logo

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:39 am 
The One True Sith Lord
The One True Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 2026
Location: Nixa,Missouri
Ok so we have the discussion going about the Rebels at 150. A lot has been made of the maps.


So I am asking is the game (via power creep and overall design) leaving the 150 format behind? Sometimes it really seems they are designing towards 200 points being the ideal level to run things. SO what do you think is 200 where you see the future championships?

Would restricting the 150 level maps down to just proven maps and fair and very balanced maps help keep the game at 150. Maybe a list of like 7 maps.

I was thinking what if at 100 all maps (besides the Endor Bunker and Plains of Hoth -ATAT maps) were legal for that format.

At 150 you have a list of like 7 of the best maps. This list can grow but only thru a lot of playtesting and I mean a lot.


At 200 well you kind are where we are right now. Would that be a better way to go? Or are things just peachy right now and you dont want to see any changes?

_________________
ImageImage
"What is your bidding, My Master?"

Collection: 934/934

SWM DCI Content Manager


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:47 am 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 2:46 pm
Posts: 7960
Location: West Chester, OH (near Cincinnati)
Nah, for the general DCI rules, leave things the way they are. All 'legal' maps are OK for 100 and 150 points, and Huge Friendly only for 200 points. If there's a concern regarding the high-end competitive play, then restrict the map lists for those specific events. May require a separate note in the Floor Rules to do that perhaps. Maybe make a distinction between maps for general 150 point play, and then have a separate section for something like "Legal maps for Star Wars Miniatures Championship and Championship Series Regional events" and then list the smaller list of 7-8 maps.

_________________
-Aaron
Mand'alor
"You either die a hero, or you live to see yourself become the villain."
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:05 am 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:08 pm
Posts: 8394
dnemiller wrote:
Would restricting the 150 level maps down to just proven maps and fair and very balanced maps help keep the game at 150. Maybe a list of like 7 maps.


Define "fair and very balanced." I've discovered recently that some people's ideas of what that means may be different than others. Take away Taris and Teth, what happens to Luke's Snowspeeder? I don't think the presence (or absence) should negatively impact the possibility of a figure or map being played.

7 maps? Do you mean:
Death Star
Muunilist
Chancellor's Starship
Ravaged Base
Jedi Temple
Train Station
Rancor Pen

Note that I left the hardboard off the list. It would solve some of the confusion issues with Gambit if it is not legal.
I think there is room for Cloud Clty, Hoth Outpost, Mos Eisley and probably a couple more...


Quote:
I was thinking what if at 100 all maps (besides the Endor Bunker and Plains of Hoth -ATAT maps) were legal for that format.


This is a bad idea. Korriban, Mustafar, Ossus, and Genonosis should never be legal at any level. Each of them have their own specific problems.

Quote:
At 150 you have a list of like 7 of the best maps. This list can grow but only thru a lot of playtesting and I mean a lot.


At 200 well you kind are where we are right now. Would that be a better way to go? Or are things just peachy right now and you dont want to see any changes?


Really these are not completely fair questions. We are trying to collect suggestions based on what is known today. We're about to get another 40-piece set, and are expecting a second set to hit before the floor rules get updated again. A lot can change in nine months. I guess what I'm saying is that the people who make the product need to be the ones who make the decisions because they know stuff that no one else does.

If you had asked me three years ago if I liked Ossus, I might have said, "Sure, it's okay. Getting to gambit is tricky."
But then factor in Force Push 4 and Greater Mobile Attack, and watch that opinion take a 180.

_________________
Click here to check out all the people who have realized the truth. Someday you will, too.

"I would really, really like to not have anything else happen at the end of the round other than things just ending." -- Sithborg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:19 am 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
To me it does look like the game is migrating closer to 200pts than it is to 150. Personally, I've always preferred 200pts anyway. And right now, the meta is FAR more open at 200 than it is at 150. :P However, with the time-limit issues, I can see why people are hesitant to have 200pts as the official DCI Championship level.

150pts is fine for the official Championship level if it stays there, but in that case I strongly think that we need a restricted map list. I dislike the strategy of running figs into gambit at the end of a round, and then hoping to win init so I can run them to safety again. But with some of the maps we have now, that's the only viable way of scoring points without eating a heavy barrage of damage. A restricted map list won't solve all the problems of the competitive game, but it will help a lot.

