Vote which scenarios to eliminate from Arena - Urgent

[Winn81]

...Adjust points penalty when below average dice/hits are rolled.

This seems like it would be hard to implement. How to define or calculate "average dice"?

I suggest adjusting points based on final medal count. For example, some tournaments use a tiered system:
-Win both games of a match
-Win one game of a match and win overall medal count
-Tied in medals, use figure count to break tie
-Win one game of a match but lose overall medal count
-Lose both games of a match

Alternatively, even simpler, have 3 categories of winning/losing: 0, 1-2, 3+. Conceding automatically falls in the 3+ category.

[PaskinsP]

I will not vote for any elimination[.
We should be able to vote to keep, not eliminate./b].

There are scenarios I do not like, but surely we are better players for having to play scenarios we don't like.

Memoir 44 isn't about playing the easy, nice scenarios - it is about playing and winning all the scenarios.

The DoW M44 online game has an award for playing and winning all the original M44 scenarios from both sides on their original day of battle. It isn't easy to do, but is more rewarding because it is hard.

I don't like some of these scenarios, but I will play them.

Reducing the number of scenarios makes Arena less interesting. Is that what we really want?

Let's stop whinging, and keep playing.

If you want easier games then go and play something else.

Totally agree.
No elimination at all.

[PaskinsP]

My reasoning against elimination... and this might be a pill a bit hard to swallow:
But I believe that for fairness-sake, the whole pool should be Arena-able.

Yes, some scenarios are weighted in favor of who gets "great" cards (most often, the cards will just be standard mediocre ones).

But after the cards... come the dice roll.
M44 has quite a few random layers, if we are to pretend we want to eliminate "unfair luck" we might as well regulate too many bad dice roll in a row!
(Obviously nobody would defend such a position... I hope)

A point of luck and randomness will always be there in a conflict simulation.

Furthermore... people who only play Arena will weirdly never see some staple maps of the pool.
The idea of Arena is to be the best of the best... on all terrain!

[MagnusNygaard]

My reasoning against elimination... and this might be a pill a bit hard to swallow:
But I believe that for fairness-sake, the whole pool should be Arena-able.

Yes, some scenarios are weighted in favor of who gets "great" cards (most often, the cards will just be standard mediocre ones).

But after the cards... come the dice roll.
M44 has quite a few random layers, if we are to pretend we want to eliminate "unfair luck" we might as well regulate too many bad dice roll in a row!
(Obviously nobody would defend such a position... I hope)

A point of luck and randomness will always be there in a conflict simulation.

Furthermore... people who only play Arena will weirdly never see some staple maps of the pool.
The idea of Arena is to be the best of the best... on all terrain!

I think maybe people are misunderstanding what the problem I have with some of the maps are. As Jeronimon pointed out - the problem isn't that maps are "unfair" or that you need to be lucky to win - it's about having fun. And mostly - it's about it being fun for your opponent even when they lose.

I don't mind losing to a better opponent. It can even be fun or teach you something about a game. I don't mind losing because of a bad dice roll. I do mind just wasting time and not having fun. And unfortunately - and I've said this repeatedly - the scenarios included in the basic game are, many of them, nowhere nearly as much FUN as the ones Richard Borg and JdRommel have made later on.

And Memoir44 has the potential to be everything from a crap-shoot to a high-level chess match - based on the initial setup of the map. And honestly - if you just want to roll dice, Yathzy is far superior...

[Waikirikiri]

Add more scenarios.
Get random selection to work better.
Adjust points penalty when below average dice/hits are rolled.

1. Not doable before new season
2. What do you mean ?
3. Not doable, you either win or lose, and that's the only thing taken into account by bga for ELO/Arena point computation

1) If you can't add more then please don't remove any.

2) Random selection of scenarios isn't working.
I seem to get some scenarios - Pointe-du-Hoc for example - much more than one would expect with a random selection. Please fix the system.

3) It is possible to more fairly allocation points gained or lost if the system is made smarter.
The statistics are in the system. The system could do a better analysis of the result.
Are you saying the no-one wants a better system?

As a new BGA player I am becoming more and more disillusioned with the system.
It promises so much, but delivers much less.

[MagnusNygaard]

Add more scenarios.
Get random selection to work better.
Adjust points penalty when below average dice/hits are rolled.

1. Not doable before new season
2. What do you mean ?
3. Not doable, you either win or lose, and that's the only thing taken into account by bga for ELO/Arena point computation

1) If you can't add more then please don't remove any.

