Vetoes not working properly

I am not sure this is a bug but I'd like to direct people's attention to something.

Since the "play only on 1 map ever" bug was fixed, the map rotation seems to be doing fine but we are playing on an inordinate amount of maps that we vetoed.

I usually play 3v3s and 4v4s with arranged teams. We have been doing this team routine for a while and I know for a fact that if you veto a map in a 4v4 arranged team it is considered to get 4 vetoes and you are practically guaranteed to never play on it (unless there are exactly 8 maps in the rotation and the other team just happens to veto the other 4 maps or something like that). When it's 3 player AT playing a 4v4 we very rarely get a vetoed map.

Well we just played 3 games on vetoed maps back to back in a 4v4 with a 3 player team. For the record, I did the "unveto then veto again" thing but it didn't help. This has literally never happened during the past several months that I've been playing with this arranged team.

There are no steps to reliably reproduce this AFAIK. Maybe it is not a bug at all but just really bad RNG 3 times in a row. But again, I can't remember that this ever happened.

+1000

I hope it gets hotfixed soon

Map vetos are not working and it's as important as balance, and I don't think it's that complicated to fix

+1000

I hope it gets hotfixed soon

Map vetos are not working and it's as important as balance, and I don't think it's that complicated to fix

The long-term solution, surely, is never to launch a patch (other than hotfix) later than Tuesday. This carnage was wholly avoidable.

bump bump bump

yap veto not working,had trouble with some alies 2v2 maps today

I think there may be a misunderstanding on how Map Veto actually works. Just because you have voted to veto a Map doesn't mean you will not play on that map.

"A Veto counts as a single vote against a Map. When creating a Match, the Automatcher will only select among maps that have the fewest amounts of Vetos"

Basically, the Server sums up the total number of Vetos for each map for everyone, then generates the set of maps with the least number of vetoes, and randomly choose one of them.

I've talked with the Server team and they are going to look at it, (just in case) if there is a problem it should be easy to resolve with a server side fix. I did some testing here and Map Veto-ing was working as intended.

I think there may be a misunderstanding on how Map Veto actually works. Just because you have voted to veto a Map doesn't mean you will not play on that map.

"A Veto counts as a single vote against a Map. When creating a Match, the Automatcher will only select among maps that have the fewest amounts of Vetos"

Basically, the Server sums up the total number of Vetos for each map for everyone, then generates the set of maps with the least number of vetoes, and randomly choose one of them.

I've talked with the Server team and they are going to look at it, (just in case) if there is a problem it should be easy to resolve with a server side fix. I did some testing here and Map Veto-ing was working as intended.

In the map-pool on 1vs1 are 14 maps - each player has 4 vetos. In any case there should remain minimum 6 maps without a veto of the 2 opponents to match them up. Do you think that a concept which isn't able or isn't even designed to produce this simple outcome should be called "Map Veto"?

I think there may be a misunderstanding on how Map Veto actually works. Just because you have voted to veto a Map doesn't mean you will not play on that map.

"A Veto counts as a single vote against a Map. When creating a Match, the Automatcher will only select among maps that have the fewest amounts of Vetos"

Basically, the Server sums up the total number of Vetos for each map for everyone, then generates the set of maps with the least number of vetoes, and randomly choose one of them.

I've talked with the Server team and they are going to look at it, (just in case) if there is a problem it should be easy to resolve with a server side fix. I did some testing here and Map Veto-ing was working as intended.

Let me put it this way: until today (playing since vcoh2 alpha) I have never played on a vetoed map. Today I played 2 games on vetoed maps...

In the map-pool on 1vs1 are 14 maps - each player has 4 vetos. In any case there should remain minimum 6 maps without a veto of the 2 opponents to match them up. Do you think that a concept which isn't able or isn't even designed to produce this simple outcome should be called "Map Veto"?

This isn't quite correct. If you are in automatch searching 1v1 and you veto 4 maps, obviously those are the 4 maps you don't want to play. However, in the entire automatch 1v1 player pool (all players searching for a 1v1 game who have also vetoed maps they don't want to play), technically all of the 14 maps available could be vetoed by someone. Therefore, as Cuddle explained, "A Veto counts as a single vote against a Map. When creating a Match, the Automatcher will only select among maps that have the fewest amounts of Vetos". Therefore, there is never actually a time where 6 maps remain that haven't been vetoed.

