Bayeux and Novgorod Outskirts ruin 1v1

The first batch of stats that came out had Bayeux being played very frequently. But now they say it is not being played? That seems a little suspicious. Hopefully there was not some weird server glitch.

Pretty sure that this is the trend I noticed in the past that I mentioned in the other thread: New maps typically start out relatively high and then decay over time until their pick rate ultimately stabilizes at some level.

Here, I produced a plot of map picks over time since the new maps have been introduced. What you see are four day averages of pick rates (like, how often a certain map got played with 4 days in percent). The numbers at the bottom, ("1256" and so on) indicate the day since an arbitrary date that I chose back when I did the map stats post.



Curves are pretty noisy even though averaged over four days, but you can clearly see the trends in Bayeux and Novgorod. You can see when Crossroads (Winter) comes in, obviously all other percentages take a hit then.

I have seen server issues before, but those typically produce abrupt jumps in these curve...

I am a newish player(playing around 4 months in automatch). I love the new maps it evens the playing field. I am for radical changes in the map pool, but AE is totally right. This is a great map pool

You will excuse me if I don't say much more, I have come to the conclusion long ago that it's really unnecessary, since feedback is rarely taken into consideration especially when it comes to maps, so it's just better to simply shout it out and have all the people that feel the same(a majority without a doubt regarding the trash that is Bayeux) shout it out as well.

This way we'll save time for everybody, at least if many people say it's bad, this way it will be taken into consideration.


But if you want solid facts you can look at rosbonne's stats.
This way we can bring back Karkov to 1v1, and have Crossroads removed from the pool.

But if you want solid facts you can look at rosbonne's stats.
This way we can bring back Karkov to 1v1, and have Crossroads removed from the pool.

Curves are pretty noisy even though averaged over four days, but you can clearly see the trends in Bayeux and Novgorod.

Awesome! Thanks for checking that out. Looks like a legit trend. I agree.

Karkov is the most played map 2v2, there was a time in 1v1 where they wouldn't remove it for a long time, for the same reason, using these stats claiming that it's still vastly played.

But if you want solid facts you can look at rosbonne's stats.
This way we can bring back Karkov to 1v1, and have Crossroads removed from the pool.

dear god why

You will excuse me if I don't say much more, I have come to the conclusion long ago that it's really unnecessary, since feedback is rarely taken into consideration especially when it comes to maps

I've provided detailed feedback and suggestions for a lot of 3v3 and 4v4 maps over the last year, and a lot of it was changed accordingly. Whiteflash hosted a mini-tourney last week for his new map and he was noting all remarks and suggestions that were brought up in the Twitch chat. Before that, there was a huge effort to gather feedback and suggestions on how to improve Nexus. Et cetera.
Saying good and solid feedback is rarely taken into consideration is not true at all.

I've provided detailed feedback and suggestions for a lot of 3v3 and 4v4 maps over the last year, and a lot of it was changed accordingly. Whiteflash hosted a mini-tourney last week for his new map and he was noting all remarks and suggestions that were brought up in the Twitch chat. Before that, there was a huge effort to gather feedback and suggestions on how to improve Nexus. Et cetera.
Saying good and solid feedback is rarely taken into consideration is not true at all.

That and the entirety of SMC, is literally just a feedback loop for the players to make sure the maps are the best they can be. And the map contests.

But tbh?

Cresc is part of the group of people that goes "why does no one listen to my feedback?!!"

And then you look and it is posts like this, or something along the lines of "ITS SUPER SHIT YOU'RE AWFUL" or "Its pretty good, I like it"

So whether negative or positive there is never really any useful information to glean.

And just to clarify, this isn't a dig at anyone that does that, I'm happy people are passionate and want to try and help, but if you are going to take the time, please just put pertinent information, and try to remove your emotions from it.

Don’t forget maps get vetoed purely because of atmosphere settings as well. Which as far as I’ve been told/seen is why maps like ladoga are at the bottom. Remember when noggano had to drop from SMC cause there were so many snow/rain maps and he played on a toaster?

