Not the main point of the thread as tri said the pool has already been decided, but I'll say this anyways. Viaduct is easily the most interesting/exciting map to spectate because all the fast paced action and fights, and even to play and get rolled by a better team is usually still fun because there are no stalemates and it's so inherently back and forth (unless you get forward held for 3 minutes which is extremely rare obviously). Nobody I've spoken to in invite (besides b4nny and lucrative who have rather extreme opinions on completely changing the map pool) seriously thinks via should be removed, because it's such a perfectly balanced and fun map to play. Maybe in lower divisions where people aren't as coordinated and can't as easily counter a sniper by bombing and proper pressure, I can see people disliking it, but we should balance around the top level not some open team that never learned how to play the map properly or gets tilted cause it's different/they're not used to it.

I think it's the best map in the rotation because it allows every class to shine and show off their mechanical abilities/gamesense (medics surfing/arrows/movement/positioning, roamers going behind/sacking, pockets the same as well as doing good uber trades, scouts/demo clearly being super strong on the map).

Yes it is the only koth map but the fact that it is so good should be plenty enough to make that not matter. I see no reason why the pool must be entirely 5cp or koth or whatever other gamemode, and if anything it would be good to see more koth in the rotation. They add a completely new and unique element to the game and makes it so the team that is best at process/pug maps must also be coordinated and have to adapt to a different environment which is good imo and adds depth.

I do see the problem with the current ban system however, because people generally don't want to be upset on viaduct and unless you're really confident in your ability to play it well it's probably better to avoid the risk of choking and losing. I agree with the above posts about how moving back to a weekly map based system would help on this front and force people to learn to play via/propaganda as well as other less commonly played maps (and this preventing space cadet from having to play one in every three matches on process lol)

It's unfair to draw a comparison to gpit as that map was nearly universally disliked, or at least is now aside from a handful of people who want it back. Via seems to be the exact opposite, with only a select few people legitimately thinking it should be gone. The reason it isn't played is not that it's bad by any means, it's just different and people don't want to get upset. It doesn't help that it isn't played in pugchamp for whatever reason (iirc it was a config issue but I feel like that's not unfixable, maybe I'm wrong tho)

I know b4nny's opinion on maps isn't the most popular around these parts but I highly recommend giving his video a watch. It makes a lot of sense even if it might blow in the short term

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B-pTFDV5yg

this was my main gripe with gpit

in a 5cp map at a minimum ur team makes 5 mistakes in order to lose 5 rounds (lets think of this as wiping on mid)
in viaduct u have at least 4 completely even fights u must take before a team has an advantage
in gpit u can basically fuck up 1 fight and have it mean u lost the map if u lose it at a certain time

i enjoyed how tense the pushes were and the experience of orchestrating them but that map had far too many upsets to consider it an accurate meter of which team is better

gpit is also never pugged and a huge pain to find scrims for

I don't get the point of that video. To tell the story of the few of many maps that had potential to be great of which only few made it? Nothing has changed in that regard. The promising looking maps are still played and given opportunity to develop and then becoming a staple (sunshine) or dropped if their major problems arent fixed even after number of seasons (reckoner). If there's a promising enough map with a lot of potential it will be given similar treatment to all the maps banny mentioned, even if just for the purpose of getting rid of badlands.
And yes in the past more incomplete/awful maps were introduced but the game has developed and we have more references to make it easy to spot which map has potential and which doesn't and since the game is old and has fewer players there is lower number of map makers leading to fewer new maps.
Another argument that could be made is that in the past valve/early custom maps just sucked for 6v6 and since today we already have many good maps there is less need to adopt half baked might get good type of maps.

Realtalk, next season we should just remove every single map from rotation and re-vote for all of them rather than just fucking around with a single one.

In all honesty, I am tired of hearing about how everything effects the invite division/players as if their opinions and matches are more valuable to shape the scene.

The only time I give a shit what these invite meeting's decide are on weapon bans because they can take items to the limit and find whats overpowered.

The last several season we all been talking about growing TF2. In my mind, the league systems need to cater to a more balanced and fun environment for the open and IM divisions more than Invite.

