Not so random maps

[drunkmonkey]

"I want to play a random game, but don't want to get stuck in a never-ending Hive or Conquer Man game, and I don't care much for City Mogul. Can there be an option to play random games with exclusions?"

"NO. RANDOM MEANS RANDOM. YOU PICK ONE MAP OR ALL MAPS. NO BETWEEN."

"But, I don't want to take away random...I just want the option to exclude a few maps. I realize I can do this through random.org, but there's a layer of fun in not knowing what map you're getting until it starts."

"YOU'RE DESTROYING ESSENCE OF RANDOM."


This is how the opposition argument reads to me.

[JoshyBoy]

Haha, great analysis drunkmonkey, very accurate.

[Woodruff]

I do not support the idea of any map being excluded from the random map setting. If you choose a random map, you should know what you are letting yourself in for... even if that means getting the dreaded hive.

Or, as a friend of mine put it....

nononononono!! random has to kept just that otherwise there is no victory in being a random map champ. i love QH's suggestions in the other thread and those are the ones that should be implemented immediately. I hate hive too, but if i get it in random, so be it! keep random random!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But the thing is, this REALLY locks up tournaments, turning it from a fun, 4 month lasting tournament or so, into a tournament that goes 10+ months because they got a map that takes 8 months to play.

You are basically saying to anyone that plays Speed games "Well, screw you buddies, if you want Random, deal with the hive"

I don't know...my tournament is no spoils, adjacent-reinforcement and we got a Hive game in the first round. We also got a Peloponnesian War game in that same round. The Hive game was ended ages ago (along with the rest of the first round). The Peloponnesian War game is still going.

[JoshyBoy]

I don't understand why people want to exclude maps from random map setting. It was made for the purpose of randomly selecting any map from the selection available, and if that brings you your least favourite map, then that's the risk you are taking. I can't believe we are even talking about this.

[drunkmonkey]

I don't understand why people want to exclude maps from random map setting. It was made for the purpose of randomly selecting any map from the selection available, and if that brings you your least favourite map, then that's the risk you are taking. I can't believe we are even talking about this.

There's a difference between disliking a map, and not wanting to get stuck in a never-ending game.

Also, as I brought up before, sometimes I'd like to play an escalating game on a random map, but I want to play a "classic map", not a "starting position map". The strategy on Feudal, AoR, Pelo, etc. is much different than most other maps. If I'm in the mood to play a random "classic map", what's wrong with granting that option?

[MrBenn]

Right now there's a 1/163 chance of getting any specific map using the random map feature. Just saying...

[jrh_cardinal]

Right now there's a 1/163 chance of getting any specific map using the random map feature. Just saying...

correct. if it's one game

but if you're running a tournament that's not just a winner-advances, one game and you're done type thing, you could easily have well over 100 games. That brings it over 50% for any one map.



One current example would be Optimus's CrackerJack Invitational 2, it has 104 4-player games. Or bigger is LV's Escalating Big Bash, not sure how many games that has, but I know there were supposed to be 160 in Round 1 (20 games for each of 8 4-player groups), then more in later rounds. Neither tourney uses random map, but they could.

[stahrgazer]

Rather than take the full randomness out of Random Maps for everyone, I suggest those who run tournaments who want random maps with exclusions make a list for random.org to pick from; then they can exclude any maps they think are too complex or lengthy, such as Hive or Stalingrad or even, at times, Waterloo or Das Schloss or... (see the list can continue, and as more maps are made, it probably should continue which is why random.org is the better venue for exclusivity in randomness).

p.s. I've played several hive games. They were all over in less than months.

[rdsrds2120]

That's no excuse. In tournaments, you can create tie-breakers, scrap the game in the event that that one map turns up, etc. No excuse.

You choose to play with random map settings, your choice. If that means you get Hive, tough.

True, but remember what this site is - we don't have to be extremely statistactical. I would hope that the deciding factor of whether this would be implemented or not would be if enough players were to use it. If you want it completely random, remember that you would have the option to not exclude any maps.

[jmyork82]

Yup, new thread time viewtopic.php?f=4&t=125908

If you are interested in this topic, try the one above. Similar substance but fresh idea.

[Pedronicus]

What happens if you are running a tournament Called Hive on random game settings and the first players who get a hive map win the tournament?

I've seen thousands of these tournaments made to exactly these specifications and I think this suggestion would ruin things for people playing in such tournaments .

[jrh_cardinal]

What happens if you are running a tournament Called Hive on random game settings and the first players who get a hive map win the tournament?

I've seen thousands of these tournaments made to exactly these specifications and I think this suggestion would ruin things for people playing in such tournaments .

Then don't exclude any maps, especially hive lol. That's the point of the suggestion, you aren't required to do anything, but it can save a ton of headaches

thousands of tournaments? That's total bs.

[Pedronicus]

How face slappingly obvious does sarcasm have to be before an American spots it? ffs

[Woodruff]

That's no excuse. In tournaments, you can create tie-breakers, scrap the game in the event that that one map turns up, etc. No excuse.

You choose to play with random map settings, your choice. If that means you get Hive, tough.

True, but remember what this site is - we don't have to be extremely statistactical. I would hope that the deciding factor of whether this would be implemented or not would be if enough players were to use it. If you want it completely random, remember that you would have the option to not exclude any maps.

My real concern here is that if the site starts tracking random-map games (like I dearly hope they will soon!), that this sort of pretend-random game would be tracked with it, simply because it's a "random map game" as far as the options go...even though it's not a fully random one.

[jrh_cardinal]

That's no excuse. In tournaments, you can create tie-breakers, scrap the game in the event that that one map turns up, etc. No excuse.

You choose to play with random map settings, your choice. If that means you get Hive, tough.

not if there are freemies. you would have to wait a month or more for the hive game to end, which would make it pointless to scrap it.

[Woodruff]

That's no excuse. In tournaments, you can create tie-breakers, scrap the game in the event that that one map turns up, etc. No excuse.

You choose to play with random map settings, your choice. If that means you get Hive, tough.

not if there are freemies. you would have to wait a month or more for the hive game to end, which would make it pointless to scrap it.

As I've already pointed out...in my no-spoils, adjacent-fortification tournament, I have had HIVE games last far less time than other maps (particularly Peloponnesian War). Not a month.

[jrh_cardinal]

actually, it makes sense that hive no spoils games would go quicker, there's enough bonuses to make it worth it to attack, but in escalating, troop count gets too big too quick, and it's not smart to attack

[squishyg]

just wanted to restate that i am 100% against excluding maps from the random option.

[Woodruff]

just wanted to restate that i am 100% against excluding maps from the random option.

I support squishyg's vote, as well.

[phantomzero]

Maybe instead on limiting random there could be another option that would pick maps using map classifications such as size, conquest type, and more?

[Pedronicus]

Make it an option.

If you don't want the option, you can click for every single map, but if you want to avoid quads on doodle earth or 1v1 on the other end of the spectrum you should be able to avoid such bullshit.

The maps are too varied nowadays in size.

[TheForgivenOne]

Added a poll.

[squishyg]

random is random is random is random. if you want to run a tourney of only small maps or big maps or green maps or pig maps, then select your maps and use random.org to decide which one is being used for each game. but don't ruin the random setting for the rest of us.

[Woodruff]

random is random is random is random. if you want to run a tourney of only small maps or big maps or green maps or pig maps, then select your maps and use random.org to decide which one is being used for each game. but don't ruin the random setting for the rest of us.

Yep...random.org or simple dice (that's how I always ran my random tournaments prior to it being site-implemented).

[drunkmonkey]

I thought this would be in addition to the Random option. I don't see how one affects the other.