Map Voting?
So after making a post about indoor maps, I thought about something that could really benefit the games health. (let me know if you think I'm wrong or disagree)
Like Halo and many other games, add a map voting feature. Before the game starts, give 3 options of maps that the 5 players can choose from. The map that gets the most votes, is selected. This might also help some map related DC issues. Or make them worse idk lol by seeing that people voted RPD, players will leave before the game starts rather than waiting till the games starts.
But with this being a thing the "add-on" and "character change lock" would have to happen sooner so people cant get an upper hand on the map selection. The map votes happen AFTER everyone's add-ons and character have been locked in.
Map offerings can be removed and instead give the player a chance to vote twice. If any voting is tied, the vote will go to the map with the most votes first. (ex: if Crotus Pren and Midwitch are tied at 2 and 2, the game will either choose one randomly or choose the map that had 2 votes first.
Or make the map offering give the wanted map a given spot in the 3 map selection for people to vote for. (ex: if you burn a Midwitch offering, 1 of 3 selected maps would be Midwitch) if all 5 player bring a different map offering, 3 offerings are picked at random for player to vote for. Or if more than 3 different offerings are brought, they all cancel out and regular map voting happens.
Thank you for reading, if you have any ideas for this or changes, add it down below!
Comments
-
Does the killer count for four votes?
18 -
Just 1
but maybe some kind of system could be placed in for SWF?
0 -
So survivors would always get their way?
22 -
I just edited my comment lol
0 -
But then it's always the killer that wins, if the survivors don't unite. And even when they do it's a tie.
Conclusion: DbD cannot have map voting.
Post edited by GentlemanFridge on15 -
Wow you're a very negative person lol
obviously this can change in any way
0 -
SWF doesn't matter.
If you have a choice between say Lerys, RPD and Badham. It's going to be Badham every time.
Kinda defeats the point of voting on maps. May as well just be 100% random.
10 -
Its an idea that can be built on. If you're going to just be negative, please leave.
2 -
The way to do map voting is similar to how you handle children sharing a dessert. In the case of children one cuts and the other chooses which half their sibling gets.
For picking the map: one side if they use a map offering should let the killer choose which map inside of that tile set. Obviously maps that only go to one place need to be "united" so that there is a meaningful choice.
Imagine for example that you use a farm offering: the killer will always pick abattoir because it is the smallest map and the only fair farm map. But even that is not exactly fair so inside each option there should be a "random map" as a nth choice. So for example you could pick swamp map and the killer might get the option via random choice to pick clown map instead.
2 -
You could build upon it by having the killers vote count for more. You shut that down. If you're not open to suggestions please leave.
11 -
Not sure I'd like this - I'd imagine the pool of maps used would shrink significantly. Also, in a 4v1, the killer will likely never get their choice (survivors would rightly choose a map beneficial to them and simply outvote the killer). So, this suggestion feels it has some problems which would need amending.
One possible change that may assist would be for the pool of maps to choose from will automatically remove the previous map each player has played from the pool. But I admit I'm not sold on this. However, at least it's an idea to encourage a change, and I applaud that.
1 -
I have stated numerous times already that anything could change. The killers vote can be 1 or more idc. Please leave this discussion.
0 -
Another idea could also be like rocket league where you can vote for maps you don't like and if other people dislike the same map, it give that map a much less chance to be selected?
0 -
But there's the issue. If you give the killer more votes, it has to be worth at least 4 survivor votes for it to matter against 4 uniting survivors. In that case, it's a tie at best.
Give the killer more than 4, and the killer wins by default.
give the killer less than 4, and the killer loses by default.
6 -
Technically that's what map offerings are for.
But we can already see that they are largely used by survivors to send killers to unfavorable realms.
Personally I would rather map offerings got removed, because I'm tired of squads just sending me to Badham, so I don't see how a map voting system wouldn't just end up favoring one side.
6 -
If this were to be implemented, maybe the killer could count for 3 votes, and the survivors could count for 1.5?
That way, 2 survivors tie with a killer, but 3 tips it into majority?
3 -
Voting could be abused by the 4 survivors.
I suggest the game blocks the previous 2 maps each player has been on. This would remove the possibility of repeating the same map multiple times while also giving the full variety.
0 -
Or give the killer 2? And if SWF comes into play, give the killer .5 votes for every survivor in SWF?
I want to base this around having more fun and also less map related DCs
Maybe. This idea can be built on too!
0 -
Blocking a previously played map wouldn't be a bad idea either. Especially during the time's when a new map comes out and people are sick of playing the new map over and over again??
1 -
But how often would this happen? I feel like people think 4 man SWFs are all the game has, when that simply just isn't true.
There are a lot of 2 man SWFs, for example, but an even bigger base of solo q players, who can't communicate what they're voting for.
0 -
I agree. I play mostly solo q. But there is also chat in lobbies. Maybe make the chat cross platform as well?
