Fuel's not bad once you realize that there is no reason whatsoever to go out into the field.

The reason is that they are in high demand.

I agree with you that an easy way to solve this is to let players choose both the game type and the map they want to play that game type on (like Gears 1 did).

And notice that I didn't say they should make all maps, or ever the majority of maps, as small as nuketown. Even a map double that size is still a small map.

Do you think your opinion of Trailer Park and Scrapyard type maps would change if flak jacket were in the game?

And this is again why I wish they would just let us choose which maps we want to play.

The majority of people hate derail, but you'd be able to hop into a derail match over and over if there were enough other people interested in playing it.

Why these devs feel the need to force all their maps down our throats is beyond me. I think its just that Halo has always (I think) made players play all the maps (unless they quit out) and everyone else followed suit.

The reason they don't just make a ton of different playlists where anyone can play any map they want over and over in whatever gametype they want is because it thins the player base too much, making it difficult for anybody to find a game. And when it's difficult to find a game, people stop playing it altogether. It also screws up the leaderboards; people playing nuketown over and over will have a higher score per minute than the people playing derail over and over.

.

Again, no, Fuel is a fine map so long as you just ignore the field.

WHAT GUNS R CONFIRMED ?!111

There are more than enough players to make this happen.

It worked fine for Gears 1.

And the leaderboard is already skewed because many kids won't play all but a handful of maps. They'll just quit out until they get what they want.

I don't think leaderboards should be taken into consideration anyway. We're talking about letting people play what they want to play. Sure, if I wanted to play Tyro Station on Gears 1, I would've had a much harder time than playing Canals or Gridlock. But all that mean is 9/10 kids are happy to not play Tyro Station, and 1/10 are upset they can't.

I want to be clear that I'm not saying you're wrong, just that I have a different opinion. **** the leaderboards, let me play the game type and maps that I want to play. I couldn't care less if some joker plays nuketown over and over and over and has a million kills. If I'm at home worrying about that I've got some issues to work on methinks.

Unless you're playing ground war or SnD, it's not always possible to completely avoid the field. I personally like Fuel sometimes, I've had some fun games playing it. But I can understand if people want to skip it and telling them to just ignore the field and pretend the map is 2/3rds as big doesn't really change anything.

And why do you tell the guy "no" when he's just stating his opinion? He just said he wants to skip the map when it comes up, and you're acting like he's illogical to want to do that. I almost always agree with what you post, but you seem to have trouble just letting people have different opinions on stuff like this

I 100% agree they can't have map selection be entirely up to the player. When players are forced (relatively speaking) to play maps they'd rather not play, they're forced to develop a strategy for that map. In doing so, in encourages players to try out different skills and strategies. This is good for the game.

How many times have you felt one way about a map, then changed that opinion completely once you played it enough times? (This very aspect is why I believe a lot of people don't like map-pack maps. When a game is new, we tend to tolerate the confusion that comes with new maps. When we're familiar with a game, new maps can be an annoyance).

From a competitive standpoint, I also like the idea of getting players out of their comfort zone. The team that has a clear advantage on Derail may be at a clear disadvantage on Favela, and vice versa. This dynamic helps keep the game challenging and rewarding.

On the other hand, I have no problem with giving players complete control of map selection late in a game's lifespan. For example, there definitely should be player-choice lobbies in COD4 and MW2 at this point, imo.

This is a good point. And come to think of it the only map pack that ever grew on me was the COD4 one.

world at war is the best 1 blackops sucks

lol'd

IM in the camp that we should have all the maps in the rotation cuz a lot of them are awesome and variety makes things fun. Ill say that the map packs suck cuz they just suck horribly. Pretty much every map pack MW 1 and 2 and BO that Ive played have all sucked and never have the quality that the maps that come with the game have. I also hate that the map packs slice up the player pool especially for the lesser played game types which end up suffering when you full parties.

Well if I don't then how am I supposed to get in the ****ing rock dumb****? HUH?

I thought they finally fixed the rock glitch..??

The competitive point is valid and one I hadn't thought of.

What you're talking about at the end is at least a good compromise.