DarkNecridIf teamwork is what keeps you interested then you should want consistency, teamwork gets eroded if you keep adding tons and tons of new maps for the sake of it. It's much more beneficial to have a single new map (test it out seriously, test people's ability to adapt to something new), your standard maps (tests teamwork/DM skill), and an A/D map (tests teamwork/gamesnese/strats over DM), since that variety helps show who the best team really is.
Also those maps change strats often enough, it's not like they've been played the same way forever and ever. Swiftwater is an easy example, it is not really played the same as it was 6 seasons ago.
If I gave the impression I thought overwhelming players with endless new different maps was a good idea, I apologize. I simply would favor a system in which maybe two or three new or unplayed for a while maps are added to the schedule for each season, so that we could work towards a system of rotating through 20-30 good maps, rather than seeing lakeside, viaduct, badwater, gullywash, and swiftwater be played half a dozen seasons in a row. This is the type of system I personally would be fond of. It was an error on my part to say that re-occuring maps discourages new strategies, however I don't see why non-inordinate implementation of different maps couldn't offer the same advocacy for "changing strats".
Quite frankly, I don't have nearly the experience you do to argue against or for the relevance of consistency and teamwork. I just wouldn't mind some less conservative diversity.