0 -
True. I'm a PS4 player, I always forget about the chat feature on PC lol.
Maybe voting would have to take place before or after the offering screen? So you can chat all you want about what you'd like to vote for, but it may not be an option when the time comes.
0 -
Id say if its after the offering screen, it would have to show what map it is when you spawn in, otherwise people will leave and discontinue the whole match for everyone
Than maybe this should become a default option.
0 -
My suggestion would be for the map to be shown before the game starts (at random) and you all have an option to skip, but the map will only skip if all 5 players agree.
Guaranteed it wouldn't be that often, but on the odd occasion a map might come up no one likes.
Other than that I think they should keep it the way it is and remove map offerings.
2 -
Hey there, I see that you’re pretty new here to the forum with only 15 posts so far, so the first thing I want to say is Welcome! I’m sorry that one of your first threads had to go this way, but one of the things you’ll come to quickly learn is that this community is VERY political.
There are the “survivor mains” and the “killer mains”, and just about any comment on any topic is viewed and distorted through the lens of “this makes their side too strong” or “that is unfair to my side!”
You had a fun idea about map voting and I personally would love to see something like this. But then you immediately saw comments of “survivors would always win” and then “now killers always win.” Knowing how this goes, I encourage you to think of possible complaints from both roles when posting ideas and try to counter them in advance. Someone will still gripe regardless, but it’s easier to handle when you expect it.
My compromise suggestion to your idea would be something like this:
- After loadouts are finalized, survivors are presented with the same 3 random realms (not maps) to choose from. Most votes wins. If 2 maps are tied, one of the two is picked randomly. If a player doesn’t vote in time, then their vote is cast randomly.
- After loadouts are finalized, the killer is given 3 random realms to choose from (not necessarily the same 3 choices that the survivors got.) If the killer doesn’t choose in time, then the vote is cast randomly.
- The winning survivor realm and the winning killer realm are displayed to all players - along with a 3rd random realm. All players watch as one of these 3 choices is chosen randomly. The match will load into one of the maps from the selected realm.
- Map offerings can be used in various ways such as: increase your role’s choices while voting, decrease the choices that the other role gets, add a 2nd random realm to the final selection (total of 4 instead of 3), or ensure that the realm of your choice gets into your role’s initial vote.
Although somewhat complex, I feel that something like this provides a middle-of-the-road solution that prevents one role from steamrolling over the other. But as I said earlier, people will still find a way to gripe. Before long, somebody will complain that “there’s already too much RNG in this game, we don’t need even more randomness!” And so I’ll respond in advance by saying that maps are ALREADY chosen at random, and when they’re not due to offerings, then the match is usually unbalanced. Giving everone some minor say is kinda nice I think!
Anyway, wall of text, I know, but I hope you get a kick out of this! The overall lesson is to expect the negativity so it does get you down. Just ignore it and keep the fun ideas flowing! And once again, welcome to the forum!
1 -
The problem is if you get a choice between shelter woods and Ormond as a killer, you'll be going to Ormond every single time. Because it's 1v4
6 -
I'd rather just see the map in the lobby before I select a character and loadout. It's really dumb that I can select a killer or survivor loadout and have it be rendered completely useless by the map. Yeah, it would lead to lobby dodging. But that's because map design is lacking in the fun department.
1 -
Unless the winner of the chosen map gets revealed when the map loads I imagine this would increase people suddenly not loading their game.
Also, I don't think DBD suffers from this problem but I don't want meme maps being constantly chosen like how Baby Park is for Mario Kart if you know what I mean.
As the most recent Community vote, some map choices were questionable.
1 -
Agreed with this one the most. Basically dbd cant really have a more normal voting system (we count map offerings as a vote) cause it would skew the maps in favor of 1 side. Basically 1 side chooses realms while the other choses specific map would be the best implementation of this kinda system with an added "random" button for incase. Personally, we'd rather have random maps every time.
0 -
I like that idea!!
2 -
I see lol and I love this idea as well! Thank you for giving you ideas!
0 -
I know exactly what you mean lol
0 -
Or an idea like @BringShaggytoDBD mentioned. Bring up 3 maps for everyone to veto instead of vote for? And get rid of map offerings? The map with the least amount of votes is played?
0 -
and sorry! I did mean realms not maps lol
0 -
No worries! I just put that in there to make sure there’s no confusion. Even the offerings we have now are technically “realms”, but everyone still refers to them as map offerings.
1 -
Swf would be an issue for sure but just the fact the killer's vote is always outnumbered is my point. It also puts solo survivors in a bad spot with voting as well when paired with swf.
1 -
Amusement Park!!!! This game needs an amusement park map. I'd be happy to be slaughtered in one. Just kill me right next to a Rollercoaster 🎢 or ferris wheel.😁😁😁
1 -
I want them to make it so the realm the players had in their last match is removed from possible map selection to stop back to back matches in same realm. Then make map offerings guarantee you won't go to a specific realm instead of increasing chances to go there, that would stop players from DCing because if you really hate a map you have a way to not get sent there.