EDIT: Basically, by "restricted map list" I mean removing any Mustafar-copy-cats. No more wide-open gambit. No more maps that favor turtling. No more maps that make either shooters or melee un-playable. Every map will give a degree of benefit to one or another type of squad, but no map should entirely nerf any squad type. If by "restricted map list" you mean a list of maps that excludes the Mustafar-copy-cats, then yes, I am 100% in favor of a Restricted Map List...whether it has 7 or 15 maps.

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Last edited by thereisnotry on Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Boris posted at the same time as me; the edit takes into account what he wrote.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:33 am 
General
General

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:15 pm
Posts: 482
Location: Redmond, WA
I don't know if 200 still needs a different map list than the other levels.

Thanks to the new(ish) setup rules for Huges (definining within 4 of edge), and the fact that you get to pick side if you lose map, are there any maps that aren't huge friendly anymore?

There are a few maps that are not Rigid Huge friendly, even with the different set up rules. But I don't think it would really disrupt the game much to make it so Rigid is ignored in Constructed like it is in Sealed. It's still there on the card for theme games and scenario play. I think Rigid is fine as a gameplay concept, but there were too many maps that were designed before Huges (Death Star, Bespin, Mos Eisley, CS Muunlist, and Coruscant) that just don't work well with Rigid. I say toss Rigid, rather than the maps.

Huges are an unpopular relic of a different era (except, of course Luke's Snowspeeder), and I don't think it makes sense to limit the map list for 200 points just for them.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:00 pm 
The One True Sith Lord
The One True Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 2026
Location: Nixa,Missouri
Grand Moff Boris wrote:
dnemiller wrote:
Would restricting the 150 level maps down to just proven maps and fair and very balanced maps help keep the game at 150. Maybe a list of like 7 maps.


Define "fair and very balanced." I've discovered recently that some people's ideas of what that means may be different than others. Take away Taris and Teth, what happens to Luke's Snowspeeder? I don't think the presence (or absence) should negatively impact the possibility of a figure or map being played.

7 maps? Do you mean:
Death Star
Muunilist
Chancellor's Starship
Ravaged Base
Jedi Temple
Train Station
Rancor Pen

Note that I left the hardboard off the list. It would solve some of the confusion issues with Gambit if it is not legal.
I think there is room for Cloud Clty, Hoth Outpost, Mos Eisley and probably a couple more...


Quote:
I was thinking what if at 100 all maps (besides the Endor Bunker and Plains of Hoth -ATAT maps) were legal for that format.


This is a bad idea. Korriban, Mustafar, Ossus, and Genonosis should never be legal at any level. Each of them have their own specific problems.

Quote:
At 150 you have a list of like 7 of the best maps. This list can grow but only thru a lot of playtesting and I mean a lot.


At 200 well you kind are where we are right now. Would that be a better way to go? Or are things just peachy right now and you dont want to see any changes?


Really these are not completely fair questions. We are trying to collect suggestions based on what is known today. We're about to get another 40-piece set, and are expecting a second set to hit before the floor rules get updated again. A lot can change in nine months. I guess what I'm saying is that the people who make the product need to be the ones who make the decisions because they know stuff that no one else does.

If you had asked me three years ago if I liked Ossus, I might have said, "Sure, it's okay. Getting to gambit is tricky."
But then factor in Force Push 4 and Greater Mobile Attack, and watch that opinion take a 180.



OMG are you really going with the these are not fair questions route? I am just asking some questions for general discussion. I am no means trying to trick you into an answer by loading the question (trust me I did plenty of that in law enforcement and use now as a parent). I am just throwing some thoughts out there. The game seems more geared towards 200 now but everyone talks about time constraints at 200. So I am asking should we make a like new format call it the championship format where the maps are restricted to keep things from not being crazy at 150?

Just a friendly discussion Dennis there are no loaded and unfair questions here.

_________________
ImageImage
"What is your bidding, My Master?"

Collection: 934/934

SWM DCI Content Manager


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:03 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:08 pm
Posts: 8394
Chill. :)

I'm sure you didn't intend the questions as "loaded" or "unfair," I'm just offering a friendly reminder that what seems like a good decision today may not be a good decision tomorrow.