Have to agree here. I bias my vetos toward snow maps because of performance, not always because of preference.

You will excuse me if I don't say much more, I have come to the conclusion long ago that it's really unnecessary, since feedback is rarely taken into consideration especially when it comes to maps, so it's just better to simply shout it out and have all the people that feel the same(a majority without a doubt regarding the trash that is Bayeux) shout it out as well.

This way we'll save time for everybody, at least if many people say it's bad, this way it will be taken into consideration.

... ok...

There have been plenty of experimental crazy maps that have gotten into the pool and veered too much from the tenants of what makes a good CoH 1v1 map.

I'm not going to name names, because they have mostly been removed from the map pool.

However in that context these two are genuinely not that bad at all, they're not great, and up against the strongest map pool we've had they will get vetoed more often. But that's what we're dealing with now, two slightly large less than perfect maps, that create some interesting games and challenge the paradigm without being bat shit insane.

Let them have their six months in the sun the cycle them out or give the map makers chance to iterate if they feel it's worth doing.

So far we have about 5 people saying these maps need work/removed.

StormJaeger actually provided some useful insights. Saying retreat paths could be adjusted.

This first post, should've been everyone's attitude 4-5 years ago, it was not. Instead people, including other content creators, publicly shit on the hard-work you are now advocating for.

Like these two maps are fine, you're all weaklings that blame your lack of adjustment and inability to adapt to new environments on the hard work of map makers.

The 1v1 map pool right now is literally the best it's ever been since 2006, CoH1 had 5 maps for the most part and in its end state this included Wrecked Train and Baux Lowlands... CoH2 launched with Moscow Outskirts as a 1v1 map...

Not every map has to be a tournament contender some are meant to be fun tactical conundrums that keep you thinking.

I especially want to focus on this

Not every map has to be a tournament contender some are meant to be fun tactical conundrums that keep you thinking.

I have been stating this for years, other mappers, whom are now all gone due to harassment and toxicity from this community, have also said the same, and tried in their own ways to implement them.

People wanted 2v2 maps? Put in some fun ones, and they were removed. Why? As Andy stated in some messages to me, because top players have said they shouldn't be in.

Yet I get messages at least a few times a month asking why they were removed cause players like the change of pace, and new scenery. We removed them and didn't replace them with anything.

This offers up a few questions.

Who do we listen to?
-Top players?
-The vast majority of players?
-Casual players (often silent)
-The vocal minority (non tournament players)

These groups are often at odds with one another. One one hand you have a fun map that the majority of people want to play on, or don't mind, but on the other you have people who are grinding elo that don't want to play around something that doesn't necessarily favor their playstyle or meta.

Both have fair arguments.

For the latter part this comes into play:

Like these two maps are fine, you're all weaklings that blame your lack of adjustment and inability to adapt to new environments on the hard work of map makers.

If this is that attitude we should take, then why are maps being removed that are different? And more importantly why are they being removed with no replacements?

Also keep in mind who do we listen too? Top players or the majority? How do you take the voices of 100 or so people and pit it against thousands and make it fair? There is so much biased shit we would have to filter through it would be impossible with a vote, as we saw with polls being bombarded by other communities in the past, or by rules being broken for tournaments so personalities would be voted for.

There have been plenty of experimental crazy maps that have gotten into the pool and veered too much from the tenants of what makes a good CoH 1v1 map.

I'm not going to name names, because they have mostly been removed from the map pool.

However in that context these two are genuinely not that bad at all, they're not great, and up against the strongest map pool we've had they will get vetoed more often. But that's what we're dealing with now, two slightly large less than perfect maps, that create some interesting games and challenge the paradigm without being bat shit insane.

Let them have their six months in the sun the cycle them out or give the map makers chance to iterate if they feel it's worth doing.

Who gets to decide this?

There have been plenty of experimental crazy maps that have gotten into the pool and veered too much from the tenants of what makes a good CoH 1v1 map.

