@wowgetoffyourcellphone @marder and all other resident map judgement experts.
There are currently over 80 random maps, making large changes to rmgen is not really feasible if all of them have to be routinely updated, some can be automated, some can't. Which is also the reason why the library has a fooDeprecated set of functions simulating buggy behaviour of foo. In the interest of maintainability, I propose removing some redundant maps.
very much agreed.
Here is my list of random maps that are very similar to each other/ offer a very similar gamplay.
I don't think it will hurt to only have one of them left or combine them using biomes.
Sahel - Mainland(savanna/steppe biome) - Anatolian Plateau [keep mainland]
African plaines - Syria - Atlas mountains - Volcanic Lands [overall not a fan of any of those maps]
Belgian Upland - Rhine Marshlands [Belgian Upland can be interesting but also hilariously unfair]
Arctic summer - Botswana haven [Could be combined / or Botswana haven deleted]
India - Lake [keep Lake]
Sahel Water Holes - Rivers [keep either one]
Phoenician Levant - Northern Lights [keep Northern Lights]
Kerala - Hycranian Shores - Hellas [Hellas seems like the most interesting]
I agree with basically all the points from the paste.
Also: The same is true for the skirmish maps. For reference here is another rating I did a while back: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/28521-completed-terrain-and-map-overhaul-milestone-alpha-25/page/4/#comment-430749
We could easily remove 10, + the demo & sandbox maps
But all the discussion in that direction were deemed to be to controversial iirc :/
For India, and the regional maps, these can be combined into a unique concept using mixed biomes showing the western border of modern day India. The Thar desert from Rajasthan to the low lands in Kerala. North to South. More minerals in the north against fish and hunt in the south.
I agree with this. The currently bloated list of maps gives the illusion of choice, when people actually only tend to choose a dozen or less. Cutting the fat, as they say, increases the overall quality of what remains. It also gives us a smaller workset as we endeavor to improve the maps that remain.
I suggest we give all removed maps to the 'Community Maps' mod, if the curator of that mod wants them. Or we create a new mod called "Legacy Maps."
I suggest we give all removed maps to the 'Community Maps' mod, if the curator of that mod wants them.
I don't see any maps there that I'd want. Except Frontier. I've seen people play that often. But maybe they're just playing it because they like the team placement options. I think players would like a little more wood on it though. I think you should reconsider keeping Frontier.
It seems like it would be good to have a way to keep track of how often maps are played. It would be much easier to decide in the future, based on player interest.
Statistics are only for hardware. We don't send any extra data. It's in the user reporter terms :)
The lobby ratings bot suggests that its available at least for rated games. But that's hardly useful. Significantly biased towards a few maps (read mainland).
taking a closer look I would say that map is indeed not good and should rather be removed than fixed.
Looks like people like gear sometimes and I also seen some games on harbor, empire and continent, so I would remove them from the list for now. (although harbor needs to be fixed and empire should be changes so that the hill are never passable.)
It seems like I see Latium played pretty regularly in the lobby. But I think it could be replaced by a rectangular map that supports all the biomes, like Mainland Rectangled in community maps. Nothing special about that one, it's just Mainland but with canyons on each side so the playing area is rectangular. Although Latium has rivers on each side, so more like Yekaterinaville (also in community maps).