The team I was on played (And won) 1 match on that map last season

and scrimmed a bit

If B4nny wants new maps to be played then maybe he should help get this pick-ban map system revoked. It really is not good for the map pool.

agreed. Encourages people to avoid maps

say whatever you want on here as you will that's cool, but please don't sit here and call my opinions extreme when I literally sit there and debate with you or anyone else I've talked to and given completely valid reasoning to the other side of the argument.

I like hearing other peoples opinions, and i have listened to plenty outside of this forum and the invite meeting, you just literally choose to ignore it when people give you their side of the argument and think we are just blindly coming out with random bullshit to support our views.

to clarify, I don't think the entire map pool should be changed, I believe that badlands and granary are outdated maps that aren't receiving the proper updates or being worked on enough to justify them being in the rotation over new maps like logjam or propaganda that are being worked on literally daily. This is the exact same reasoning that was used in the invite meeting to justify the removal of cardinal is that the map is not seeing any updates in the near future that we know about, therefore there isn't a point in continuing to playtest it in leagues, which is a point i agree with and also vocalized during this meeting (and that cardinal should be removed despite being a player and part of a team who plays the map frequently)

Ill remind you I am literally the only NA based player making an effort to get map testing done and to directly work with map makers to adapt their maps for 6v6 and to keep map makers around on the other side of things cause any of them will tell you, they were all about to fade out into non-existence. No gave a shit to even playtest the maps they work very hard and long hours on, while a majority of the community will sit here and complain about maps in the rotation and make literally 0 effort to change while we slowly slide into playing the same 8 maps for the rest of TF2's life in 6v6.

say whatever you want about this topic on this forum that's cool, I'm in the minority opinion and thats fine and I will always respect tri's decisions for the league. But don't try to make me look like some narrowminded and headstrong person whose opinion isn't relevant when Im Literally the only person currently bringing new maps into 6v6 in any way in NA or testing them (which you are not or your million other invite friends you talk to are not.)

With regards to map testing, Luc is absolutely spot on.

The NA 6v6 community is absolutely awful to try and support as far as mapmaking goes. Almost nobody is willing to help with testing / design these days. There were times in the past when we had new map sundays - as well as mixchamp running new maps, etc. that would see some attention - though I can recall running my maps in the new map groups and getting told the very helpful feedback of "This shouldn't be a barrel, it should be a box. Actually, you should just kill yourself."

Nice stuff, as always.

It's a stark contrast to rest of the world - ETF2L and Ozfortress have been incredible in working through new maps. The most development Logjam ever got was when I was working on it daily with the ETF2L prem guys running through it every day as well - and they were willing to give the map a shot in season. Sure, that version ended up being a pile of crap, but that was the point - you can theorycraft all day long what will make a map great, but you won't really get it there until you actually play it with some amount of seriousness (Logjam was beloved in doublemixes / PUGS before it got put into ETF2L, but once it was serious and not messing around errors came to light).

Ozfortress has been more than excellent as well - giving Logjam another chance out of the blue. And, perhaps a shock to NA, they like it. If I recall correctly, Logjam had a higher approval rating by their players than Prolands did, and it sounds like they will be keeping Logjam in next season (it replaced Granary, last season).

Both ETF2L and Ozfortress have organized numerous map test cups and worked with devs to keep things going. I recognize that that won't ever really be the case with ESEA as it's not as community / grassroots run as they are, but that said, we could seriously be doing a lot more.

I can honestly say it's endlessly frustrating trying to work on maps for the NA scene. I enjoy doing it, which is why I started and kept at it. I would honestly say that without the support that I've received from Ozfortress, ETF2L, and pretty much just Lucrative and b4nny I would have stopped for good a while ago. I think about quitting mapping altogether pretty regular still because of this, and maybe I should - but I won't yet because of these groups and people.

-end rant-

When it comes down to it barely anyone is playing granary blands and viaduct anyway. These aren't liked so there isn't really a reason to keep them over maps that are actually being updated other than you have played them for so long you are really good at them. Do you want something fresh and with potential to be better or do you want to continue playing (rarely) these outdated maps?

That being said I think there are new maps being made that don't necessarily have the potential to be good even with work from the mapper. Some of these actually do though. I think we should be honest about that.
Personally I do like product and don't really want to see it gone.

I think the least played maps should be removed, either blands granary and/or viaduct. The divisions should be weighted though to cater more to invite.

