Introduce the Alternative Vote (AV) system to Matchmaking?

Currently, the map/gametype with the most votes wins. But there (usually) isn’t just 2 options to vote for. This means that fringe votes are ignored in the final decision of choosing the map/gametype.

Here’s an example, as the clock ticks down:

  • Map A (3 votes)
  • Map B (3 votes)
  • Map C (1 vote)
  • None of the Above (1 vote)

In this example, the real contest is between map A and map B. The views of the 2 players who voted for Map C and None of the Above are pretty much irrelevant. As it stands, Map A will be the winner with 3 votes out of 8.

We know that given the choice between A and B, 3 people would choose A and 3 would choose B. But what of the other 2 people? Even though B isn’t their favourite map, they may still prefer B over A if that is the 50/50 choice. That would mean 5 out of 8 people actually prefer B to A in a straight up choice, yet A would win.

This is where the Alternative Vote (AV) comes in.

Each player ranks each option 1, 2, 3, 4 - with 1 being their favourite and 4 being their least favourite. They only have to put at least 1, but the more they rank the others, the clearer it becomes which maps they prefer to play on.

To start, all players ‘number 1’ votes are allocated like normal.

  • Map A (3 votes)
  • Map B (3 votes)
  • Map C (1 vote)
  • None of the above (1 vote)

Then the map/maps with the least votes are eliminated. The players who votes for that map(s) then have their 2nd choice taken into account. This 2nd choice is basically their first choice of the remaining options, the ones most likely to reach a popular consensus.

  • Map A (3 votes)
  • Map B (3 votes)
  • Map C (eliminated) The 1 person who voted has Map B as their 2nd choice
  • None of the above (eliminated) The 1 person who voted has Map B as their 2nd choice

The final vote:

  • Map A (3 votes)
  • Map B (5 votes)

All this is done in an “instant run-off” once voting closes. This would be easier for each player than the current system of manually switching votes at the last second of voting once they realise nobody is going to join them in their vote of “none of the above,” for example, and then use their vote to tip the balance between the front runners, as so often happens.

It’s basically a way you can give the game all the information to express things like “I really want Asylum, but I’d compromise and take Power House over Sword Base.”

What do you think players/343?

if a vote ties, they should simply make an instant vote off between those two options. i think that’s what you’ve outlined. it makes sense.