Concerning the choice of maps I seem to recall that a similar position was taken by other players against field of Isis in the good old days. Although I have this map thumbed down myself, I still think that some large maps are actually appropriate for 1 vs. 1 ranked games.

Most small maps are won through a combination of spamming, early economy and map control skills and will never move beyond tier 2 unless both players have matching strengths (or both play defensively). Larger maps can reward other set of skills such as transiting to a tier 3 economy and army (not as easy as shifting to tier 2), defensive counter measures against tier 1 spam and reclaiming destroyed enemy armies.

Those games are not won as quickly and as decisively as small maps but they do offer different (and ultimately interesting) play styles. They add to the complexity of the game and force us to think in new patterns. So while I don’t particularly like that map, I still like the fact that the game throws me in situations that I do not always expect or work in my favor because they force me to think outside my usual comfort zone. In the end it’s the fact that I feel that I’m discovering something new each time that I play that makes me come back again and again ;)

For a true 1v1 competition ranking does not cut it. A league is required, then we can debate what “pro” maps should be in the list. Something one of the leagues like ESL, TheSGL, SupCom-Live or even GPG need to consider. Leagues and Divisions is the only way for a truely proffesional league of top players.

But thats getting side tracked :)

The argument that the top ladder players should have to prove themselves at all levels of FA play is a purist’s argument. It sounds nice, but in practice it just doesn’t work out that well. After all, thats what custom games are for. Ranked play should be more standardized in my opinion.

That said, Deman, Hoschie, thanks for bringing up some opposing points! I appreciate anything that contributes to meaningfun discussion on this website, and I welcome constructive dialog and debate. I’m not saying you guys are wrong, you just have a different view of what ranked play should be.

This map is absolutly no fun at all. As Engineer said, until some real “action” happens, over half an hour can pass. The idea of playing competetive 1on1 in FA (or any other game) is not waiting 30 minutes to build up a base and expand over the map. Very good games need to have action in the first 5 minutes!

I think what Hoschie and Deman did not realise was that there is nothing wrong with big maps in FA at all. The problem is that there are maps designed for 8 players occurring in a 1on1 ladder. It would be the same as playing a 4on4 on a 5×5 km² map designed for 1on1 matches (with just having 8 starting spots), ending in t1 spam and comm rushing all the time.

Another aspect to consider is that 20×20 km² maps have a high risk to “lag” in the late game. I would expect many games to slow down after half an hour and be crippled after one hour, when both players have reached unit cap with mostly air units.

Yes, I love to see T3 in games and yes I want games to take more then 10 minutes, but hell yes I also want to see non stop action throughout the entire game. So far one of the best games ever played was BlueScreen vs Sir_Loui in the first 5000 Dollar tournament on Finns. That was one of the most intense games I have ever seen and it had really everything to it this game can have.

I dont think competetive gameplay on any map bigger then designed for 2on2 will ever be good at all. Not in this game and not in any other game to come.
Also dont misunderstand this post for “pro small maps vs large maps”. All I say is:
Please dont put maps not designed for 1on1\2on2 in the 1on1 ranked game pool! - no matter the size!

Supreme Commander Forged Alliance has sped up game play and forces for map control. It’s meant for epic sized battles that aren’t over in the flash of a pan.

It’s not just about ZOMG this map will take more than 10 minutes to win on WTF Remove. It’s about actually enjoying the game throughout, which dare I say a lot more than just the top 100 players prefer.

I am all for entertaining fast small maps for “pro” match ups but there is also the turtles and methodical players to think about.

sorry for the bad english