What tenants do you speak of? Where are they listed?

I specifically remember you fighting tooth and nail for the changes on the maps in rotation, even with the GCS champion, Talisman, among other top 10 players at that time as well. Is your word better than theirs? Ultimately we made the changes regardless, that you didn't want, and the maps now play better for it. This isn't intended as a call out, more an example, looping back into who's voice do we listen to, and how does everyone end up feeling heard, as Cresc, apparently does not, and this is something that I would like to genuinely solve with the people that still care about this game.

I have tried multiple ways to accomplish this
-Map contest with Judges from varying backgrounds
-Map contest with private submission and community voting
-Tournament with maps designed with top tournament players

And all have their weakness and strengths, and their own varied failures and successes.

And why does the voice of the few out weigh a large part of the silent majority? The stats don't lie, they aren't made up, so do we just remove whatever is in the lowest tier and rotate out maps? (I would love this, but its too late for consistent updates like that to take place).

I'm very happy that people seem to be finally realizing what I've been saying for years, isn't me just making shit up, but a re-occurring problem, and issues that I've seen, and have tried multiple different ways to express or solve, albeit, I didn't always do it very well, or level-headedly, but it was a large learning experience for me.

I, however, feel its a bit too little too late. I have some plans in the future, and will help with things here, just need a bit of time to get them setup for people to use, regardless of what I feel personally is too late or not.

Show Spoiler

People who are still playing 1v1 dont want weird or "fun" maps, they want maps that follow same concept of "tournament" map, like crossroads or nexus. 1v1 is tiring as it is, no need to make it more tiring with maps that encourage abusive tactics or are designed to irritate player.

Bayeux is way too large, promoting clown car plays (nobody wants to be on receiving end of that).

Deutz was a fucking abomination that promoted team weapon spam and setting your pak wall on mid VP (you cant flank on this map).

Ladoga is nice map but initially it was hard to see anything due to night + snowstorm combination (no reason to have both).

Dont add maps/gimmicks like these, save it for 2v2+.

This first post, should've been everyone's attitude 4-5 years ago, it was not. Instead people, including other content creators, publicly shit on the hard-work you are now advocating for.



I especially want to focus on this



I have been stating this for years, other mappers, whom are now all gone due to harassment and toxicity from this community, have also said the same, and tried in their own ways to implement them.

People wanted 2v2 maps? Put in some fun ones, and they were removed. Why? As Andy stated in some messages to me, because top players have said they shouldn't be in.

Yet I get messages at least a few times a month asking why they were removed cause players like the change of pace, and new scenery. We removed them and didn't replace them with anything.

This offers up a few questions.

Who do we listen to?
-Top players?
-The vast majority of players?
-Casual players (often silent)
-The vocal minority (non tournament players)

These groups are often at odds with one another. One one hand you have a fun map that the majority of people want to play on, or don't mind, but on the other you have people who are grinding elo that don't want to play around something that doesn't necessarily favor their playstyle or meta.

Both have fair arguments.

For the latter part this comes into play:



If this is that attitude we should take, then why are maps being removed that are different? And more importantly why are they being removed with no replacements?

Also keep in mind who do we listen too? Top players or the majority? How do you take the voices of 100 or so people and pit it against thousands and make it fair? There is so much biased shit we would have to filter through it would be impossible with a vote, as we saw with polls being bombarded by other communities in the past, or by rules being broken for tournaments so personalities would be voted for.



Who gets to decide this?



What tenants do you speak of? Where are they listed?

I specifically remember you fighting tooth and nail for the changes on the maps in rotation, even with the GCS champion, Talisman, among other top 10 players at that time as well. Is your word better than theirs? Ultimately we made the changes regardless, that you didn't want, and the maps now play better for it. This isn't intended as a call out, more an example, looping back into who's voice do we listen to, and how does everyone end up feeling heard, as Cresc, apparently does not, and this is something that I would like to genuinely solve with the people that still care about this game.

