84 posts? What's going on?
Can't be arsed to read them all :x

i like it, especially without antilag :P.

The votes realy surprise me. I dont think i have talked to anyone i know who likes cmt4.

I guess all individual votes won't be worth equally with clan votes, but I think if one clan has 15 members then they will probably have a couple that will only play 1-2 maps, and then a couple who won't play any maps at all. And I think those votes shouldn't be worth as much as someone who plays every map through out the entire season.

althou.. I am pretty sure I have a couple of times seen 5 TVS players spamming me at the same time!

it is probably also alot easier to manage a clan-poll rather than a player-poll.

ye sure but the problem would be that
if lets say we have 3 clans with 4 members that all vote tb3, and then 1 clan with 13 members go and vote tb5.
Even thou the majority of the players want it, I still think 3 clans is worth more than 1 clan. Because every clan get the same amount of "playing-hours", cause you can't field more than 4 players.

I'm no big fan of any CMT map to be honest. But if I have to choose one map that i think is decent enough for 4on4 is CMT3, unfortunately not chosen into the map pool. (CMT4 is just horrible in my opinion, and cmt1b is far better than cmt4, even if i don't think its very suitable for different reasons.)

Biggest reason for disliking CMT4 is that it feels like the map is in another scale than other maps. It's like taking dm3 and double it in scale while players stay unchanged. Don't know how to explain it better.

In my opinion, CMT4's biggest flaw is the huge potential reward from getting lucky by dropping on RA as it spawns; Something which happens a significant number of times each game. If anyone doesn't believe me, next time you see someone practicing cmt4, set up a spec cam in the water and count the number of hilarious, unavoidable steals done by some oblivious spawner jumping blindly into the water.

It doesn't matter how well you are timing it, and what weapons you are carrying. Even if you are on the RA every time it spawns, qw's flawed pickup system means that someone can just drop in on you (perhaps after grabbing that usefully located sng next to the high spawn, or the ssg near the tele spawn), take the RA through the wonder of cruelly arbitrary packet priority, then rape you right in the face with their newly acquired stack.

How do you stop them from taking the next lg and making their way to quad where they will be at an advantage? Jump in the water after them? If it's early enough, maybe they'll even take the mega too, and there's no chance they're going to run out of cells with 57 of them dotting the map. It's too much power given to someone who just got lucky.

Perhaps this map worked better in the past when everyone had terrible connections, terrible lg aim and no antilag, but I think its time has passed.

I agree with Mr Astley, RA discharge on cmt4 isn’t necessarily a flaw, it just requires a change in mentality from what we are used to (of tb3, only dm3 has LG and there is no line of sight from water to armours there). We are so ingrained into thinking that QW 4on4 = tb3 that anything a bit different makes us wary especially when it comes to ‘tricks’ we can perform.

Yesterday in prac I got discharged at RA when I had RL and Quad, but I didn’t think ‘man this map is flawed’, I thought OK so I need to play a little differently, the traditional tb3 tactic of ‘armour is spawning now I will go and grab it’ maybe needs a little rethink. It’s a risk that you need to weigh up or take some kind of precautions about. Like on dm3, over the years players have got much smarter, you don’t see players with quad blindly bunny jumping across high bridge looking over the edge etc. They have adapted to the risk of being discharged and over time the same should happen with regards to water on cmt4 (and any other map with LG and fluids).

Just because something in a map design is annoying, doesn’t make it a bad feature / map. Otherwise why in god’s name are we still playing dm2?

I am not for clan votes. Consider having 2 clans with 5 members. Let's say that in both clans there are 2 members that want custom maps. That's 40% of players. With clan votes it would seem that 0% want custom maps. Also we can not presume that all clans would follow democratic principles. What if the clan leader wants tb3 and everyone else customs?

However I agree with the divisional voting. It doesn't make sense that people who understand nothing about tdm mechanics and gameplay dictate what maps those who do have to play.

Im more for clanvotes instead of individual votes, and also divided by division.
Feels strange if a clear majority of one division want/dont want extra maps and are forced to play an option voted by the other divisions.

And if some reader is now wondering what the hell are we talking about, you can voice your opinion here: http://www.doodle.com/qckphwwun5mm48ss

Go vote, the more the better.

Johnny_cz is not interested in any findings that opposes his opinion that we need more maps.

I think blAze should have cred for creating that poll. If you want to create your own poll JohnNy_cz go ahead. Post it on quakeworld.nu or somewhere similar if you now think that would change the outcome. If you want to tell your friends about blAze poll because that would change the result, then do so.

I think most of the community already knows about it considering how many people that were following the comments in that thread, and due to the several times blAze spammed about it on IRC. I think the results of the poll should be taken very seriously until someone comes up with a better way to gather peoples opinions.

Rikoll: Yes, you can "buy" me. Just pay me a decent salary and I will be all yours :(

I never really had a problem with discharges in cmt4.

