Second round

[widurr]

Could the second round be disabled? Personally, I can't see a point in having a second round on the same map.

[Miauz55555]

It is not a 2.-round but a rebalanced quick round re-match. The timer is set to 7 min atm. So when the teams are highly inbalanced and you get a quick round it should be better in the next (as long no one swich, join, leave, plays better/worse, ... =D ).

And from what I see it is much more balanced than. And much harder to push to the core.

[widurr]

So that's why teams get mixed up

I started this thread because in 80% of "new round" cases I'm like "oh no, not this map again" (I think I'm not the only one ) and the remaining 20% like "shit, I was busting my ass off to win and in new round I'm lossing, how great is that". The latter one is for example on SpankJox, which is a fast map and blitzkrieg under 7 minutes is totally acceptable.

In any case, even if teams were unbalanced, wouldn't it be better to have a more balanced re-match on another map?

[Dalyup!]

It can be potentially disappointing to people when they map they like gets chosen and a team gets crushed quickly, ending the map. Also, the balancer sometimes creates unbalanced teams (as it is not omniscient) which can create unfair and equally disappointing games.

Now, I see your point of view regarding people complain about having to play a map again. I have done it myself and see others do it, but I'm a bit sceptical of your percentages (doubtless they are merely examples) as it tends to be the vocal lot mostly who voice discontent. I also agree with you on when it can be a bit disheartening when you blitz through a map and win but, eh, the achievement is in doing that.

I don't think the second round should be disabled due to what I said earlier. We don't some maps to become mere 5-minute affairs. Perhaps the time could be reduced though? I personally think it's okay at 7-minutes as I don't see second rounds invoked that much but I don't play particularly often.

[Cat1981England]

The first round is sometimes unbalanced because people leave/join or are just afk very early on with a new map. The second round is usually better because those that don't like a map have gone, everyone is ready etc

I think it's necessary to have it on because if you went 3/4 maps in a row very quickly that wouldn't be a lot of fun. 7 minutes does seem a little high though, as there are maps that you can win in less then that with even teams if everything goes your way (kingdom) or people are simply not paying attention to the radar map (gunshop).

How does reducing it to 5 minutes sound to everyone?

[Miauz55555]

How does reducing it to 5 minutes sound to everyone?

5 was to short imo. 6 sounds good as a compromise.

[Zon3r]

I think it should be left as it is, it works just fine. if it's not broken, why try to fix it.

[widurr]

Any shortening the clock looks good to me.

I don't play too often myself, but on the evenings I do, there's almost always a two round match.
And I don't like the second round in both cases - being on the winning or the loosing team.
Anyway, seems I'm alone on this one. No worries though. Perhpas I'll just go to spectating during second round.

[Cat1981England]

Anyway, seems I'm alone on this one.

Only a few of us have said anything and everyone seem to have a different opinion I hope it's ok, but I've added a poll to your first post. If two or more options get the same number of votes we'll leave it as it is.

Whatever people decide - we'll go for. Can't get fairer then that

[Gaffer]

Im winning this vote single-handedly