I tried all the house north-west of the Church but couldn't repro the Issue. can you describe the building a bit more? Which units were you using to garrison the Building?
Thanks
I confirm the issue Aerohank discribes.
It' s the stone building between the church and the 2 cut offs on the western side of the map, without any windows facing the west.
I do not remember if the bug appears on a specific unit type, but I usually play Ostheer. |
Brits need a heavy tank
Well, there is almost nothing Brits don't need, except of opponents. |
That's the misunderstanding, It has never meant that.
The funny the thing is, that despite this unintentionality it worked for years exactly as almost everybody expected it to do. Well, the truth came out, at least.  |
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. |
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 have one q about smoke grenaids. Will my troops be blind to? I meen the smoke most limit my view to!?
Well, usually it will do so - except if you smoke really strong stuff. |
same to me in 2200 matches. Where is the sense of vetoing then?
Well, if ferwiner is right and from now on I will have to play on a vetoed map after a search of cheerful 30 seconds, it rather does not appear to me as a matter of sense. But I still hope he is not. |
Becouse you never had a search long enough, old searching system preffered to find you an opponent from completely different league than give you a vetoed map (its a trade of, you know) so only top of the top players were waiting long enough to play on vetoed map. Now we generally speaking all search with top player waiting time becouse a number of possible opponents decreased significantly.
To conclude: old system favoured vetos over fair matches cousing a lot of bad matches, while new system takes vetos more like a clue becouse the highest importance is to find fair match, no matter what.
And I must say I like it, even though I dont like to play on many maps, it brings more variety and you should be able to face opponent on every map either way. Before half of the maps were "axis always veto" and the other was "allies always veto" cousing us to play on few remaining maps over and over again.
Sometimes my search used to last for minutes, too. But I never played on vetoed maps. And since yesterday I had 3 fights on vetoed maps after a search of seconds. Your explanation still seems to offer space for some doubts.
The question, if I like it or not, is another one. I rather prefer so face from time to time a top 10 player on a map I like, than someone else of similar skills on a map I exclude calculatedly because of tactical or strategical issues. But, as I said, this is an other topic. |
Playing on veto map is the issue connected to long opponent search not a bug. If the server won't be able to find you a match on the map you want it will expand map poll by turning your vetos off. It was always like that, just waiting times were shorter before.
I never played before on a vetoed map - in 2.000 matches. |
|
Automatch still ignores vetos. |
Galgengeiler
新颖
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
