• Our Minecraft servers are offline but we will keep this forum online for any community communication. Site permissions for posting could change at a later date but will remain online.

SURVIVAL GAMES Megathread: Voting Improvements

subtato

District 13
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
1,066
Reaction score
2,191
Based on discussion on the MCGamer Discord, there appears to be some areas where we could improve on the voting functionality. For what I've seen, I'll describe below and update this posting as we (as a community) hash out any further ideas.

Problems
  1. It appears that lower-voted maps are seeing higher than anticipated play time.
  2. Players are voting and leaving, but their votes aren't leaving with them, leading to increased chances on undesirable maps for the current session.
Additional Complaints
  • Chance voting leads to undesired maps being played.
Proposed Solutions
  • Problems 1, 2, and additional complaint 1
    • Move votes from a general number of votes on a map to each individual vote has the ability to win. This would allow us to propose a probability on a per-vote level, moving it from 5 options to up to the number of players in a game plus the number of additional or weighted votes.

If you have any other concerns or feelings about the voting system, you are welcome to comment on them here or discuss in the Discord. Please note that only feedback that is posted here will be guaranteed to be read and potentially added to this list. Anything other than what's in this thread may not reach the appropriate people and can get lost in Discord history.
 

Pixelatorx2

Platinum
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
2,957
Reaction score
2,625
I'd still like to see some underdog maps being played sometimes, but I do agree with the complaints that sometimes it's a little but frustrating when a less-than-wanted map wins.

1) I made a suggestion that I think got lost in the mix on the discord, but it was that only maps within an x% threshold of the highest-voted map is 'in the mix'.

For example:

1)
Valleyside - 20%
SG4 - 70%
SG1 - 0%
SG2 - 0%
TSG2 - 10%

Highest voted - SG4 w/ 70%. Valleyside is 'within' 50% of the votes, thus, it is able to be selected. TSG2, however, is outside of a 50% cuttoff, and is not able to be selected. SG1,2 are 70% away, and are obviously not able to be selected.

Thus, when there's an even spread, everything can be 'within' the threshold, and can be selected. This also prevents the issue of having one person vote a map that nobody else would like.

2) Give people a reward for voting. I've noticed that some people simply don't care to vote, but still leave when a map they don't want gets chosen. Maybe giving people 5 points or so for voting for a map would insensitivize players to vote more often, which will really get players thought's on maps.

It's a win-win scenario. Players get the maps they truly want, and the mapping team gets more accurate statistics about people's favorite maps.
 

IronOre12

Platinum
Joined
Apr 28, 2014
Messages
571
Reaction score
609
I'd still like to see some underdog maps being played sometimes, but I do agree with the complaints that sometimes it's a little but frustrating when a less-than-wanted map wins.

1) I made a suggestion that I think got lost in the mix on the discord, but it was that only maps within an x% threshold of the highest-voted map is 'in the mix'.

For example:

1)
Valleyside - 20%
SG4 - 70%
SG1 - 0%
SG2 - 0%
TSG2 - 10%

Highest voted - SG4 w/ 70%. Valleyside is 'within' 50% of the votes, thus, it is able to be selected. TSG2, however, is outside of a 50% cuttoff, and is not able to be selected. SG1,2 are 70% away, and are obviously not able to be selected.

Thus, when there's an even spread, everything can be 'within' the threshold, and can be selected. This also prevents the issue of having one person vote a map that nobody else would like.

2) Give people a reward for voting. I've noticed that some people simply don't care to vote, but still leave when a map they don't want gets chosen. Maybe giving people 5 points or so for voting for a map would insensitivize players to vote more often, which will really get players thought's on maps.

It's a win-win scenario. Players get the maps they truly want, and the mapping team gets more accurate statistics about people's favorite maps.
I like this idea in theory, but it leads to situations where in an evenly spread voting no map would be eligible to win, eg. four maps with <50% each.
Secondly, if roll with that method of voting, the voting cutoff you mentioned would have to be less than 50%, because of course you can't have more than a single map with more than 50%. If we say, hypothetically, the cutoff is 40%, then what happens to the maps that ARE above that cutoff? I would think the vote percentage for those maps in consideration would have to be recalculated since it is out of a new vote total. What I mean is if we have two maps with voting percentages of 45% and 55%, those percents are relative to the total votes, but when we go to choose which map is played, we have to calculate the percentage with the number of votes for those maps only as the total.
I'd like to propose ranked-choice voting where voters can submit the maps they would like to play in an order of favorites. This post is already long enough, but you can read about ranked choice voting here.
 

Pixelatorx2

Platinum
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
2,957
Reaction score
2,625
I like this idea in theory, but it leads to situations where in an evenly spread voting no map would be eligible to win, eg. four maps with <50% each.
Secondly, if roll with that method of voting, the voting cutoff you mentioned would have to be less than 50%, because of course you can't have more than a single map with more than 50%. If we say, hypothetically, the cutoff is 40%, then what happens to the maps that ARE above that cutoff? I would think the vote percentage for those maps in consideration would have to be recalculated since it is out of a new vote total. What I mean is if we have two maps with voting percentages of 45% and 55%, those percents are relative to the total votes, but when we go to choose which map is played, we have to calculate the percentage with the number of votes for those maps only as the total.
I'd like to propose ranked-choice voting where voters can submit the maps they would like to play in an order of favorites. This post is already long enough, but you can read about ranked choice voting here.
I think you misinterpreted my suggestion entirely. I didn't say cutoff percentage as in of total votes, I meant in terms of cutoff percentage based on the highest voted map.

For example, my suggestion of a 30% cutoff would play out like this:

Valleyside - 30%
SG4 - 50%
SG1 - 10%
SG2 - 0%
TSG2 - 10%

SG4 is the highest voted with 50%. We then compare all the other maps as follows:

Valleyside: 50 - 30 = 20%. 20% < 30% therefore valleyside is eligible
SG1: 50 - 10 = 40%. 40% > 30% therefore it is not eligible.
TSG2: 50 - 10 = 40%. 40% > 30% therefore it is not eligible.

Thus, Valleyside and SG4 are now 'in the draw' per se, and get selected based on the votes for that map.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
242,193
Messages
2,449,633
Members
523,972
Latest member
Atasci