That advice wasn't so much for you as it was for everyone else.

_________________
Click here to check out all the people who have realized the truth. Someday you will, too.

"I would really, really like to not have anything else happen at the end of the round other than things just ending." -- Sithborg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:13 pm 
The One True Sith Lord
The One True Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 2026
Location: Nixa,Missouri
well I all for a long term discussions. Sometimes I think we dont have enough on them other times I think we draw them out too far.

I think though SWM is at kind of a crossroads. We need to either nail down 150 as the championship point level by giving it some help (something like a restricted map list or anything else that is better I by no means have the answers) or we need to prepare for the fact the game is marching towards 200 and we might as well accept it. In fact I am to the point I believe with the current power creep that at some point 250 points will be where the game is aimed at (if it lives that long). We had a pass of craziness for several years but here in the last year and a half things seem to be spiraling towards more points for balanced gameplay. But that is just my opinion

_________________
ImageImage
"What is your bidding, My Master?"

Collection: 934/934

SWM DCI Content Manager


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:20 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:08 pm
Posts: 8394
dnemiller wrote:
well I all for a long term discussions.


Sure, I can agree with this, as long as its understood that any discussion among the community about the map lists takes into account the fact that the design team is working a year ahead of us. :)

Quote:
Sometimes I think we dont have enough on them other times I think we draw them out too far.


Again I agree.

Quote:
I think though SWM is at kind of a crossroads. We need to either nail down 150 as the championship point level by giving it some help (something like a restricted map list or anything else that is better I by no means have the answers) or we need to prepare for the fact the game is marching towards 200 and we might as well accept it. In fact I am to the point I believe with the current power creep that at some point 250 points will be where the game is aimed at (if it lives that long). We had a pass of craziness for several years but here in the last year and a half things seem to be spiraling towards more points for balanced gameplay. But that is just my opinion


IMO 150 should never have been implemented. I have long pushed for 200 pts. to be the championship level. If time is an issue, one solution is to increase Gambit to 10 pts. instead of 5 to speed it up. Another would be to limit the number of characters that can be fielded, and then errata Swarm and Gang and such abilities to break that number limit.

_________________
Click here to check out all the people who have realized the truth. Someday you will, too.

"I would really, really like to not have anything else happen at the end of the round other than things just ending." -- Sithborg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:23 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:08 pm
Posts: 8394
Grand Moff Boris wrote:
dnemiller wrote:
well I all for a long term discussions.


Sure, I can agree with this, as long as its understood that any discussion among the community about the map lists takes into account the fact that the design team is working a year ahead of us. :)

Quote:
Sometimes I think we dont have enough on them other times I think we draw them out too far.


Again I agree.

Quote:
I think though SWM is at kind of a crossroads. We need to either nail down 150 as the championship point level by giving it some help (something like a restricted map list or anything else that is better I by no means have the answers) or we need to prepare for the fact the game is marching towards 200 and we might as well accept it. In fact I am to the point I believe with the current power creep that at some point 250 points will be where the game is aimed at (if it lives that long). We had a pass of craziness for several years but here in the last year and a half things seem to be spiraling towards more points for balanced gameplay. But that is just my opinion


IMO 150 should never have been implemented. I have long pushed for 200 pts. to be the championship level. If time is an issue, one solution is to increase Gambit to 10 pts. instead of 5 to speed it up. Another would be to limit the number of characters that can be fielded, and then errata Swarm and Gang and such abilities to break that number limit.


I will never play a sanctioned skirmish game at 250 pts. under the current restrictions. You would almost certainly have to increase the time limit.

Lately, I've been thinking the goal is to move the game back to 100 pts. with some of the stuff that has come out. There is absolutely a design pattern built into the last set to specifically aim certain pieces at specific point levels.

_________________
Click here to check out all the people who have realized the truth. Someday you will, too.

"I would really, really like to not have anything else happen at the end of the round other than things just ending." -- Sithborg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:43 pm 
The One True Sith Lord
The One True Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 2026
Location: Nixa,Missouri
Grand Moff Boris wrote:
Grand Moff Boris wrote:
dnemiller wrote:
well I all for a long term discussions.