2) Random selection of scenarios isn't working.
I seem to get some scenarios - Pointe-du-Hoc for example - much more than one would expect with a random selection. Please fix the system.

3) It is possible to more fairly allocation points gained or lost if the system is made smarter.
The statistics are in the system. The system could do a better analysis of the result.
Are you saying the no-one wants a better system?

As a new BGA player I am becoming more and more disillusioned with the system.
It promises so much, but delivers much less.

You have to be more specific Mark. What system are you referring to? Are you saying that you want compensation for when you're unlucky?
I know you, and I know you don't think it's fun to just be completely unable to do something about your situation. And that's what my point is - if it's not fun - then we all lose.

[Tisaac]

Add more scenarios.
Get random selection to work better.
Adjust points penalty when below average dice/hits are rolled.

1. Not doable before new season
2. What do you mean ?
3. Not doable, you either win or lose, and that's the only thing taken into account by bga for ELO/Arena point computation

1) If you can't add more then please don't remove any.

2) Random selection of scenarios isn't working.
I seem to get some scenarios - Pointe-du-Hoc for example - much more than one would expect with a random selection. Please fix the system.

3) It is possible to more fairly allocation points gained or lost if the system is made smarter.
The statistics are in the system. The system could do a better analysis of the result.
Are you saying the no-one wants a better system?

As a new BGA player I am becoming more and more disillusioned with the system.
It promises so much, but delivers much less.

2. Nope, it's random. Human just have a bad perception of what is random
3. You seems to misunderstand how bga works. I am just a game dev, i am bound to use the bga infrastructure. What you describe is simply not possible given the current bga framework.

Please keep in mind that memoir 44 is just one of the 500 games on this plateform so of course the whole website cannot be focused on that game for computing elo change, for having a nice lobby with dow database directly when creating a table, for having some kind of distinctions or badges. However the main thing that you have here is active developpers on the game that already implemented more features than the online while fixing some well known bug of the systems, and that are open to discuss evolution of the game with the community. It's a global win IMO, but indeed it's not better on all aspect.

[PaskinsP]

My reasoning against elimination... and this might be a pill a bit hard to swallow:
But I believe that for fairness-sake, the whole pool should be Arena-able.

Yes, some scenarios are weighted in favor of who gets "great" cards (most often, the cards will just be standard mediocre ones).

But after the cards... come the dice roll.
M44 has quite a few random layers, if we are to pretend we want to eliminate "unfair luck" we might as well regulate too many bad dice roll in a row!
(Obviously nobody would defend such a position... I hope)

A point of luck and randomness will always be there in a conflict simulation.

Furthermore... people who only play Arena will weirdly never see some staple maps of the pool.
The idea of Arena is to be the best of the best... on all terrain!

I think maybe people are misunderstanding what the problem I have with some of the maps are. As Jeronimon pointed out - the problem isn't that maps are "unfair" or that you need to be lucky to win - it's about having fun. And mostly - it's about it being fun for your opponent even when they lose.

I don't mind losing to a better opponent. It can even be fun or teach you something about a game. I don't mind losing because of a bad dice roll. I do mind just wasting time and not having fun. And unfortunately - and I've said this repeatedly - the scenarios included in the basic game are, many of them, nowhere nearly as much FUN as the ones Richard Borg and JdRommel have made later on.

And Memoir44 has the potential to be everything from a crap-shoot to a high-level chess match - based on the initial setup of the map. And honestly - if you just want to roll dice, Yathzy is far superior...

I do respect your opinion greatly Magnus.
But I see the argument in response to my post... lacking.

The veto-ing of so many maps, based on the subjetive argument of "fun".
Fun is in the eye of the beholder.

Previously on the forums, you and some others, were defending the veto-ing of a part of the map pool PRECISELY due to the initial opening situation, and maps with 4 banner count being susceptible to hard luck streaks.
Now you say "losing due to luck is not the factor".

I simply believe we should wait another Arena season before taking drastic measures.

[Wiking44]

Not really drastic measures but just removing some of the more unbalanced scenarios that are really of bad design where precisely the first hand can win the game without the other player having a chance. Not good for competitive playing but ok for regular games if you so choose

[PaskinsP]

But that simply isn't true, and with that logic...
Next will be asking to put measures against bad dice roll streaks.

Some phenomenal dice can also very, very well win a match.
And that is no fun either.... at all.

And furthermore, a right combination of powerful cards can win the game, NO matter when drawn, and the opponent is equally impotent against them.

If you are to call maps "un-competitive" if a good hand comes around, the same argument can be made for too many good dice stats.