I have tried multiple ways to accomplish this
-Map contest with Judges from varying backgrounds
-Map contest with private submission and community voting
-Tournament with maps designed with top tournament players

And all have their weakness and strengths, and their own varied failures and successes.

And why does the voice of the few out weigh a large part of the silent majority? The stats don't lie, they aren't made up, so do we just remove whatever is in the lowest tier and rotate out maps? (I would love this, but its too late for consistent updates like that to take place).

I'm very happy that people seem to be finally realizing what I've been saying for years, isn't me just making shit up, but a re-occurring problem, and issues that I've seen, and have tried multiple different ways to express or solve, albeit, I didn't always do it very well, or level-headedly, but it was a large learning experience for me.

I, however, feel its a bit too little too late. I have some plans in the future, and will help with things here, just need a bit of time to get them setup for people to use, regardless of what I feel personally is too late or not.

Show Spoiler

I've always held these views on maps, and always considered myself a good source of feedback for mapping processes. As far back as 2012 I have been involved in map feedback and iterative processes.

Just recently as part my work for the World Championship I "coherently worked together" with Sturmpanther and Rosbone to make excellent improvements to Faymonville approach and then with WhiteFlashReborn to make excellent improvements to Nexus and make it the solid map it is now.

I literally don't recognise this to be true: "I specifically remember you fighting tooth and nail for the changes on the maps in rotation, even with the GCS champion, Talisman, among other top 10 players at that time as well."

Nearly all of the top level players can attest to the fact that I consulted them and at least listened to their opinions before drawing up map pools, from GCS1 to WC2019. I consider this consulting process the parent of the current roster of tournament staples.

I do not want to get into a lengthy discussion with you Tric, I am confident people respect my opinion, without needing you to validate it or attempt pick it apart. I have my criticisms of map makers just like the rest of people but know what makes a good map and when a map isn't as bad as people are making out.

If you must know I would consider your 2016-2017 maps in the 1v1 pools to be part of an LSD trip and diorama of the human psyche, and your 2018-2019 maps to be very strong and solid work. Vilashanka for example should have been in World Championship 2019 over Nexus but needs a complete 1:1 reassembly to get past 'the bug', which I respect you not being willing to do as it's not your fault etc.

If you must know I would consider your 2016-2017 maps in the 1v1 pools to be part of an LCD trip and diorama of the human psyche, and your 2018-2019 maps to be very strong and solid work. Vilashanka for example should have been in World Championship 2019 over Nexus but needs a complete 1:1 reassembly, which I respect you not being willing to do.

I've no interest in he said she said, like I said, the things I've stated above (while you largely glossed over much of what I said) happened.

The maps you see as part of 2016-2017 were either voted in by the map contest judges/relic, voted in by the community/relic, voted on by judges, community and relic, or put in rotation when they weren't supposed to be. Which is why I said above what I said, whose voice gets listened too?

I did do it actually. Still bugged, entire move and reupload and it was still broken when it was reuploaded by Relic. Why I talked recently about map IDs, might be a culprit for the UI issues.

Garrisons being placed near or on cutoffs are the biggest problem with these maps although it's not as bad on Novgorod. Especially when the cutoffs dictate if you are able to hold your close fuel point. I still think there are older maps that are generally worse and Lost Glider North is probably my least favorite spawn in 1v1.

Not every map has to be a tournament contender some are meant to be fun tactical conundrums that keep you thinking.

In no way is this an excuse for abominations like Westwall, Arnhem, Stalingrad and Lost Glider.

A good example of an alternative map is Rachnaya Pereprava. Good cutoffs, action everywhere, distinctive engagement areas and no garrisons on cutoff points.

In no way is this an excuse for abominations like Westwall, Arnhem, Stalingrad and Lost Glider.

A good example of an alternative map is Rachnaya Pereprava. Good cutoffs, action everywhere, distinctive engagement areas and no cutoffs on cutoff points.

I would suggest watching this:



literally in the first 1 minute in you'll find why I find your response so strange.