Weighted mapvoting

[iRobot]

Any possibility of making this less STRICT?

I'm tired of voting for a map I enjoy only to be met with 0.04, 0.3 or lower, or even sometimes it completely stonewalls you with a 'Sorry, you cannot vote this map right now.'

It doesn't even do this on 1on1 maps, it's quite a few that seem to be weighted down for no apparent reason.

#lesshighlander #lessamdk #nomorehelmsdeep

It's weighted only over playercount, the maps will have normal vote when there is enough players. (Also a little derp in the "0.04" votes to fix (so it jumps on 0.3 when the "minimum" player condition is satisfied).

Not a single map in the pool is designed for 22 players, so it seems unreasonable to limit some of them just because you don't think they'll give good games.

[iZumo]

Well no, it's there for a different reason:
- prevent voting of really small maps with full server
- prevent voting big maps like Goatswood, Highlander etc. when there are like 6 players on the server.

There also was a desire to keep the popluar maps like Highlander available on the peak hours (i.e to prevent them being voted at 4 AM when there are 2 players).

[iRobot]

Well no, it's there for a different reason:
- prevent voting of really small maps with full server
- prevent voting big maps like Goatswood, Highlander etc. when there are like 6 players on the server.

There also was a desire to keep the popluar maps like Highlander available on the peak hours (i.e to prevent them being voted at 4 AM when there are 2 players).

I'm not sure if these maps are truly popular. I just think they are forced.

It's extremely common to see whining in chat when Highlander is looking like it will win the vote.

If the map is rigged to be played every night, is it popular? No, it's just all there is.

To take the latest addition as an example, VideoHut, it's a truly awful map, but it's play lots because it's new. I think people just want to play new maps. During voting, you always have 2 or 3 people voting for a lesser played map, only to be denied because the voting is 0.3 or something ridiculous - then other people see this map has 0.3 and think 'Oh, I wont vote for that, it must be bad' without even giving the map a chance.

[reload]

There are a lot of maps that are rarely played. Maybe they should be removed.
This website has a bunch of cool maps it would be awesome if someone could sift through them and recommend some

http://unrealtournament2004.filefront.c ... /Maps;3989

[focus]

I have another idea how to organize voting.

Its simple. Every player can choose any amount of maps, which he likes. The map which collect the most number of 'likes' wins. If there are several of those, map is chosen by random among them.

[pupimassa]

Just reviving post...

Guys, how its possible to vote biggest maps with few players? Today around 1AM (CET), there were less than 10 ppl on the server and they voted urbanhotzone and toystory! Weighting didnt work at all and player count was still lowering due to late hours:/

Anyway, TY for all new maps you added, its also possible to play them?! Every time I join, Im forced to play evergreen bs maps. Nothing at all changed in voting mechanism, kinda sad and tired of it

[Capaco]

cause ppl know which maps are good

But still even when 10 ppl vote with 0.15 weight the map can still win, if they vote so, u cant do anything.

[iRobot]

What if everyone had a vote weight of the following

0.2 * <skill> = vote

donators could get

0.3 * <skill> = vote

[Azarael]

Wouldn't help. Capaco has 8 skill.

[iRobot]

Wouldn't help. Capaco has 8 skill.

Are you implying he is the one voting shit maps?