1 -
These are valid concerns. If maps were more balanced it wouldn't matter where a trial is played, beyond just personal preference.
Then a voting system of some sort could be added. Based on fun. Remember fun?
1 -
I would rather get a map vote for where not to go on all maps.
1 -
The map choice should be pure RNG imo. No map offerings, no voting, just luck of the draw.
1 -
All 5 people would need to agree on the vote. Otherwise we would just end up in a situation where a map gets banned in the survivor’s favor because it’s 4v1.
1 -
I feel that would fall into a similar category you mentioned earlier, although it does at least keep a sizeable pool of maps remaining to choose from, so it's a better idea.
1 -
The best thing would just be a map veto list, just like in Starcraft 2. So everyone can veto a certain amount of maps maybe 3-5 per person? I mean there are more than 40 maps in the game so it really should not be much of an issue. With that nobody has to play on their most hated map and in the end everyone gets an okayish map.
Like I said before the number could also be sth else... Now we either need to remove map offerings as they destroy the concept or make them iridescent maybe? At least playing a map offering should only bring the map back into the pool but not with a higher chance, even if multiple of the same are played... Unless the map is not vetoed of course....
I'm aware of the issues that brings for certain builds that only work on certain maps: Mirror Myers for example. But then again when our goal is to not make somebody completely miserable by them having to play on a certain map we cannot give everyone what they wanted but only what they really did not want...
Worst case you have to hope you will get a group of survivors that don't despise the map you want... But then again many guys that despise a certain map will dc anyway, so with that in mind you're most likely not getting to play your map anyway xD
1 -
Wouldn’t work cause this is a asymmetrical game. There are maps that are good for surv, some neutral, and some good for Killer. One side will NEVER choose a map that benefits the other side. With good reason lol
not to mention it would 100% defeat the purpose of map offerings. All maps should just be all neutral tbh
2 -
That's basically why I want a veto system.. as both sides will vote out the most annoying maps for them leaving the rather balanced ones left... You could even argue about give the killer the same amount of vetos as all survivors togehter for that purpose...
1 -
But that would only create new problems. First being the same maps over and over and over as some maps are hated all around. Second being even longer wait time in the game lobby for basically nothing as people would keep vetoing everything.
Not to mention people quitting for not getting their way, meaning requeues. I mean, if I play infinite tier one Myers in Mother Dwelling I’d seriously consider quitting the match before loading lol
1 -
I mean... isn't it good to play on rather the same 20 maps over and over because all the other maps are hated? Maybe that's the problem itself... some maps are just so terrible for at least one side that nobody wants to play them... I think that's a good thing that people would not have to play those.
I don't think that is an issue either because you have a limited amount of vetos and after a minute you're either loading into the game or have to leave the lobby... So unless I got you wrong on that one? I don't see how that is a problem... So maybe explain it differently? Because that's the same as saying there are too many perks in the game people just keep changing them so you spend more time in the lobby ...
People are already quitting on some maps or not playing them at all, but yeah i agree some builds that need a specific map are just not gonna work... That's the one point I admit is problematic.. But then again every single T1 Myers in Lerys I went against had basically at least 1 dc anyway... so yeah :/
0 -
It is bad for the game overall, like ??? No diversity is not healthy for the game at all. It would be like logging into DBD right after the Haddonfield rework when all u would see was Legion on Haddonfield all week. It is not optimal nor healthy.
so ur saying it would be the same amount of time to choose ur build AND vote and veto a map? Again, not optimal, realistically it would have to increase the lobby time to do all that, specially if everyone could veto at least once. And even if that was the case, the Killer is alone, to be fair the Killer would have at least 4 vetoes. Can u see how you would need more lobby time? Time inefficient.
and yes people do quit but suffer a dc penalty, there is no penalty for quitting while in lobby. If u could see the map and quit without penalty it would be a mess with no repercussions.
0 -
Yeah sure but its not like it is the same map over and over again, like I said before there are between 40 and 50 maps... if we veto 15-20 there are still 20-30 maps in the pool? And I would rather play on 10 good maps every day than 50 ######### ones... I you look into counter strike or starcraft... there are waaaaaay less maps in the pool, and people still play the game because the maps are actually well designed... And that is the problem with many maps in DBD they might look nice, but they are not fun to play on... You can't blame people for not wanting to play on unfun maps..
Ah ok nono you misunderstood... Every survivor has a list of all maps, even before he enters queue and every killer as well... And just like your perk loadout it gets saved every time, just like in Starcraft 2 you just pick the maps you want to veto and these veto'ed maps just stay veto'ed until you cange it again... So there is literally no extra time you have to spend in the lobby unless you just cannot decide on which map you hate most.
But you don't see the map in my idea XD You just play with a decreased map pool and just like now already you see the map when you load into it.... I think you misunderstood me my points there, wasn't clear enough I guess...
1
