCWs, because everyone would want to play the maps they are gonna play in the upcoming officials. So yeah, probably not that good of an idea after all.

The point is we dont put those maps into the pool every week...

Theres 8 maps. Possibly more to come for this season in the current map pool. That leaves at LEAST 40 different combinations (pools of 5 maps) every week. WHY THE FUCK would we use the ones that only tram summit veil every week.

Tram 24/7.

A 5 map pool is pretty good allready, a season is not rly made to "try out maps".

Im fine with forced maps on groups then veto on playoffs. So titus cant come up with the "we start on US Central server because we chosed map".

On the other hand you could make ensl map test sessions on weekends, with ppl signing up for those like a gather.

I mean new maps are cool but forcing them early season without more testing...

Off topic:

The point you make about the pcws is pretty true swalk.

It always amuses me when i see lower div teams training 3 or 4 different maps in a pcw barely learning anything.
While they even know wich map they have to play in their next official.

Re'ing the same map once isn't boring ESPECIALLY if you failed your early game or anything else since you can try fixing problems on the spot.

Tico says

The point is we dont put those maps into the pool every week...

Theres 8 maps. Possibly more to come for this season in the current map pool. That leaves at LEAST 40 different combinations (pools of 5 maps) every week. WHY THE FUCK would we use the ones that only tram summit veil every week.

Those are the most played maps, those are the maps the most players favor. Those maps will be played the most if it is up to the players. Simple as that.

Even with 8 maps in the map pool you would still see a minimum of 1(but more likely 2 or more) of these 4 maps I mentioned, every single week. And those maps will be picked, because of what I said above.

Reach the playoffs if you want to pick maps.

Good maps being played consistently, how dare they!?

herakles says

Good maps being played consistently, how dare they!?

Variety is good, why take that away?

Summit, Tram, Biodome, Veil, and Jambi are pretty much the prime maps.

Kodiak could maybe at some point be played but it has a few rooms that are just laughable.
Caged a few iterations ago was actually pretty cool, it had some stuff to fix, but I think too much has been done now, what the fuak?
Mineral, played a few times and just 'meh' alright.
Nyx, never played.

Descent is in an area where it's kinda playable, but also kinda super aggravating..
Docking I feel has a stigma associated with it, that's kinda hard to break for those who have played for such a long time. I still see it as a pub map, checked out docking2 seems interesting but again we'd have to see.

I'm down for tossing in a newish map into the map rotation. But for shit sakes, make sure the map is actually complete and the glaring issues are fixed. I'm also tired of a map being tossed into the rotation whenever the TEXTURES aren't even complete yet. Just like anything else, if you want people involved in testing or looking at maps during the season give them an incentive. Oh your team played nyx and tested it during the regular season, for winning you get 1.5pts per round you win.

Just an example but with something like that say if the team doesn't have a playoff spot because they're a few points short, well this could potentially help them. Or if someone is in 1st and they want to remain in that position for the regular season it'll give that advantage, so if a team in 2nd place wants to catch up they'd have to play it. I'm sure some people wouldn't care about what points they have when they are in positions 1-3 but some will.

So pretty much, either give some incentives TO TEAMS WHO CHOOSE to play it. Or those maps be played in an off-season/maptest cup.

The custom cup a few seasons ago was a good starting point. There was decent feedback that came out of it. But I think one of the issues was it was taken too seriously. I believe we should have approached that tournament not as a true competition but as map testers. playing through them and then provide feedback. I remember playing against Wonga.NS on fracture and the match lasting upwards of almost 75 minutes. granted there were mistakes being made that would have shortened it, but the creator watched that map over, and then sat in the stream watching all the other matches being played on it and then made adjustments. That map afterwards was playing well and the changes were pretty good, he/she got feedback on it. Perhaps we need to revisit this, maybe just select two custom maps and have a round robin of teams play on them. not to see who wins, but to watch the flow of the game. I like the person's idea of having only pcws or gathers on custom maps being done on the weekends or weeknights, but when this happens i think they need to be recorded so the authors can watch them over. the map pool idea is good and perhaps instead of 5 maps just pick out of 3. if they all stink then deal with it. i understand this is live or die, real life stuff, but in the end this type of thing should run concurrently to a season

Syknik says

extra points for winning custom maps during season

bad idea imo.

the incentive should just be to have the upper hand against teams who dont practice the maps.

Syknik says

I'm also tired of a map being tossed into the rotation whenever the TEXTURES aren't even complete yet.

Do you mea maps with still graybox in it or maps that are in beta texture state? Because for docking2 for example I guess it will take at least another year until the textures are finished (well ok maybe only 10 months)