Mouse_

Thank you, that looks great!

Would also love if you can also consider HP to not be admin-only. The leader-based suggestion sounds one idea better  

3 hours ago, paranoid said:

have their caps lowered by about 5, they're not that hard maps.

I am thinking the following:

Maps with 45 requirement -> 40. These are the ones you mentioned

Maps with 40 requirement -> 30. These are bathroom, crazy_escpe (solid maps that are easy and perfectly beatable with lower player count. These are also used as early hours player boosters on GO servers for that same reason)

shroom3 should be kept as it used to (or at least lower to 35)

3 hours ago, paranoid said:

I can nominate bathroom and crazy escape right now.

Yeah at the peak oh an 8 hour period, with the maps being unavailable for nomination for 80% of the remaining time

7 hours ago, Batata said:

As i said, i will check soon the cooldowns and etc.

So I took a look at the current map pool. Anything that has a 40+ player requirement would be difficult to vote during NA for multiple reasons. 1st, player count tends to hover around 40 so maps would fall-out from the nomlist occasionally. 2nd, the nomination still has to compete with one among atix, surf, nemesis, boat, sorrento (at least one of these always been off-CD)

Some of the maps limited under that cap are: bathroom, bowser, crazy_escape, destruction_of_exorath, dreamin, l0v0l, paper_escape, predator, sandstorm, skyrim, tyranny

Most of those are not even difficult, nor overplayed. I also noticed this:

shroomforest3 now requires 50 players. Why? That map was beaten 3 times in the past few months during NA hours, we have people that know the map and lead it

4 hours ago, Batata said:

There were no cooldowns in maps, you could nominate everything you wanted, no matter the number of players, if it was laser or non-laser map, playing all the nemesis maps in a row, everything.

Yeah, I don't consider this extreme as healthy either. In fact, I am a proponent of having larger map cool-downs, and avoid the same group of maps being played one after another. I can't say that extended CD works for the popular casual maps, but it would be great to try something greater than 1 CD for certain categories.

In either case, the restrictions I am concerned about is locking maps or increasing player requirement on difficult maps, to a point where it's not even possible to nominate them, just because population tends to be low during specific hours of the day, NA specifically. I don't want maps to be available on daily basis, but would love them to remain on option under some cadence, without having to wait until late post-midnight hours when more folks join for extended period. If it's overplayed map, sure extend the CD. Add a group CD in addition to that, to the difficult maps with high player restrictions today, maybe 1 map can be played a day. Maybe even separate the NA from the rest to avoid CD conflict, if there are concerns around map being waster under high CD. There should be an alternative than putting a hard cap, that's what I am concerned with. The rest is hard to manage.

4 hours ago, Batata said:

i think that just an increase in the cooldown would be enough, but leaving the map in the public list

Yes, please

4 hours ago, Batata said:

But i can't admit a guy saying that, after this tons of work, i am or i was a manager that only cared about playing knifing maps.

Nothing personal, sounds that I am wrong here. I used to join the server around 10pm UTC daily. What followed was the same set of maps every time, atix, boat, sorrento, nemesis, knife fun for extended periods of time, no gaps in between, with you on the comm channel. I didn't see you otherwise, in NA hours, likely time-zone difference. This at a time of restrictions on difficult maps, with the modifiers being so popular it was impossible to vote anything else during those hours, yet not facing the same scrutiny around the overplayed aspect. This is where my perception is coming from.

4 hours ago, Batata said:

Are you really supporting the diversity of the maps that are being played on this server or just supporting just these 2 specific maps that you like? Aditionally, i can understand ze_harry_potter, since it's rarely played, but ze_dreamin? It's an overplayed map, it was played literally everyday. And harry_potter is debatable, it makes sense to be in admin list, since it has 12 stages (!), it requires to have a good team that knows how to use items, but we could also have the approach of putting the map in public list with a high cooldown (like being played once a week) and like 40~50 players requirement to be nominated

I have played Dreamin once in the past 2 months, the 1st time the map got voted hours after I joined the server, which is fine. But then I wanted to give another shot, and the player restriction was now increased, making it locked during NA hours, where population in the past few days wouldn't sustain over 50 for larger period of time. I get that that map is debatable, but from my perspective it's not played as often when I am online, and now it's even less likely to be played. I brought it up because it was the latest to be impacted.

Yes, harry potter is map that I would pursue on a weekly basis, but again extended CD would be way better than locking it from nomination all-together.

4 hours ago, Batata said:

About harry potter, at NiDE, the map was only played at events. Who moved the map to public list so a normal player could nominate it? Yea.

Yeah I was grateful for that, for having the map available for nomination, in contrast to other severs. I am not surprised that the map would get "abandoned in the admin list", anything non-FF would stay that way.

This is with regards to the latest map restrictions. Specifically, removal of the Harry Potter map and the increased player requirements around Dreamin, two favorites of mine that people were actually willing to vote, now are no longer an option during NA hours.

This might not seem a lot, but consider this. NA hours already suffer from lack of map diversity, since newer players either haven't had exposure to wider variety of maps, or are not used to attempting such. Or sure, they may just not like to explore new stuff. In either case, the choices of team-oriented map that folks are willing to vote are already very limited. Attempting to promote and lead a new map is extremely cumbersome process, it could take hours for the map to get voted (if), and even when rounds are won it's likely that the map doesn't get extended. I would love if there was a solution around that, diversifying the map pool, have folks play challenging team-oriented maps to completion, but that expectation might be unrealistic due to many factors. 