Sure, I can agree with this, as long as its understood that any discussion among the community about the map lists takes into account the fact that the design team is working a year ahead of us. :)

Quote:
Sometimes I think we dont have enough on them other times I think we draw them out too far.


Again I agree.

Quote:
I think though SWM is at kind of a crossroads. We need to either nail down 150 as the championship point level by giving it some help (something like a restricted map list or anything else that is better I by no means have the answers) or we need to prepare for the fact the game is marching towards 200 and we might as well accept it. In fact I am to the point I believe with the current power creep that at some point 250 points will be where the game is aimed at (if it lives that long). We had a pass of craziness for several years but here in the last year and a half things seem to be spiraling towards more points for balanced gameplay. But that is just my opinion


IMO 150 should never have been implemented. I have long pushed for 200 pts. to be the championship level. If time is an issue, one solution is to increase Gambit to 10 pts. instead of 5 to speed it up. Another would be to limit the number of characters that can be fielded, and then errata Swarm and Gang and such abilities to break that number limit.


I will never play a sanctioned skirmish game at 250 pts. under the current restrictions. You would almost certainly have to increase the time limit.

Lately, I've been thinking the goal is to move the game back to 100 pts. with some of the stuff that has come out. There is absolutely a design pattern built into the last set to specifically aim certain pieces at specific point levels.


Well 200 points is definately where the most fun in the game resides right now. I guess 150 was fun a couple a years ago but I think that boat has left port.

I guess your 100 point example would not be Luke GM? LOL

I kind of agree 150 has always seemed like a hybrid point level. In gun terms 150 is the 40 caliber. 9 mm would be the 100 (fun but not gonna kill anyone). 45 caliber is 200 all the knock down power you will ever need. Just like the 40 caliber 150 sometimes just doesnt feel right. Now with our new gatekeeper squad it just feels that way even worse.

_________________
ImageImage
"What is your bidding, My Master?"

Collection: 934/934

SWM DCI Content Manager


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:28 pm 
Hall of Fame Member
Hall of Fame Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 7:22 pm
Posts: 4982
The answer to this question is dependant on how you envisage the game being played.

Restrict maps in one direction too much and you force gameplay in that direction.
Have everything in closed gambit and close confines and you push it to melee, open gambit even on one map and you support non-melee teams.

The game is well developed and has always favoured shooters.

So i guess the question is

What are you trying to do by restricting the map list?

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:56 pm 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
fingersandteeth wrote:
The answer to this question is dependant on how you envisage the game being played.

Restrict maps in one direction too much and you force gameplay in that direction.
Have everything in closed gambit and close confines and you push it to melee, open gambit even on one map and you support non-melee teams.

The game is well developed and has always favoured shooters.


Good post, and good point.

fingersandteeth wrote:
So i guess the question is

What are you trying to do by restricting the map list?


I can't speak for Dean, but the reason I want a restricted map list is so that melee squads and pieces will no longer be almost entirely nerfed by losing a single die roll.

Right now, I think this is true:
Open maplist = restricted meta
Restricted maplist = open (or more open) meta

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:01 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:08 pm
Posts: 8394
thereisnotry wrote:
I can't speak for Dean, but the reason I want a restricted map list is so that melee squads and pieces will no longer be almost entirely nerfed by losing a single die roll.


I agree with this statement, but as my friend Jason pointed out to me when talking about this issue at the store on Saturday, taking away ALL the maps that make Luke's Snowspeeder top-notch nerfs it just as much as the current list affects melee.

Sometimes you just have to play the hand you're dealt. In a perfect world, the map roll would have a greater impact than it does now. At least now, there is still a chance to win the die roll and throw down Muunilist.

_________________
Click here to check out all the people who have realized the truth. Someday you will, too.

"I would really, really like to not have anything else happen at the end of the round other than things just ending." -- Sithborg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:11 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 2:46 pm
Posts: 7960
Location: West Chester, OH (near Cincinnati)
Well, but would you rather have one piece (Luke's Snowspeeder) or a whole host of other pieces (melee)? In addition, it isn't clear to me that the Snowspeeder would be completely knocked out of running with these wide-open maps. We had known of those maps (with the exception of Starship) at last year's GenCon, and the Snowspeeder still did very well. TINT beat me on Bespin with his SS squad 2 weeks ago. It's not AS powerful on many of the other maps, but that doesn't mean it gets completely knocked out of the meta altogether.

