Change the Voting System back.

[bcfcAnt]

The biggest reason maps are overplayed is because people are obsessive with staying with what they know. Unless we force players to learn something out of their realm of knowledge of a map they are only going to play Valleyside, Holiday, etc. and let the time spent on maps that are way nicer than those (*cough* SG2 *cough*) go to waste. I actually got to play my favourite map, SG2, MULTIPLE times yesterday. That is more than I've played it in the last 2 weeks total. Personally, I find the new voting system forces you to learn new maps that you most likely will end up liking.

This is precisely my point. We are being forced to play maps we don't like.

Everyone else saying it's fair because we get to give new maps a chance. That should be our choice if you ask me. Also I notice a lot of people leave the game if the map what was winning doesn't get picked so that's not exactly making us play the underplayed maps but rather annoying us because we just waited the whole lobby time for a map with barely any votes to win. How is that fair?

Regarding your comment RC_4777 - I personally purchased diamond donor to a) join full lobbies, b) to get 4 votes and c) to help the server.

We have the right to 'swing' the map voting, we donated for that privilege

 

[MoLoToV]

This is precisely my point. We are being forced to play maps we don't like.

Everyone else saying it's fair because we get to give new maps a chance. That should be our choice if you ask me. Also I notice a lot of people leave the game if the map what was winning doesn't get picked so that's not exactly making us play the underplayed maps but rather annoying us because we just waited the whole lobby time for a map with barely any votes to win. How is that fair?

Regarding your comment RC_4777 - I personally purchased diamond donor to a) join full lobbies, b) to get 4 votes and c) to help the server.

We have the right to 'swing' the map voting, we donated for that privilege

You still have the right to 'swing' the map voting. As your vote counts for 4 it'll increase the chance of that map winning the vote alot

 

[TF1xHD]

being honest if the maps that are 'UnderPlayed' had more than 1 or 2 Teir 2 Chests on it maybe the map would get played more for example, Breeze Island , that map has two teir 2 's on it and everyone just rushes there making the game bad cause you get nothing.
and other maps that i have tried out there has been no teir 2 's :c so thats why i stick to maps like holiday,vallyside ect. cause there is plenty of chests for everyone to have a chance. just my thought

 

[bcfcAnt]

You still have the right to 'swing' the map voting. As your vote counts for 4 it'll increase the chance of that map winning the vote alot

I think you're missing the point. If there's a clear favourite map wanting to be played in a lobby and a map with a very low percentage is played it's ridiculous because clearly the majority didn't want that. Surely it's better to please the majority rather than the odd few?

 

[Tyco]

being honest if the maps that are 'Under Played' had more than 1 or 2 Teir 2 Chests on it maybe the map would get played more for example, Breeze Island , that map has two tier 2 's on it and everyone just rushes there making the game bad cause you get nothing.
and other maps that i have tried out there has been no teir 2 's :c so thats why i stick to maps like holiday,vallyside ect. cause there is plenty of chests for everyone to have a chance. just my thought

There are LOTS of chest route videos on Youtube. They're not hard to find and there is one for every map. If the reason you don't like underplayed maps is because of not having a route I recommend that

 

[MoLoToV]

I think you're missing the point. If there's a clear favourite map wanting to be played in a lobby and a map with a very low percentage is played it's ridiculous because clearly the majority didn't want that. Surely it's better to please the majority rather than the odd few?

The majority wanted to play the map, so it gets a higher percentage to be played. the other map, which less people wana play, will get a way lower percentage to be played. Could you please explain how this is not fair?

 

[ITsMeTYL3R]

I find it annoying that for example, if 1 person votes breeze island, and 23 people vote SgHighway, and breeze wins, then nobody but 1 will be a happy camper.

 

[TF1xHD]

but i still don't get why we want to know a percentage instead of it just saying MAPABC - 8 Votes
MAPDEF - 3 Votes
and then the map with more votes wins :3

 

[bcfcAnt]

The majority wanted to play the map, so it gets a higher percentage to be played. the other map, which less people wana play, will get a way lower percentage to be played. Could you please explain how this is not fair?

Yeah sure, read the message directly beneath yours.

 

[MoLoToV]

Yeah sure, read the message directly beneath yours.

Still. That doesn't make it unfair, it's perfectly fair. The 1 person that voted for that map just got lucky. It might be annoying, but it's still fair.

 

[Dah_Hobbit]

but i still don't get why we want to know a percentage instead of it just saying MAPABC - 8 Votes
MAPDEF - 3 Votes
and then the map with more votes wins :3

This was the old system and the percentage is crucial. I'm pretty sure nobody in the lobby wants to do the math and figure out what is the chance of the map being voted.

 

[Tyco]

Let us put it this way. In the Canadian voting system there is no party with total power. When there is an election Members of Parliament of specific parties will run in their constituencies. If they win with most votes in said constituency, they will earn one of the 308 spots in parliament for their said party. Now, with this system it means that if an MP does NOT win the vote in their constituency, they just lost their .003 % chance they had for that seat in decision making to another party. Now when the election is over, the party with the most seats get to be the party in 'power'. But, if they got below 50% total seats, they are a minority and actually have LESS of a say than the other parties who were running and got into the house. But, if they got above 50% they have a majority government and have much more say in decision making, but not all of it. The point I'm trying to get at is this system IS fair, and can give everyone more of a say in the final result, sort of how when a map gets the least votes it can still affect what the final outcome is. Though just like in the Canadian voting system, majority does not NECESSARILY rule and in the end that is more fair to have the beliefs of everyone spoken for. Like in the new voting, majority does have the most power but we are giving the underdogs the chance to prove themselves that they deserve.