So the ask here in short is to lift the most recent restrictions and not limit the pool of well-established challenging maps that folks are still willing to vote. Secondly, it would be awesome if we could try a model where, say a locked map is available for nomination once a week, or we get to attempt something new (say a random map option is available, something more attractive than a specific map name in the nomlist)

This should summary the topic. The rest was an angry post at start, followed by a lovely discussion with this paranoid fanboy

You mention that NA is only 1% of the player base, then it's the perfect candidate to try experiment with settings. Relax the restrictions, let people freely decide what maps to play. If there is concern around server-killer maps, make them player-available only 1 day of the week. Add an option in the nomlist to vote for a "random map", in case people want to try something new. There are so many options that could bring positive impact.

----

1 hour ago, paranoid said:

Diversity in this case means "maps I like" because none of the underplayed maps are actually restricted, MCPX has no restrictions on it, feel free to nominate it whenever.

I don't mind MCPX, it's a quick fun parkour-maze-like map with 2 holds. Believe it or not, this was a popular map in the days when Nide got rebooted and had to gain population, after the .ru era. There was a lot of interest then into trying new maps. Of course you probably wouldn't know about this because you are quick to put the classification "unpopular which probably means sh*t" so you'd likely never join maps outside of your list.

MCPX will no longer get voted nowadays because new folks don't know it. In that case I am wondering how can you even judge whether players would like the map, when it's never played

Either way, there is so much that can change. My hope here is any of the following:

1) Remove any new restrictions, specifically lower player requirements during NA hours on more maps and add back HP to the nomlist (even if the cool-down needs to be extended). The argument that the map will kill the server is inaccurate, if there is no leader the map will simply get changed within 1-2 rounds.

2) Revise the cool-downs around overplayed maps, maybe try this on a Friday, or any other idea to promote at least some level of map diversity.

3) Unlock maybe 1 FF during prime time NA hours (could be a rotation). If there are remaining GFL css players, I'd bet they would not be interested into playing surf maps or atix

2 hours ago, paranoid said:

because gfl is dead?

#1 server on GO (for players not bound to source).

2 hours ago, paranoid said:

if you just restrict those maps those people will f*ck off and your server will have 20 players playing

If the server has reached a state where players are only interested into a map pool of 20 maps and that those players would leave if a new map is voted, then how is that different than having a pure FF player base interested only in the pool of restricted maps. I will stop here.

2 hours ago, paranoid said:

They're locked because they kill the server population

https://0x0.st/-JVF.png 

Check your snapshot. This is the state of the server with those locked maps not being played. 

2 hours ago, paranoid said:

Why would they want to play an unpopular map

Aren't admins supposed to spend certain amount of time on the server anyway, teach players and so. You are telling me that in all that time spent they would have no interest in trying new maps. Of course I guess there is the option of waiting until a specific "skill"-based map is voted and then demonstrate their skills.

2 hours ago, paranoid said:

Why do they need to extend, you have like an hour of extends by default.

When there is a leader, rounds are won and extend loses the vote to an overplayed map, simply because folks are not used to completing new maps, then there is no point of even trying in the first place. Admin vote extend counter-acts that and is common pattern on other servers. Whether people really want to continue the map, the new vote would tell that, with the bias of overplayed map listed now removed. 

2 hours ago, paranoid said:

Because admins would extend the map for up to 3 hours and it would kill the server every f*cking time because most people won't play a map for 3 hours and once you're done playing you f*cking quit regardless of next map.

Let me correct you there: "Because players would extend". Admins can nominate those maps, other players cannot. I'll stop here

2 hours ago, paranoid said:

Since when exactly? There's no player requirement for any map when I last looked.

50 players requirement, pretty sure that was not the case a few days ago

2 hours ago, paranoid said:

You mean where people are bribed to play map with the incentive of free vip? when instead they would vote for something completely different?

Yeah 3 days of VIP for winning a map, definitely the sole reason to spend 4 hours on an event

Give me 1 reason why a NA player should continue supporting the server (unless that player has a potato PC of course..)

Not even going to talk about the lack of willingness among regulars to promote map diversity, the ridiculous cool-down settings that result into the same maps being played over and over, most of which don't even need a leader, the fact that there are 2 pirate versions in the nomlist that don't even share a cool-down, while certain maps are locked due to having lasers? (as if the surf maps don't have those) or concerns around long cd-s (as if the EU folks play these), population melting like butter, admins not present when unpopular maps are played, eliminating the tiniest chance of extends, etc, etc

Thats fine, but why do you keep adding restrictions on the map pool. Harry potter started seeing higher playthrough, now it's no longer on the nomlist. Surprise, surprise, the map is no longer played. Dreamin might not be the friendliest map, but it's better than surf and adds to map diversity. Now, can't even nominate that since the player requirement has increased?

Oh and congrats on the new server manager, the guy who started such restrictions at the first place, promoting boat-based, knife-based maps instead. f*cking fantastic. Guess the only good thing left for NA folks are the Asian event, the only instance where the lack of any player-based voting system has surprisingly worked well so far

Please convince me otherwise

23 minutes ago, paranoid said:

so they can freeze themselves?

Just for you, clarifying what smoke grenades I'm recommending to give zm

Can you add some kickers, otherwise the event will be over in 20 minutes.

• Maybe pitchblack can be pistols and awp only.
• For hold_em we need riffles for ending boss, but maybe enable fail nades and increase zm speed, or better yet give smoke grenades to mother zm