_________________
-Aaron
Mand'alor
"You either die a hero, or you live to see yourself become the villain."
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:15 pm 
The One True Sith Lord
The One True Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 2026
Location: Nixa,Missouri
yes and the chncellors throne room has always been good to the speeder without totally crushing melee.

_________________
ImageImage
"What is your bidding, My Master?"

Collection: 934/934

SWM DCI Content Manager


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:25 pm 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
Grand Moff Boris wrote:
I agree with this statement, but as my friend Jason pointed out to me when talking about this issue at the store on Saturday, taking away ALL the maps that make Luke's Snowspeeder top-notch nerfs it just as much as the current list affects melee.


I'm not sure that the SS can be nerfed quite so easily. I had a really easy time using it on Muun Grand Plaza (the CS version) the other day. It works fine on Bespin too, when you're careful with your placement. The thing hurting the meta right now is that the SS dominates on a number of maps, and can still be very effective on the rest of them. I just want to restrict those maps which are dominated by the SS, because the presence and prevalence of those maps makes it very difficult for many other squads to compete.

If we restrict the maplist, the Smuggler Cannon is no longer the gatekeeper at 150. It's solid, but it's by no means the gatekeeper anymore. And even if the SS was nerfed on some maps (again, I'm not saying it would be), that would still be a good trade, if it allowed literally dozens of other pieces to be played competitively.

Grand Moff Boris wrote:
Sometimes you just have to play the hand you're dealt. In a perfect world, the map roll would have a greater impact than it does now. At least now, there is still a chance to win the die roll and throw down Muunilist.


I agree that you have to play with the hand you're dealt. Gaming is a microcosm of life in general: whiners and poor sports who give up too easily seldom do well at either. And part of playing the hand you're dealt is picking a squad that can do well on all the maps. And, given the maplist we have right now at 150, playing with the hand you're dealt means using a squad that does well (or can at least compete) on maps with wide-open gambit and long shooting lanes with little space to hide.

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 3:04 pm 
Hall of Fame Member
Hall of Fame Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 7:22 pm
Posts: 4982
thereisnotry wrote:

fingersandteeth wrote:
So i guess the question is

What are you trying to do by restricting the map list?


I can't speak for Dean, but the reason I want a restricted map list is so that melee squads and pieces will no longer be almost entirely nerfed by losing a single die roll.

Right now, I think this is true:
Open maplist = restricted meta
Restricted maplist = open (or more open) meta


Ok so the goal of the map restriction is to make more figures applicable.

So you start to restrict maps so melee stand more of a chance.

Say you pick Boris' map list
Death Star
Muunilist
Chancellor's Starship
Ravaged Base
Jedi Temple
Train Station
Rancor Pen

With this map list do we know what will rise to the top? Are you going to 'solve' the meta for everyone before you restrict the map list?
Or are you going to pick maps based on the qualities of the maps (closed off gambit, safe starting squares, doors) and let the stics fall where they will?

This notion of opening up the meta via map choice may be a fallacy. We are all presuming that it would open the game up but gamers always find a way to bias their own team. Gamers are a clever bunch, its why they chose these games and hobbies.
With the selection above i could well imagine the top squads being multi-override squads all picking train station. If you don't play on train station then you are fine but it becomes the same situation as now.
Win map and compete, lose map and see your percentage win rate drop dramatically.

Last years gen con has a restricted map list but Bill and Matt still found a strategy based around map choice that favoured their game plan.

So constanly messing with the map list is essentially trying to force players into a style of game that YOU think is best. A game that YOU think will be more open but it is easy to imagine that as the maps suppress one gamepstyle the other floats to the surface.

The question is then what maps make people play that way, how different is that from the way the game is designed to play and how will the game adapt later on.
Will it become stale with matches being vanilla style? or will there be enough variety for everyone to run their favorite pieces?
I don't think the latter case will ever be true.

At some point you have to just let the game play as it should be played and kind of let gamers get on with it.

Thinking about it, if variety is what people want then you just rotate maps every DCI update.

Select 4-7 for each format every time and then alter it the next update. At least then you can select maps of similar design and everyone will know that its to push melee or shooter style of play.

