Project Reality Forums

I love that many community servers give us players the ability to vote the next map but I'm starting to get sick of playing Kokan, OP Marlin, Fallujah or the other same ole maps ( Forgot Muttah) people vote for. Sure i enjoy playing them a lot but still i enjoy playing 'maps in rotation' instead of voting for them all the time so we can get to play those many maps we don't see in a while. Just my opinion

Agreed.

Entirely true. PR is great, just people like the same stuff. Over and over...

My thought on this is that soldiers in the military don't get to pick where they're deployed to. They go where they're told to go. If their firebase sucks ***, they have to deal with it because that's where the military put it. If the map is one sided they have to deal with it because that's how it happened to set up.

It's something about demoncracy.lol

I believe most of existing servers have a mapvote.

I struggle to recall the last tiem I played Yamalia and Bijar Canyons (and I like that map a lot!).

The OP has a point.

ryan d ale wrote:I struggle to recall the last tiem I played Yamalia and Bijar Canyons (and I like that map a lot!).

The OP has a point.

I played both yesterday. And I like both.

just wish there was servers that would just do a map rotation for those player that prefer that and servers for those who like to vote

I'm totaly agree with you.I dont remember when i last time played korengal,lashkar,gaza,bijar canyons or other cool maps.I already hate fallujah,kokan,karbala caz' are overplayed.

ryan d ale wrote:I struggle to recall the last tiem I played Yamalia and Bijar Canyons (and I like that map a lot!).

The OP has a point.

Actually, I played Yamalia not too long ago, love it. But to be honest...Bijar Canyons? I seriously haven't played that map in the almost 3 years since I first installed PR. I literally didn't know it existed until now. That's just sad. Map votes suck

Not every map works at any time. In the early evening with a full server you could almost play every map and server will stay full, but admins often play something popular like muttrah then....and in the late evening when people decide to go to sleep or play another round you often cant set every map. Iron Eagle for example takes forever and with 40players no flag will be capped the one team is in bijar the other in alkomin and nothing moves, you often got a lack of transport on big maps when the server is not full and thats boring. Same with lashkar, the map is quite big and there are a few people that dont want to play taliban for 2 hours on an half full server.

What i dont like, its 9pm and there comes a mapvote up like iron ridge, gaza beach, muttrah ....you can say for sure that muttrah will win, admins have to think more often wich maps they could pack into a vote together, because sometimes its not really a choice....

The admins could make a vote about having a map vote. Problem solved

Darman1138 wrote:My thought on this is that soldiers in the military don't get to pick where they're deployed to. They go where they're told to go. If their firebase sucks ***, they have to deal with it because that's where the military put it. If the map is one sided they have to deal with it because that's how it happened to set up.

Yeah, but PR soldiers vam choose and leave when they wamt. Its 80% crybabies who only play what they like...

Realistically, this is something server admins need to balance. We need to take into account the amount of players on the server, as well as the popularity of the maps being chosen.

That said, I don't think there's anything wrong with occasionally just saying "No, we're going to play <insert somewhat unpopular map here>."

At least in my experience, most of the complaints about certain maps are from a vocal minority.

I'm also interested to see how the 100-player server is going to change that up a bit; an "unpopular" map might not have such a huge hit on server population, and most maps will still be just as fun with 60+ players as they were in 0.98.

Second. Yamalia is few and far in between.

Jolly wrote:It's something about demoncracy.lol

I believe most of existing servers have a mapvote.

Unfortunately there are a LOT of people, who are afraid of the new and uncomfortable and just can't see far enough. All the new stuff is actually exiting but all they think of are their ways to play the other maps. Pushing away what's new - I call that lack of intelligence.

T.A.Sharps wrote:I like those maps a lot, but I do feel like a moron trying to squad lead on the other maps that I don't get to play.

Well if you are a squad leader you have a certain set of skills, right? Just try to do what you think is smart and right in the situation. This stuff applies to all maps. Especially the new ones where not many people have found these "golden must have spots" like on muttrah where you put the FBs in tiny spaces or Ramiel - inside buildings.

Startrekern wrote: That said, I don't think there's anything wrong with occasionally just saying "No, we're going to play <insert somewhat unpopular map here>."

At least in my experience, most of the complaints about certain maps are from a vocal minority.

Sadly, true. Sometimes I just want to slap some of these loud *** kids quiet. Also sadly the majority is often passive because they don't feel like arguing is going to help in these cases. So it's up to the admin and the votes.

@ OP: Votes should be enabled but when an active admin is on he should really go for diversity. Maybe after muttrah play a totally new map and then another new map then fallujah. Etc.

I don't care if there's a vote or not, but one of the biggest problems for me is not knowing what will be up next. I don't have a whole lot of time to play PR, and I don't want to waste it playing maps I really hate (e.g. Korengal). If I know in advance either that the next map is already picked, that the admin will pick, or there will be a vote, then I may not know precisely what the next map will be, but at least I have the most information available to make the decision to stick around. If there's a good chance it will be another map I dislike, I'll sign off and work for the night so I have more time the following night to play.

The thing that annoys me the most is logging into a half-complete round, seeing next map = Korengal or something else I dislike, asking whether there has been / will be a vote or a different setnext, and the admin responds with "there will be a vote if you deserve it". Even worse is the admin who calls a vote, does setnext to the winner (for a map I enjoy, so I stay), then with 50 tickets left they setnext to something they like and I don't. To be clear, I'm not saying the admin doesn't have the right to pick whatever they want, I would just appreciate my time not being wasted by being misled into thinking the next map is something other than what it will be.

tl;dr: Just pick something and stick with it, whether vote-based, admin choice, or fixed rotation. But don't waste people's time by lying about the next map (or the process for its selection) then changing your mind an hour later.

SIDEKILL3R wrote:just wish there was servers that would just do a map rotation for those player that prefer that and servers for those who like to vote

=]H[= decided to implement open forum thread where ppl. can put in their map rotation wish list. if selected we run the list for couple of days. no map votes.

Forums / PROJECT REALITY / Official maplist request thread - HARDCORE GAMING COMMUNITY

we did it mainly because of the low vote turnout and suspected server instability when map votes are used, but also for those "rare" maps to be played.

I THINK I COULD DO A BETTER JOB!

Get together donate money and start your own server called "The maps no one wants to play 24/7"

lol seriously it can get to be the same maps in map votes.