This isn't quite correct. If you are in automatch searching 1v1 and you veto 4 maps, obviously those are the 4 maps you don't want to play. However, in the entire automatch 1v1 player pool (all players searching for a 1v1 game who have also vetoed maps they don't want to play), technically all of the 14 maps available could be vetoed by someone. Therefore, as Cuddle explained, "A Veto counts as a single vote against a Map. When creating a Match, the Automatcher will only select among maps that have the fewest amounts of Vetos". Therefore, there is never actually a time where 6 maps remain that haven't been vetoed.

My English might not be good, but how is that possible? While it's possible that through the whole playerbase who is searching 1v1, all maps could be vetoed, the moment you match another player there should be at least 4 maps which are not vetoed by both players.
If we talk about teamgames, that should be another complete different story, as people searching as random might as well veto every single map.

Another Q: does arranged teams vetoes counts as only 1 vote or each player from that team has a vote?

My English might not be good, but how is that possible? While it's possible that through the whole playerbase who is searching 1v1, all maps could be vetoed, the moment you match another player there should be at least 4 maps which are not vetoed by both players.
If we talk about teamgames, that should be another complete different story, as people searching as random might as well veto every single map.

Another Q: does arranged teams vetoes counts as only 1 vote or each player from that team has a vote?

I think it means that the servers don't check your veto list with your opponent(s). The server compares it with every single player who is searching for a game. So for example if there are 1000 players searching and 500 of the vetoed map X and only 10 people vetoed Y, map X won't be picked but map Y will be since it has the lowest amount of vetoes, even if you had vetoed it.

I think it means that the servers don't check your veto list with your opponent(s). The server compares it with every single player who is searching for a game. So for example if there are 1000 players searching and 500 of the vetoed map X and only 10 people vetoed Y, map X won't be picked but map Y will be since it has the lowest amount of vetoes, even if you had vetoed it.

I don't think this is true either. Veto = not gonna play a map and that's how it should be. Some maps are just horrible to play in for a variety of reasons, mostly favoring one starting side or faction.

I don't think this is true either. Veto = not gonna play a map and that's how it should be. Some maps are just horrible to play in for a variety of reasons, mostly favoring one starting side or faction.

I agree with you on how it should be, but I think it works like that. At least that's my understanding.

Let me put it this way: until today (playing since vcoh2 alpha) I have never played on a vetoed map. Today I played 2 games on vetoed maps...

+1
A veto in the past has always meant you don't play on that map.

+1
A veto in the past has always meant you don't play on that map.

That's the misunderstanding, It has never meant that.

This isn't quite correct. If you are in automatch searching 1v1 and you veto 4 maps, obviously those are the 4 maps you don't want to play. However, in the entire automatch 1v1 player pool (all players searching for a 1v1 game who have also vetoed maps they don't want to play), technically all of the 14 maps available could be vetoed by someone. Therefore, as Cuddle explained, "A Veto counts as a single vote against a Map. When creating a Match, the Automatcher will only select among maps that have the fewest amounts of Vetos". Therefore, there is never actually a time where 6 maps remain that haven't been vetoed.

What I wrote describes the task of a concept of Veto Map in its simplest form. What you describe, sounds to me like an interesting concept being completely off its own subject.

That's the misunderstanding, It has never meant that.

So me never getting a vetoed map before during my 600 hrs of play is just a huge coincidence?

That's the misunderstanding, It has never meant that.

While a misunderstanding, I have never played on vetoed maps since Beta or so, until now. Now rougly one in 8 games are on maps that have been vetoed. I almost exclusivly play 2v2 or the occasional larger teamgame, so thats a factor.

To me, either of two things happened. 1: Vetoes are now working diffrently than before in some regard. 2: The improved matchmaking is somehow affecting map-pool in some way (besides the longer wait-time).

That's the misunderstanding, It has never meant that.

And who's fault is that? It's not like you guys make guides or any sort of FAQ to properly explain any of the game elements. All of the best stuff like that is found here, made by fans. By the way, I have never once played a map that I had on veto since launch, and since the last update 3 out of my 10 games have been on maps I vetoed (thats only in 2v2).

Something tells me that since a couple of different people have come here pointing the same thing out, it's probably not working as intended, even if the system works differently than many of us thought.

So me never getting a vetoed map before during my 600 hrs of play is just a huge coincidence?

If that is the case, then yes. There's a programmer looking at this right now, if something did break I'll reply with that in this thread.