To end, I've made a handful of jump maps and have had a decent amount of comp players ask me to make a 6s map. From my pov it is not worth it at all, so it's pretty amazing to see anybody actually mapping for 6s. Kudos and good luck

.

omega nerd essay coming in. headings underlined if ur only interested in a bit.

First thing: comp player's n1 priority is winning--while we care about fun and liking the maps, nothing will trump trying to win when match time comes. So when people ban maps, they ban the maps that either 1) their team is bad at playing or 2) the other team is good at playing.

This is why the map distribution works out the way it does. It's not just that people like process, snake, and gully more; it's that they feel most comfortable on these maps because they are well made. These maps are consistent and flow well, so teams can focus on higher level play and not be held back by gimmicks. Teams know that they cannot be cheesed out of a win on these maps--the better team always wins here.

on granary and badlands:

Granary and badlands are gimmicks--both maps have hugely exploitable layouts (granary slows to a snails pace so only uber advantage is relevent/badlands last is hell to push into and out of). So what ends up happening is people pick these maps not because they know the map better, but because they can exploit these problems better than the other team. As in, these maps are only picked when one team feels so much worse than the other that they feel like they need to cheese out the win.

Notably, both granary and badlands are hugely dependent on ubers, while also making it really fucking hard to sack for medics. So if a team wants to safely hold back and wait for uber, there isn't much you can do to stop them. These maps have always been hard to sack for medic on, but in recent years (MEDIC-SCOUT SPEED WHY) it has just become unreasonable. Not only do these maps make the game slow and boring, but they encourage 1-dimensional play: stalemate, sack for medic, repeat until 1 of the medics fuck up.

These maps are good at producing upsets, but not for the right reasons. You can cheese these maps really hard by playing defensively, to the point where the decidedly worse team can sometimes come out on top. Similar to how any soldier can beat you on spire if they just sit on the fence.

on new maps:

New maps are in an interesting position: when they come out, everyone is bad at them. So you can either ban them and focus on the maps you know, or you can try to learn the map before everyone else and leverage that map knowledge for some wins against unprepared teams.

So why didn't anyone try to pull ahead on cardinal (well some teams have, like King's Krew, but in general)? Because the map isn't the same quality as the core 6s maps. That is to say, with so many branching chokes and wide areas, the map still feels cheese-ridden with how players can potentially wrap/flank/backcap. Nobody would ever feel comfortable that they would certainly win going into that map.

Propaganda has reason to go over differently. The map plays much cleaner, like the rest of the core 6s maps. That should be enough encourage teams to play it--to get ahead of other teams on a map where they can win consistently and not get gimmicked.

At the end of the day, every map in rotation should eventually be held to the same standard as process, snake, and gully. They should feel consistent and non-gimmicky, and teams would pick between them based on more nuanced concepts: which maps favour soldiers over scouts, holds over team-fights, etc... It's not that worse teams should never be able to upset better teams, but that they must get these upsets by carefully picking maps which benefit the few, slight advantages they have. New maps need to be added to reach this ideal state, so we shouldn't be shooting them down right off the bat.

on viaduct:

It's not a bad map, but I really don't consider it very good either. And that's not because people just don't know how to play it--it's the opposite. If you know how to play viaduct, it becomes pretty simple: team-fight for point, losing team respawns, losing team 4 man sacks to break even ubers/uber disadvantage, then losing team refights with uber ad so that they become the winning team, then loop until time hits 0.

The only compelling parts of viaduct are the team-fights; but frequent team-fights occur because it's KOTH, not because it's viaduct. I'd be much more interested in developing KOTH maps which did not give the winning team complete positional advantage, making it viable for the losing team to dry-push instead of sacking their whole team for med.

A KOTH map which encourages dry-pushing by evening out positional advantage, and therefore encourages more team-fights, would be far superior to viaduct imo. And having more than 1 KOTH in rotation would be great too. That said, KOTH should stay in the rotation as way to reward teams with coordinated team-fighting, and as a way to encourage teams to work on coordinating team-fights (which is arguably the most complex and underutilized aspect of tf2 imo). Viaduct just might not be the map to keep KOTH relevant tho.

nerd essay end me

I don’t think the notion of dropping badlands/granary and possibly product (due to being the only KotH map in the rotation) for new maps is “extreme”. “extreme” would be completely revamping the map rotation. No one is trying to take out the maps that are best suited for comp play. B4nny/lucrative and co are just looking to improve upon the current map pool. Why leave in maps that are generally disliked and do not play fluidly with the current meta? The game has out grown some of the older maps. It’s time to replace them.

