Prune the Dead Maps

[nestharus]

[ENT] Combat Zone lobby has been up for 296:18:37, which is more than 12 days.

That's the most extreme one. There are a few others that are 50+ hours, which seems pretty dead.

edit
[ENT] DotA ap AUTOBAL us/ca #1 has been up for 768 hours! That's more than a month since the last game.

[BouncingHitman]

He means replace the maps auto-hosted (ofc you know that) with more popular ones. Another thing we could do is, maybe reduce the amount of auto-hosted maps, which would have users switch to other ones we host.

[karasu.]

I'm all for pruning dead maps but it would help if you had suggestions of maps that you believe are more popular for us to replace them with. Now that you've brought it to our attention though it can be brought up for discussion so we thank you for that.

[Love]

I posted an autohost suggestion for the Vampirism family of maps (Vamp fire, Vamp Beast, Vamp Speed, Vamp Zero). Im sure that those maps would be vastly more popular than some of the older, dead maps that we are currently autohosting.

[karasu.]

I posted an autohost suggestion for the Vampirism family of maps (Vamp fire, Vamp Beast, Vamp Speed, Vamp Zero). Im sure that those maps would be vastly more popular than some of the older, dead maps that we are currently autohosting.

If you have a suggestion for them. then make a separate post and one of the reds will evaluate and act. I wouldn't mind playing some of those myself.

[Love]

@karasu. I did "I posted an autohost suggest for the Vampirism Family" (:

[Tom and Jerry]

Guys we have 15 bots with 0 games, they are active for year and half at least. Imagine how much ent lost games and potential new players in that period? It is TIME to alredy replace that unactive autohost bots with some old popular or some new games! I play Warcraft since Warcraft 2, i made lot of maps, spend lot of hours,days, even a years working on those maps and helping WC3 to survive. But now even if you make good map, no one will play it if you dont have BOT for your map. So if some new mapmaker have good map with potential and he ask for ENT bot to promote his map and give it a chance (giving ent new players and more games) he cant becouse 15 fuck*ng unactive bots just waste space and there is no free bot for him. Where is logic in that??? And when will someone do something about this??? I think that ENT Gaming is one of last good and alive Warcraft 3 community, and we must do everything to make it to remain that whay and be even more great. If @uakf.b is only guy who can change this unactive bots and he dont have time, can he give permision to someone else to change this??? I offer my help for making list of maps and settings that can replace few of unactive ones. Pls guys write what you think about this problem!

[BouncingHitman]

There's a topic that's already been opened similar to this "Prune the dead maps". Though I'd take care of maps and etc, if I had access.

Edit(May-21-2014)09:59 EDT) Merged above post with topic.

[I_kill_satan]

Good day all,


I also think Ent should work more for improve its effectivecy in context of replace unpopular maps to the more popular ones. I suggested Multiple TD wich attract 10 players in near 5 minutes - very good result. Suggestion link:
viewtopic.php?f=126&t=27752

Additional information about Multiple TD - i saw creator of map's last versions in that game and he told that he will create new and more comfortable updates of map.


Also i have idea about Paladin TD - also very-very popular map in the past (i m sure some of u played this one ).


Sincerely, I_k

[nestharus]

I think that maps newly added should have 2 weeks to get players. If they are rather dead after two weeks, they get taken down. From here, they have to be active each week (following trends of course). If they aren't active, they get taken down ^)^. This way only the most active maps get put up. If people want to play a rather dead map, they can host it on their own.

It's more work, but it'll improve hosting immensely : ).


Look at the 5 least active maps to decide which maps are dead. 5 least active maps are always in the danger zone. For now, replace all of them, but in the future, only look at the bottom 5.

[karasu.]

I think that maps newly added should have 2 weeks to get players. If they are rather dead after two weeks, they get taken down. From here, they have to be active each week (following trends of course). If they aren't active, they get taken down ^)^. This way only the most active maps get put up. If people want to play a rather dead map, they can host it on their own.

It's more work, but it'll improve hosting immensely : ).


Look at the 5 least active maps to decide which maps are dead. 5 least active maps are always in the danger zone. For now, replace all of them, but in the future, only look at the bottom 5.

I don't say this about suggestions often at all but this has to be the most logically thought out suggestion I've ever heard. The bots would be played a ton more this way. I was debating making a suggestion like yours and didn't know how to word it but you nailed that one. Personally though i think about 16-18 days is a good guideline though.

[Tom and Jerry]

me and few others speak about same thing for some time but on dead ears. We suggested replacing of maps, and puting them to the test on few days or weeks...Someone who have ability to change bots shoud do this alredy. But i think that only pearson who can change bots is uakf.b and he dont want to work on this, or dont have time. But this shoud be done, if we regular members cant convince him, then you admins must!!! POINT

[karasu.]

@uakf.b

[Tom and Jerry]

@karasu. see what i mean, no one cares?

[Tom and Jerry]

yea i know, but others dont want to write him and explain him that this is needed