Project Reality Forums

Just wanna say something about this.

It happened already a view times and it gets more and more.
The servers run a map vote,....and at the end they just run the map they like.
For example Muttrah all the time,...

Run a map vote and stick with it,....or just don't run a map vote at all!!!!

Sometimes admins forget to change map or don't have the time to. And if it's late they don't want to kill the server e.g. If kashan would have won the vote it would kill the server for sure at 1am.

Somtimes the conditions change.

If you run a mapvote in the beginning of the round, and there's a large turnover of players or a huge player drop/raise , you might rethink your choice and run another mapvote or set another map.

Another problem with the map vote is that a lot of the players do not even vote. They all seem to be too busy or too unaware. But of course they start to complain after the vote.
But basically, I agree with you, that if you run a mapvote, you should accept the outcome.

/dweed was faster

Agree with OP!

Also if theres going to be a vote at least vary the maps.

Kashan/Silent Eagle/Yamalia isnt really a map vote. These are pretty much the same map, lots of assets and a small little kill box for the infantry.

I like the map vote, though I perceive it as a bit of a placebo. You're still playing the same old maps at the end of the day.

ShockUnitBlack wrote:I like the map vote, though I perceive it as a bit of a placebo. You're still playing the same old maps at the end of the day.

until admins put in more maps into the vote, like Ochamancheria and quingling and qwai

Conman51 wrote:Agree with OP!

Also if theres going to be a vote at least vary the maps.

Kashan/Silent Eagle/Yamalia isnt really a map vote. These are pretty much the same map, lots of assets and a small little kill box for the infantry.

Yup exactly what I mean also.
It's just a little frustrating.

There are lots of things should be considered by admins.
Balance of the team.
If one weak team has to do BLUFOR, that round will be horrible for both side. coz BLUFOR cant make a good attack. Everybody are bored and left the server.
Sometimes, you have played tons of AAS, according to some server rules, 2AAS1INS rotation should be followed. So it'll not surprise they put a INS map.
Admins have to consider not only game play and the order, but also the population.



Infantry on kashan and some big maps are fun, dont try to engage enemy yourself, try teamwork. or just go tank squad or apc squad.(Remote control jet is funny, when you see enemies are killed by your little "UAV". ambush tank is funny too.)


Even if most of ppl agreed a map, but horrible gameplay would let'em leave. So lots of admins consider vote as a reference.

Map voting is one of the main reasons that we are playing the same maps every day.
Its very easy for an admin to play the map he wants to play.

He just take 1 semi-popular map up against 2 similar maps
for example:
1:Muttrah
2: kozelsk
3: assault on mestia.

koselsk and mestia are similar and muttrah is the safe choice for people who hate woodlands and rebels.

In the best case the woodlands maps share 60% of the votes (the majority wants to play woodlands) Muttrah wins with 40% because the woodlands had 30% each.

1:Muttrah wins 40%
2: kozelsk 30%
3: assault on mestia. 30%



use fixed map rotations and post the map rotations on the server website like we did in the old days. It worked well and all maps where played over time.

when seeding skirmish maps should be run of-course but when up and running it should continue with the next map from the day before.

If your server dies in 9/10 cases it is not because of the current map but because local players simply have to go to sleep to work the next day, or there is an issue with admin abuse... or technical problems that cause players to get kicked by PB or simply crash.

The 1/10 cases where it is the map that is an issue it will probably only prolong the life of the server with 20-30 min. The only thing that can rescue a dying server is if another populated server dies and it doesn't recover quickly.


I doubt anyone is going to listen to this though. I guess the 2nd best option is that admins make a vote with 3 similar maps but they have a plan for which "type" of vote is next.

1st vote
Type: 1km maps

1 Tad sae offensive us/china
2 Operation Ghost Train gb/china
3 Assault on Mestia us/rebels

2nd vote
Type: us vs mec old school maps

1 Jabal us/mec
2 Muttrah us/mec
3 Kashan Desert us/mec

3rd vote
Type: 1km rebel maps

1 Iron ridge rus/rebel
2 Dragon fly gb/rebel
3 Fools Road gb/rebel

4th vote
Type: 4km jet maps

1 Black gold china/rus
2 Iron Eagle idf/mec
3 Shija Valley gb/china

5th vote
Type: 4km maps attack choppers with a central city

1 Vadso gb/rus
2 Silent Eagle alt alt gb/china
3 Burning Sands ger/mec

6th vote
Type: attack from sea maps

1 Beirut Standard rus/idf
2 Barracuda us/china
3 Pavlosk Bay us/rus

Or use alternative vote instead !

