Meta vs Map rotation

We currently have a system whereby a 4 map set stays in rotation for aprox a month. The argument for this is that it allows different meta to rise before a new rotation is put in place and a potentially different meta can occur. I would argue that the benefit of this system is not enough to prevent having a different system in place whereby the map rotation is either changed more frequently or more maps are added to one rotation. The current meta is pretty set regardless of rotation, I do not believe it would change drastically based on any available scenario change and (I assume) we want more people playing MP: Playing 4 maps for a month straight becomes dull for the most ardent CH fan.

 

Would card/item pool changes (balancing/additions/removals) influence meta shifts moreso than map rotation ? Asking cos most MOBAs are pretty set in the roles (tanks, dps, support, carry, disabler etc) and its quite predictable when meta changes come about, ie, balancing/additions/removals of hero/items/skills. Maps are not a key influence of meta changes there. So I believe its identical in CH as well.

edit: of course, some party builds are powerful on some maps but less so in others. So terrain changes do have some impact but shifts are largely minimal.

 

Balancing would affect everything a lot more. I don't have a problem with having "only" 4 maps.
Guess I could play till the end of my life on these same 4.

 

Since the second player has a slight advantage, a change could be made that the player going first gets to pick the map. So that:

1. A matchup between two players would be made
2. The starting player would be determined at random
3. That player would be given an option to choose the map (whether out of a rotation of 4, or out of all the MP maps)
4. The scenario would load on the chosen map

Of course I don't know if this would give more or less variety on maps so maybe it's not helpful, but a thought of mine none the less.

 

Actually, the difference between the player win percentages has been explained to result from the AI always being called Player #1 in the stats and the AI losing a lot. So the second player doesn't have any advantage.

 

I never believed that the second player can have a 52% win rate or whatever number was called once.
AI always being player 1 explains this well.

And Scarponi: No lol.

 

Myself think 4 is good, but i would not mind increase it to 6, just to add a bit more variety.
anyway the leagues should spice things up a bit plus some player organized events

 

Ahh, my mistake. I retract my suggestion.

 

It would be nice to have things change a bit. These days it's usually like, "Aw, I hate that map".