#66 I have announced the poll with .qw bot many times. I have not done any personal promotion besides telling guys to vote at tvs private which would amount to 5 votes.

I think the sample size is more than acceptable for a poll.

Certainly it's hard to accept criticizm from a guy who references a poll where people who are not even playing can vote or people can vote as many times as they bother to create accounts and which is formed in a way that doesn't even clearly answer the question.

dm3 has the same 'flaw' in as much as discharging is easy.. problem with discharging is it can fuck up your team mates as well as enemy! so there is still an element of tactics and team play required.

#55: LOL, you base that on your doodle thing that you pasted as comment no. ~150 in a ~500 comments page? So we are now going to argue with statistics based on poll that is unknown to vast majority of people who are supposed to vote, vote that you give only to people you know will vote in favor of your option? Please, I believe you have higher standards :)

Or just hope nmy team wont pick the map.

Throw grenades in both corridors before jumping into water :D

You are very cute, Hagge!

How much does a Hagge cost you reckon? Can I buy one?

Just let me play with wallhack and I can play them map :) I do see your point, but I do still think it's a flaw making the map much less fun to play. However, I will give it a try and see what creative thinking I can come up with.

I actually topfragged in yesterdays prac, so maybe the map was actually made for me? :) Can't help having the feeling that this would be like having RA in water at dm3 though..

What you think is a flaw, is what some others might think of as a strength. If I get LG, want red armor and some stupid fuck with RL jumps in and wants to take a bath with me, what does he expect me to do? Shoot sg vs his RL in an underwater corridor that is tighter than his own ass? Preferences in different map layouts are more often than not just a matter of taste.

What you think is a flaw on this map, is to me something that encourages creative thinking and using different tactics to approach an situation, and thereby might even be a positive thing :-)

Im a big fan of discharging enemies but even i understand that on cmt4 you are supposed to: get ra -> get lg -> povdmm4 for quad -> own all enemies with infinite amount of quadcells -> repeat for next quad. (every now and then there is a pent which requires some teamplay)

Of course I'm no expert on the map, but you do have to admit that it has flaws? Obviously it's important to take ra, but how would you deal with discharging nmys? It takes a lot of time to time the lg and make sure it stays in the team all the time due to the fact that it takes a bit of time getting to the lg, no?

What it seems hagge is that you don't know how to play the map. ;)

Actually there is less to no flaws with the alternative suggestions hangtime proposted.
It is just beyond me why the admins chose this election method in the first place. I guess they did not wanna bother coding an option for ppl to vote in a proper manner suited for chosing 2 extra maps.

Maybe they are also tired of the map discussion and just dont care to put more time/effort into that part of this project.

We pracced cmt4 yesterday. Seems like it only has one clear strategy. Take lg > go to ra > discharge nmy rls. Gr8 map guys!

Well, since it seems that 64% of players don't even want additional maps at all, if the admins have any sense this will be the last 5 map 4on4 tournament anyway. So from that perspective it doesn't really matter which maps we play for the one last time.

'"You talked to 3 clans that... blabla" Lol they must be the biggest idiots voting 'strategically' and then getting it back in the face when their map is not included.'

I neither condone nor condemn their actions. My statement was only to illustrate one of the many inherent flaws in the poll. "Idiots" or not, it is still a flaw of the poll, and the poll alone, that this was allowed to happen.


"talked to at least 3 clans: so now you bring this strong anecdotal evidence to the table?"

Anecdotal evidence indeed, but of a large enough sample size that it does in fact change the result of the poll, making it a perfectly acceptable comment to make. Two of those clans voted for cmt1b, even though it was their second choice, and one, at the time, said they were voting for schloss.

Just this one tiny alteration to the poll and already we have a new top two maps: cmt3 and cmt4 tied for 1st place on 11 votes, while cmt1b slips out with 10.

You accuse me of selfishness, and obviously I do want what I think is best for quakeworld to happen, but I did not ask for my word to be law. I did not say "give me the maps I want and fuck everyone else". Sure, I lobbied for a map I think is important, but I didn't say "put cmt3 in"; I asked for a more accurate version of the poll.

If you are going to choose maps based on popular opinion, then you should at least try to do it correctly.

"HangTime, I understand that it has flaws, as does ANY type of thing you come up with to decide this issue."

It doesn't just "have flaws", this might be the poll with the least potential for accuracy I have ever seen.

It's one step away from being a lottery, and excuse me if I don't think that's a good enough system to decide the only custom maps we will see for a whole year.

Regardless of my opinion on any map, the poll was conducted in terrible fashion. Whoever made it has no concept of the psychology of polls, or of basic statistics, thus this poll is entirely unsuitable as a tool to determine popular opinion.

And this isn't just me complaining because a map I like didn't get in. In fact, my favourite custom map (cmt1b) did get in, and finished top of the poll, which seems a rather questionable event in itself. By asking for a second round of voting, I put this in jeopardy. My complaints are not for personal gain.