The Alternative Vote Explained - YouTube

(Go check this guy's videos, they're awesome)

Map votes are fine but over done, but there is a problem I see every time it is run.

If there are 64 people on the server engaged in battle and a vote is run, at the most 30% of the players will have voted. Thats 19-20 people who voted and of those about 10-15 deciding for the whole server which maps is played. I see this all the time.

At round end, the map voted on loads and 30-40 people go "wtf?" and a few leave. Then the admin, from pressure from the remaining players runs another map vote or makes an arbitrary decision on which map to play. Which imo should have done in the first place, just pick a fricken map admins and players deal with it. but I digress. A good admin knows which map to play from experience and the mood of the players on the server but now most are apparently afraid to offend but end up doing so anyway.

May I suggest that if you insist on being lazy, run a map that has AT LEAST 50% participation (35-40 votes). If you don't get that many then step out pick a map. Thats what admins do, make decisions!

Secondly, give people MORE TIME to vote. The default time is too short because people are focused on the game at hand. Since the game usually lasts at least an hour, in wouldn't hurt to have it run 3 minutes to give people a chance to think on it and then decide.

DDS wrote:May I suggest that if you insist on being lazy, run a map that has AT LEAST 50% participation (35-40 votes). If you don't get that many then step out pick a map. Thats what admins do, make decisions!

Secondly, give people MORE TIME to vote. The default time is too short because people are focused on the game at hand. Since the game usually lasts at least an hour, in wouldn't hurt to have it run 3 minutes to give people a chance to think on it and then decide.

I totally agree with that. I've seen to many desperate votes that are done quickly before a round is over and a few people gets to decide whats next, while the people busy not dyien and thereby lose the round gets a WTF moment when they realize they didn't vote in time. Then its better that the admin pick maybe a 4th map so technically Nobody wins the vote.

zombie-yellow wrote:Or use alternative vote instead !

The Alternative Vote Explained - YouTube

(Go check this guy's videos, they're awesome)

So then the vote has to be done twice with Primary and then 2ndary choise? then the admins has to have a spreadsheet to figure out who won...and a lot of players would probably vote for the same map twice thinking it would benefit more because they dont know the system

I like alternative vote but I don't see how it is possible to manage when players can't even manage to vote in squad chat all the time

is it really every admins problem that people are lasy and cannot write 1 number?

I vote for lazy people

It's how democracy works - if there will be an option "against all" - we will get back to muttrah-muttrah-muttrah or another most underplayed map.

Write AV script and then suggest. Too complicated to do without.

ExeTick wrote:is it really every admins problem that people are lasy and cannot write 1 number?

It's their responsibility. Which comes with administrating a public server. As I wrote in my last post people are busy playing the game and don't always see the vote come up and when they do it's almost too late to vote. And you end up having fewer people participate in the voting. That's not lazy, that is busy PLAYING THE GAME. Two different things. It's also just being considerate of the players during the game to allow them to have a bit more time to vote. You must realize that spam on the screen is ultra annoying in the first place. If your going to vote ffs lets do it right!

would it be possible to script for players to make 1 map request each? !req yamalia aas
Then admin could pick from that list to get started. Instead of two votes, layer vote then map vote.

so the only time you can actually have a mapvote is beginning of the round when no one is out of main. thats the time everyone can see the vote without being busy.

rest of the time there will be always someone busy. so the entire round will be a bad time to make a mapvote. it will always be a bad time for a mapvote middle of a round.

I think that making mapvotes take longer(for example 10 minutes) could solve problems that players don't vote because are too busy or didn't saw it. Although current short vote should stay, in case of vote right before end of the round.

NwA is running mapvotes that is around 5-6 minutes.

I feel its to long but it might be good