Is it real !?

[Rico]

As a server admin for PRTA we usually ask for suggestions on admin TeamSpeak. Ideas put forward will usually be based on but not limited to:

- Avoiding maps already played that day.
- Must be a different layer to current map (inf, std, alt, ins)
- The population of the server (some maps are not good with low numbers, and/or wont help fill the server up). E.g. Insurgency works best for seeding.
- Time of day. Later in eve, more Americans are on who like American maps as the euro's go to bed.
- Variety of map size and type e.g. Go from desert to forest, small to big, NATO forces to other etc.

We do see the map suggestions in chat but above takes priority.

[ToXiCGrAvE]

Originally Posted by Rico

As a server admin for PRTA we usually ask for suggestions on admin TeamSpeak. Ideas put forward will usually be based on but not limited to:

- Avoiding maps already played that day.
- Must be a different layer to current map (inf, std, alt, ins)
- The population of the server (some maps are not good with low numbers, and/or wont help fill the server up). E.g. Insurgency works best for seeding.
- Time of day. Later in eve, more Americans are on who like American maps as the euro's go to bed.
- Variety of map size and type e.g. Go from desert to forest, small to big, NATO forces to other etc.

We do see the map suggestions in chat but above takes priority.

I appreciate you took the time give a quality reply.

[FlyingR]

Originally Posted by CAS_ual_TY

This is how often each map has been put into a vote on our server. Considering how often the top maps are played in contrary to how often they are put into votes, YES I do blame the voter

Most of the times I see votes being 2 overplayed maps and one not so overplayed, so usually everybody picks the overplayed maps, the votes are somewhat bias.

You should definitely change it a little bit, make a vote like Falklands, Tad Sae and Route E106 rather Silent Eagle, Falklands and Kashan.

Something like this guarantees to have a different map and make things more interesting.

Originally Posted by CAS_ual_TY

Stop pretending that desert maps are fun for the majority of players playing, because they are not. It is simple as that.

I think desert maps (or all heavy asset maps for that matter) are very fun for infantry. Having heavy assets in the map makes it even more challenging for inf squads, makes SLs work harder to capture the flag while trying to eliminate assets. I enjoy it a lot honestly, and I'm most of the times SLing.

[[R-DEV]​mectus11]

Originally Posted by FlyingR

I think desert maps (or all heavy asset maps for that matter) are very fun for infantry. Having heavy assets in the map makes it even more challenging for inf squads, makes SLs work harder to capture the flag while trying to eliminate assets. I enjoy it a lot honestly, and I'm most of the times SLing.

Next thing you'll be telling me how maps like Bijar are fun for infantry, they're not, they're the worst to play Infantry as.

If your CAS on your team is shit then you're going to lose your ground assets and then the enemy team will steamroll your team and the infantry will end up dying over and over. Dying over and over is not fun for anyone.

This is not organized play like the PR Tournament for it to be fun for Infantry, pubbing means you'll get fucked if you end up on the team with the worse asset players.

Our process on A94 is to go 2k -> 2k -> 4k -> 2k -> 2k -> 4k and over and over. As Casualty pointed out from his quality post that we tend to favour maps that are the best for infantry play for the regulars and new players.

We usually debate map choices on Teamspeak and then pick a map or two that players suggested but if you check !history and if a map like Khami or Kashan was played it will not be put in the vote for a while until it's 4k's turn again.

That is our process and we stick with it since it benefits players, you get to experience assets and infantry play.

[FlyingR]

Originally Posted by mectus11

Next thing you'll be telling me how maps like Bijar are fun for infantry, they're not, they're the worst to play Infantry as.

We actually played Bijar today in A94 as inf (SL) and it was pretty fun. I do like Bijar as inf, for me it's honestly fun to play 4x4km AAS maps (with or without assets).

If you play it right and know what's your role in the game and play accordingly then it works. You also have to basically assume that asset squads suck so have to find a way to rely on your squad and yourself. You guys underestimate the ability of inf countering heavy assets (especially with well placed FOBs).

As for maps, today there was a map vote, I think during Bijar if I'm not mistaken where it was Goose Green, Beirut and some other (Iron Ridge?). Guess which one won? Beirut of course... My only problem with this and like I said above is that map selecting is a bit bias, in the way that there's always one popular map which will get all the votes meaning that maps like Goose Green, Iron Ridge, etc. will not be played.

A suggestion:

A suggestion could be that you could select the most unpopular mapvotes selection at the same time (Shijia, Falklands, Ghost Train, Hades Peak, Pavlosk, etc.) while putting the most popular maps at the same time (Kashan, Silent Eagle, Wanda Shan, Beirut, etc.)

[QuickLoad]

used to admin for FCV and personally did:

1. asks for suggestions

1-2 map votes that were suggested, khami dragonfly
1 map vote that isn't usually played, assault on mestia

i don't admin anymore cause no time, but I can say that the new system(auto map switch) is less biased although has the issue of ..

0. falluja
1. burning sands
2. kokan

lets just say that's the map vote in example.

people play on falluja, then map switch to burning sands crashes

then everyones back on fallujah, and they have to play burning sands again, then mapswitch to kokan crashes

and then they have to do fallujah, sands, AND kokan.
so admins are generally better, but they have to be vigilant in variety

[[R-MOD]FFG]

Currently for FCV, I'm generally the person who picks the maps.

When deciding the map, I look at the maps played recently
- Factions
- Setting
- Mode
- Play style
- Map size and scope

Then look at the capability of the teams
- Do we have a lot of clans on
- Do we have enough pub squad leaders
- Would this team be good for X gamemode or Y flag situation
- How balanced are the teams (Would this team be better of on a hard blufor map) etc

then pick a map based off the outcome from that. I do generally ask for map suggestions, but its mainly to get an idea of what kinda maps people wanna play.

[QuickLoad]

Originally Posted by FFG

Currently for FCV, I'm generally the person who picks the maps.

When deciding the map, I look at the maps played recently
- Factions
- Setting
- Mode
- Play style
- Map size and scope

Then look at the capability of the teams
- Do we have a lot of clans on
- Do we have enough pub squad leaders
- Would this team be good for X gamemode or Y flag situation
- How balanced are the teams (Would this team be better of on a hard blufor map) etc

then pick a map based off the outcome from that. I do generally ask for map suggestions, but its mainly to get an idea of what kinda maps people wanna play.

<3 ur style, stay true

[Tommygun]

Those of you who suggest there is a lack of variety in maps played, I presume you have all downloaded the new map pack? If I have my way I would see them in every servers map list and too bad if you've not downloaded it, you will just get dropped.
I'm all up for map votes but looking at this thread you can see why some servers might not want implement them.
As an aside, I ALWAYS play inf (too scared of wasting assets (high ping) and other players are just plain better at this stage) and I don't care what map I play. I just love PR.
Sadly, you cant please all the people all the time....

[Raklodder]

I don't care what map the admin(s) end up choosing as long as it's insurgency.