I have been complaining about this poll since it started. Go read the first few posts of the front page signup news on quakeworld.nu to see the arguments.

Instead of addressing any concerns, the response was "But lets be honest, what ever approach we decide on, someone will find a way to hammer it." which seems to be "we can't please everyone, so we're not going to please anyone" and I don't find that acceptable.

Hooraytio: I mean those CMT maps what has been selected on EQL/NQR before. ;)

HangTime, I understand that it has flaws, as does ANY type of thing you come up with to decide this issue. I just disagree with the way some people are raising hell about almost everything and they don't seem to stop until they get what they want.

"When electing a parliament for example, we don't give as many votes as there are seats to fill, we vote one option that is best for us."

Voting for parliament is a whole different way more complicated problem, including parties, party alliances, emphasis on different areas etc. It's also bound by limitations that we do not have in QW due to smaller vote and it being virtual and all. No-one thinks the system for electing parliament is perfect, it's just something that kind of works in practice. And obviously different countries have different system with their stronger and weaker points. Not to mention that the point of the election is to elect representatives for different viewpoints, and is thus nothing like the map vote.

The problem about not being able to vote for underdogs is also obviously well known in the elections. In the Finnish parliament election it's supposed to be alleviated by having the vote go the party. Party gets X number of seats and then those seats are filled with the highest vote counts within the party. Similarly in the presidential election a two round system is used, so even if your choice doesn't make the cut, you can still choose between the top two candidates. Only reason there are two rounds instead of even more is the cost and time that would be required.

I just can't see how this one map vote could possibly yield better results, when compared to a two map vote or to different iterative voting systems (2 or more rounds).

"Yes it does, because people could vote on the maps they like most."

No, it really doesn’t because the voting system is fundamentally flawed for a situation where you want to choose the two best maps. Example:

Let’s say of the 39 clans, 38 voted cmt4 and 1 voted cmt1b. CMT1b is then allegedly the second most popular map. However, the reality may be that the 38 clans who voted cmt4 might all actually prefer to play e2m2tdm than cmt1b. So of the 39 clans, 38 of them are unhappy with the second map in the pool. You get a map in the pool that only 1 clan has any interest in playing.

When you need to choose two things, having 1 single vote only is inherently bad. You need to either use an elimination voting system (iterative voting over multiple rounds where the least popular map is eliminated after each round and then votes recast), or adopt a point scaling system or similar. You need to understand that these arguments have nothing to do with maps or even computer games (so whining about cmt3-lover Stev is completely irrelevant), they are just implicit in voting systems. For example, the elimination system is typically used for electing political party leaders here and works well.

give us cmt3 :E

"all cmt maps" include cmt5b and cmt2 as well

I like both of them. Be all cmt maps selectable! Why is this not possible? Both had been choosen on many competitions. This is certainly favor, in contrast to the E2M2TDM.

Let the map pool TB3+CMT1b+CMT3+CMT4 be! oo/

@rkd
ask your CL rkd :P

This might be a bit late and offtopic but I am totally clueless to where this clanvote for maps was. I've been looking like crazy to find a thread on qw.nu, forums and EQL site where the clans cast their votes on a map but haven't found anything.
So where did the clans vote? :D

"The poll simply doesn't answer the question what two extra maps would the clans participating in EQL most want to play on."

Yes it does, because people could vote on the maps they like most.

When electing a parliament for example, we dont give as many votes as there are seats to fill, we vote one option that is best for us. 2 map vote would be just as skewed, people will vote what they think others dislike or are bad at, not where they think we would have the best games.

man, they are commenting everywhere, and keep pushing their propaganda. It is so irritating, even if i agree with the last comments of their.

I don't look upon Stev and Medars comments as whine. More like tips on how to improve the poll at an eventual later tourney. Cause clearly, when two maps are gonna be added to the pool, each participating team should have two votes for two different maps to make the poll fair, yes?

How long will you continue to whine? Till cmt1b and cmt3 will be in a map pool? You wont get too many fans with this attitude, be a man, do some real life business, dont be gay at all.

Yes, and all the credits and big thanks to the admins for running it :)
I know this feeling as I ran the Kurwaliga one year ago. Tough as it may be. Thanks again guys !!

Dont tell Johnny_cz that you base your opinions on what you hear and see on the servers though, according to him thats total crap and everything must be backed up with diagrams constructed from a very serious statistical material...

I'm quite disappointed about the bizarre way the map selection was done, and especially about how late the map pool was decided. But what is done is done. Hopefully we can overcome these mishaps and have a good season anyway.

Then maybe in the future we can learn from this, and get the map pool sorted out at the end of the previous EQL giving people the opportunity to practice before the season starts.

In any case I'm happy that there are people who still are willing to run leagues even amongst all the drama. :) So props to them.