Absolutely not!Will the KoTD Arabia map have woodlines this time?
Would be nice to have different variations of Arabia... One 'standard', one desert, one green, one with bigger woodlines, hills, etc.
Not just one arabia with so few and thin woodlines it's ridiculous.
What are you complaining about? This is probably a "Green Arabia" gen with how chunky those woodlines are. Better be careful before all of the sand is turned into unwallable terrainI was watching Memb's stream and I'm not liking the map generation. I understand the intention to restrict the ability to wall, but the wood lines look too far.
More problematic is that some generations had small ponds that greatly reduced the amount of wood available for only one of the players, e.g.
Just wanted to second this thought. The seeding is so important when there are qualifiers for this, and it doesn't take much to put a very good player in a borderline impossible situation with 2 brackets of death, where other brackets have it way easier. I do like having no invites, and understand that its probably not going to change for this event, but it feels like a definite area where improvement could be had.Love the deep payouts, but it is sad to see Single Elimination qualifiers show up again. Obviously, having two is better than one, but the strength of seeding is just too great, especially considering how with no invited players there will be 2-4 players in each of Hera/Viper/Liereyy/TaToH/Yo's path for Q1 that realistically have no choice but to take the L and try again in Q2.
Idk if a switch to Double Elimination could be considered or even possible, but still, I hate SE with the power of a thousand suns.
Anyway, looking forward to it!
there is 2 problems, time and money, we do what we can with what we have, thanks for feedback but we have already considered all the options possible for how i have said before the time we have and the money we have also.Just wanted to second this thought. The seeding is so important when there are qualifiers for this, and it doesn't take much to put a very good player in a borderline impossible situation with 2 brackets of death, where other brackets have it way easier. I do like having no invites, and understand that its probably not going to change for this event, but it feels like a definite area where improvement could be had.
Not sure if this would be popular, but for me I'd like to see the qualifiers be shrunk in size in terms of participants in order to be more meaningful. The first couple rounds just never seem to be that impactful, other than giving more people a 'chance to play'. To throw something out there, I think an ideal qualifier for me would look something like the top 80 seeded people, split into 16 groups of 5. Each group plays out a mini group stage, with the top player advancing to main event, the bottom 2 eliminated, and the middle 2 playing a series for the invite. Probably more total games and admin work, but if the main group stage games are allowed to be played any time the players schedule and the final series matches between the #2 and #3 in each group are played live it feels like a good compromise between flexibility and exciting live series. Plus those final series give some highlight to the #17-48 players who odds are won't last very long in the main event anyways as the #1-16 players are already qualified. IDK seems more 'fair' to me, but I'd be excited to see more thought put into this no matter the outcome.
Actually not a bad idea. This will make civ selection somewhat more strategic too.Would be nice to have different variations of Arabia... One 'standard', one desert, one green, one with bigger woodlines, hills, etc.
Not just one arabia with so few and thin woodlines it's ridiculous.
Would be nice to have different variations of Arabia... One 'standard', one desert, one green, one with bigger woodlines, hills, etc.
Not just one arabia with so few and thin woodlines it's ridiculous.
It's an interesting idea. The current version should offer a good amount of variety; however, since it's unpredictable, you won't be able to use this to your advantage with the civilisation picks.Actually not a bad idea. This will make civ selection somewhat more strategic too.
How about instead, we add extra Ponds AND make it the standard Arabia on ladder for the next yearCan I please make an absolute, on my knees begging request to not Chrazini our woodlines? Ponds offer no strategic value to Arabia and purely make the map more frustrating, both for players and viewers.
not sure if I understood this correctly, but is there really variations to the kotd5 map? Like based on randomness, players might generate a map with more/closer woodlines or generate a fully open map with scarcer woodlines?It's an interesting idea. The current version should offer a good amount of variety; however, since it's unpredictable, you won't be able to use this to your advantage with the civilisation picks.
It's certainly something that would be interesting to explore in the future, but for King of the Desert V, we'll remain with one map for now.
Appreciate the input!
not sure if I understood this correctly, but is there really variations to the kotd5 map? Like based on randomness, players might generate a map with more/closer woodlines or generate a fully open map with scarcer woodlines?
I agree. Maybe also add a blue Arabia with water and maybe some arabia where you're protected by a stone wall from the start, that looks like an arena. And then we also could change the name of the tournament into King of Everything.
As long as its not random and players know which version they are playing. Like all the variations in arabia should not be masked under one map and leave it to the rng gods for generation. I remember seeing many times in some tourneys where the two most popular versions of arabia back in the voobly days : HC2 Arabia and KOTD2 Arabia, were used within the same set. HC2 arabia was the classic wallable map with 3-4 thick woodlines. The gold and berry placement was equivalent for both players (one back and one forward or vice versa). Civs like Mayans, Britons are super good on this version. On the other hand you have KOTD2 arabia, fully open, deserted, barely any woodlines, hilly. Civs like Franks, Slavs were solid on this map back in the day, and nowadays we would see Lithuanians, Khmer dominate such a map.Nah, it could still be "Arabia". But you can have one Arabia that is fully open (very hard to wall), one that is like Standard Arabia on the ladder, and one with a bit more trees (like the old school Arabia). One with some more cliffs and elevation, one with less.
It would help increase the variety in civ picks and strategies, and would be more entertaining to watch (in my opinion).
Well I guess everyone have their own taste. I agree that cav civs benefit from openes more, I overall find cav civ currently much better/easier, but at same time having runestones where most ppl just drush fc is just most boring thing ever both to watch and to play. Finally arabia have some life in feudal age, yeah sometimes it sucks, sometimes its amazing to have nice aggressive feudal, but there is nothing more boring that just hitting walls, though there are still sometimes nice generations in ladder where ppl manage to wall min8.As long as its not random and players know which version they are playing. Like all the variations in arabia should not be masked under one map and leave it to the rng gods for generation. I remember seeing many times in some tourneys where the two most popular versions of arabia back in the voobly days : HC2 Arabia and KOTD2 Arabia, were used within the same set. HC2 arabia was the classic wallable map with 3-4 thick woodlines. The gold and berry placement was equivalent for both players (one back and one forward or vice versa). Civs like Mayans, Britons are super good on this version. On the other hand you have KOTD2 arabia, fully open, deserted, barely any woodlines, hilly. Civs like Franks, Slavs were solid on this map back in the day, and nowadays we would see Lithuanians, Khmer dominate such a map.