Procedurally generated ranked maps?

well then some solution:
1) hardcopy of the map, instead of the seed (bigger file, but no compatibility needed to the alg.)
2) save the algs with versionsnumber (more updates and changes = more algs needed to be save, but smaller map-files)
3) save the algs. changes in the game and save version number (as older the game as bigger it would get because of algs)
4) you save the saved maps online and update them with your algs., which would in the end cost you more traffic. I guess.

well of course, I dont know how much the algs. would take space, but i would recommend a option between one and two for the user. He should be himself able to choose if his map is longer available or only for a amount of time. (, if you decide not to save the older algs.)

I think procedurally generated maps are a chance for having a bit more diversion in balanced ranked maps.
Algorithmically it's probably easier keeping track of equal resources and other balance requirements than creating/editing them manually (at least beyond simple mirror images).

I think the biggest problem for balance is the inter planetary level, e.g. how to keep the balance without just making the planets equal.
The idea with more or less barren and equal moons around some diverse planet(s) would probably be a good starting point.
It depends also on how easy it is to move between planets, as that also influences how importing the "perfect" starting point is.

It's mainly a problem for tournament matches where one loss mean the loss of the tournament.
The ranked match are okay as you're supposed to play more than 10 matches. The small differences are not that important after some matches.

unless you lose 5 matches because of a single thing, which makes the difference.

both players will need to have access to identical resources in early game. Both players should have equal footing on the battlefield to begin with. You don't skill your way out of having less resources than your enemy. Sure you can, but that will not sit well with any well known competitive player.

Maps for ranked games have to have symmetry. Ie both maps are the same from the center out. They can be slightly different in terms of mass spots locations, however its important to note the distance which a player must travel to get it. This should be the same.

In competitive play we are talking the difference of a few seconds making or breaking a battle. For example in supreme commander 2. If you get the first megalith out then well your going to win. In forged alliance its basically who ever gets to tech 2 first and doesn't bunk their eco. In total annihilation pretty much the same thing who ever got to tech 2.

Thus it is very important to make sure the maps are balanced on both sides with equal resources and travel distances. Naturally one side cannot have a rock to reclaim while the other side doesn't. Thus rank maps cannot be randomly generated, will require some sort of tweaking to ensure equal footing for both players.

From what I see, this game will be more strategic than any game before it.
Think of all games before being chess, each player has a mirror of each other(kind of) and there main pieces have been placed for them.

I would hope this game would follow Go, rather. The board is empty and players decide the opening placements... You decide how aggressive you want to be, there are still tactical plays(to make eyes and secure your stones), but they are better left till end game in most cases as you can gain far more by strategic moves.

People are worrying that each player should have the exact same starting resources, maps mirrored etc etc.
But In posts before, it was suggested that the player choose where their commander lands, a 2 min look at map, then pick entry point. I like this. Part of the game is to find that perfect spot... Even having it so if both players pick same placement knock each other of course (or disrupt teleport)... If there is one resource rich location you want to be close but not too close to it. It simply would not matter if maps were uneven.

Infact Veering from subject matter, teleportation could answer a lot of fluff questions.... Why commanders just happen to arrive at same time on maps.... Space/time warping though teleportation, larger the jump the larger the attraction, allowing in game teleportation to be a freely usable tactic but intergalactic jumps(commander only I'm guessing) pull landing points closer in time, even could have map loading built into it, more detail as commander comes closer to "landing". I'm going to have to find that galactic travel post.

I really hope whatever ladder maps there are, won't be generated on the fly but maps that are thought out and guaranteed to play well.

When people roughly know the map they're playing on, they'll just simply play better since they won't make as many stupid blunders and assumptions, and can come up with specialized builds suited for just this or that map.

It will add a new level of skill if you have to play on unknown territory. And stupid blunders and assumptions are a great watch. So just make sure the maps are symetric and all will be fine.

Nobody played Massive assault ?
It's a wargame. The kind of game where one wrong move can cost you the match.

It has completly non symetric maps. Despite that, there is no problems in ranked games.
It adds a lot of variety to every matches.
Done correctly, asymetric maps are possible.