Walrex brings up several good points. Yes, there is a reason process snake and gully are the most heavily played maps. These maps should definitely stay in the rotation. The newer maps may not be on the same tier as the favored maps (although with time and dedication, I think some of them can be), but I’d still rather play them over some of the maps in the rotation. We should be looking to make the map rotation as strong as possible while adding a little bit of diversity to the pool. New maps will force people to think outside the box, try new things, and not mimic things they have seen other players do. This should be exciting but is instead generally frowned upon.

I’d like this entire situation to also pose as a PSA to all comp players/teams to also step up and give the new maps a chance and actually put some time on them before writing them off. I don’t mean to play it once or twice in a pug and be like “dis map sux L not fun” I mean ACTUALLY test it, practice it, and play it with your team in scrims. Play it for a season extensively. My team struggles to get anyone to even practice the new maps (we are strong advocates for the change and would gladly play any new map that is up for consideration). I appreciate the map makers making new maps but it boggles my mind how they have to get put under the microscope and ran through a gauntlet before even seeing true comp play. The gauntlet SHOULD be comp play itself, which is what some of the community is trying to do with the new map tournaments/pugs etc, and I applaud those who put the time and effort into organizing those as well as the dedicated developers trying to make maps for a group of players that are very difficult to please. Keep it up.

we dont have to autoban the maps that we dont want to play if all the maps consistent and fun. even helping to pug a new map or two gives SO much feedback to the mapper and makes them able to drastically change the map quickly + in the right direction. the effect would be multiplied here if a map is inducted into league play. within a few seasons we could have a full map pool of solid, consistent maps like gully, snake and process. it just starts will one or two maps first and getting rid of the old ones that no one plays anyways (gran or badlands) gimmicky stuff isn't fun unless you're doing it.

I'm super excited to play/scrim propaganda once we get going but I would be even more excited to play two new maps.

testing a new map>banning one that you dont like already and might still get in playoffs bo3

I'm gonna have to agree with what hyce and lucrative are saying. Propaganda literally sat in limbo for like 7 months with no feedback whatsoever. Once lucrative picked it up and started to show me the reasons why my map wasn't working I was able to get it to a state that a lot of people are happy with in basically a month. Just imagine how much better my map could be if I had feedback to work with during those 7 months.

That's honestly, I think, the main complaint from most of the mapping community. Anytime they've tried to make a comp map, their map kind of just gets forgotten because of people not testing it, and then they end up in the hole time-wise. Because they could've been putting their efforts into a casual map that actually has a chance of making it into the game.

is there a specific version of propaganda that esea has committed to yet?

I believe the latest, cp_propaganda_b12a

Yeah, nobody's reported any issues with b12a since I pushed it out a few days ago, so unless something pops up, that's the version being used.

I was jumping around through it last night and i was getting massive stutters (dips below 100 FPS with nobody else on the map). I feel some optimization work needs to be done before this map is ready for league play.

literally have not heard a single person from the new map cup, map playtest pugs or quindali pugs complain about optimization of the map even once

use a pc to play the maps screwb

this thread in a nutshell

https://img.fireden.net/v/image/1525/38/1525388794348.png

Im playing on a 2700x @ 4.35ghz with 16gb DDR4 3400 and R7 260x. More than enough for TF2. The issue is only on this map. The stutters are repeatable and occurs only in specific areas of the map. Clearly the issue is the map.

Badlands... Now THAT was a map

https://i.imgur.com/gIgnfhX.png

HEY SCREWBALLER MAYBE YOU COULD TELL THE MAP MAKER WHERE ON THE MAP THIS STUTTERING OCCURS INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING THAT IT OCCURS

Completely irrelevant in TF2.

I will add him and do just that.

just because its a more CPU bound game doesnt mean it doesnt use your graphics card, i have an RX 470 and in game have 15-30% percent GPU utilization
the r7 260x was a low tier card even when it came out, and that was in 2013

Which is why the issue is ONLY ON THIS MAP and ONLY in certain places? I think there is a culling issue somewhere. Did this map use any custom assets without LODs?

Anyone here got a private server with the map? I have contacted the map maker and i am going to walk through the map pointing out the areas with stuttering.