It will force players to adapt to a new meta each update that will essentially be random based on new fig releases and the shake up gives people a something to look forward to in future updates

eg "man this last map meta was way too shooty, i hope the pick ruined base, munnalinst, rancor, jedi temple for the next realease so I can wtfpwn people with JBMs"

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 5:32 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:08 pm
Posts: 8394
fingersandteeth wrote:
Ok so the goal of the map restriction is to make more figures applicable.

So you start to restrict maps so melee stand more of a chance.

Say you pick Boris' map list
Death Star
Muunilist
Chancellor's Starship
Ravaged Base
Jedi Temple
Train Station
Rancor Pen

With this map list do we know what will rise to the top? Are you going to 'solve' the meta for everyone before you restrict the map list?
Or are you going to pick maps based on the qualities of the maps (closed off gambit, safe starting squares, doors) and let the stics fall where they will?

This notion of opening up the meta via map choice may be a fallacy. We are all presuming that it would open the game up but gamers always find a way to bias their own team. Gamers are a clever bunch, its why they chose these games and hobbies.
With the selection above i could well imagine the top squads being multi-override squads all picking train station. If you don't play on train station then you are fine but it becomes the same situation as now.
Win map and compete, lose map and see your percentage win rate drop dramatically.


There's some logic to your comments, and they are on the same track as what I was trying to say earlier today. However, where that logic breaks down - for both of us - is what is the alternative? Rotating what is allowable from season to season is probably the strongest, fairest option, but I cringe at it.

Quote:
Last years gen con has a restricted map list but Bill and Matt still found a strategy based around map choice that favoured their game plan.


And Jim and I knew that could happen. The goal wasn't to restrict options, it was to make sure that the map choices were A) balanced for fairness and B)maps that were readily available to the larger community.

Quote:
So constanly messing with the map list is essentially trying to force players into a style of game that YOU think is best. A game that YOU think will be more open but it is easy to imagine that as the maps suppress one gamepstyle the other floats to the surface.

The question is then what maps make people play that way, how different is that from the way the game is designed to play and how will the game adapt later on.
Will it become stale with matches being vanilla style? or will there be enough variety for everyone to run their favorite pieces?
I don't think the latter case will ever be true.


This quoted portion touches on what I've been trying to say. Changing the map list, or what's on it, just doesn't solve the problem. The problem goes far beyond the map options. Imagine if the map list is radically altered to better favor melee and then we get a mid-cost Republic commander that grants Extra Attack and Greater Mobile Attack to Force-user follwers/allies. Then what?

Quote:
At some point you have to just let the game play as it should be played and kind of let gamers get on with it.
[/quote][/quote]

Yeah.

_________________
Click here to check out all the people who have realized the truth. Someday you will, too.

"I would really, really like to not have anything else happen at the end of the round other than things just ending." -- Sithborg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Should 150 have a restricted map list?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 7:27 pm 
Name Calling Internet Bully
Name Calling Internet Bully
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:10 pm
Posts: 6172
Location: Gurnee, IL
fingersandteeth wrote:
Last years gen con has a restricted map list but Bill and Matt still found a strategy based around map choice that favoured their game plan.


Number 1, Starship is probably off the list.

Number 2, I find it extremely suspect that you would compare our use of Starship with the use of Mustafar/Geonosis in 2007 and Taris/Teth in 2009.

Sorry, those two are not even in the same ball park of abuse. My biggest challenge (other than the mirror) came from playing against Matt Hanson with Loda on Starship. He obviously took the left, out activated me and can kill my speeder from 12 away. Loda on Starship left side, has significantly higher odds than Loda from either side of Teth.

There are degrees of abusiveness to any list. We know that. This is all you are saying. What you aren't recognizing is how much different they are from each other. Saying, "something always rises to the top" is of course true. We all agree already on that. It's nothing new. Who are you talking to with that? What's important is how much better is it than the next tier. In 2008, I had many tough opposing squads. I had many options that I considered running. In 2009, we are back to 2007 limits. I've got three squads, and their cooresponding maps to choose from. The degree of difference is everything.

_________________
Image

http://www.bloomilk.com/Squads/Search.aspx?UserID=29


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Jedi Knights style by Scott Stubblefield