- WFGeppetto
- |
- Exalted Heroic Member
I kind of like the idea, but I think it would just create a new subject for arguement. People will then be saying, "How come two objectives came up?", or "Both choices were on the same map!!!", or, ah, screw it, all kinds of stupid stuff. I think it's pretty awesome that we have veto at all, and I worry that given even more choices, many would have even more gripes. The randomness of maps, and gametypes is part of it, and I like it. I love it in LW when people veto KOTH, and we get oddball. I like them both, and I hate the fact that everyone vetos everything but slayer. In that circumstance people would just complain that they couldn't choose slayer.
It would be cool to have more control, and more choices, but considering the reactions you see from many of the people in the forums, sometimes it seems that too much control only illicits desire for more. Fewer choices can be nice. Especially in ranked, I think that choice of gametype/map should be limited. You should have to deal with what you are dealt, and not be able to lean towards your favorites so much. It helps keep the ranking system a little purer in my opinion.
There's always custom games. And, don't get me wrong, I am not disagreeing with you, I am only suggesting the problems with your idea.