HyceFor what it's worth, the test versions have been out for about a month and nobody had anything to say, so I went ahead with it.
Take this as you'd like since 1) this is only a handful of player opinions and 2) I'm an inactive low open NA player but I talk with EU players more than NA players:
When I asked some Mid to Prem players who complained about an update or a map mechanic, "can you leave that feedback for Logjam on the forums?", they said it seemed like it wouldn't matter because you'd just update the map by next week, meaning nothing would ever stay constant. It's the opposite of how people felt about other maps where rather than it being "they're not listening to feedback", this was "they're listening to too much feedback".
This is not the first time you've been told publicly to stop updating and let people get acclimated to the layout; Collaide lengthily mentioned it a while back. This has apparently been a consistent opinion out of many different opinions, even after Logjam stopped being in rotation in ETF2L a while ago before it was brought back.
People from the Cardinal era knows that since I'm primarily a content creator, I will usually fiercely take the side of the mapper's frustrations - which is why I'm telling you what I've been told, because that's all I can do. If that sounds ridiculously more frustrating for you and seems unfair or disheartening, it's because it probably is.
This part is where this becomes a c l a s s i c overdramatic uberchain nerd essay:
I sympathize with you as somebody who doesn't play comp anymore, but continues to market & create content catered for comp, hoping that it pays off despite our lack of high-level gamesense. I haven't played in ages. I can only listen to people who do play. So I can't imagine how hard it is to make a map and pick which feedback you integrate into it, especially because you place your trust in these players who know more than you from a gameplay perspective, but not necessarily from a level designer perspective. I wish people did speak up, especially in a small scene like this where validation - for better or worse - has become essential to its survival.
My sympathy will not make your map better or worse. My sympathy is not feedback. My sympathy is me telling you one reason, out of an unknown number of reasons, as to why people didn't give feedback, whether it's fair or not.
That being said, Collaide and gemm (who both brought up how you should stop updating as much) both emphasized that they appreciate and respect the amount of work you put into the map, as well as acknowledge that it is a lot of care you put into each update as an active mapper. That doesn't mean these updates have been executed well, but that doesn't mean you didn't put your heart into it. Credit where credit is due. This is also the general sentiment from the census of players I've talked to - which I guess you + every other mapper who spends time here want to hear straight from them, rather than like this from me.
You can take this as a motivator to think and analyze, rather than a deterrence to give up or stop altogether. I don't know whether that analysis and reflection means holding onto the map and salvaging it, moving on with a new map and starting over - or keeping things as it is. You'll know that better than I do, and your decisions are your own. I'd personally like you and other mappers to keep going, whether it's your current project or a new one. I think it's awesome what you do, I could never stomach it let alone know where to start. But I understand your frustrations.
Also this is already longer than I wanted a "don't shoot the messenger" post to be, but I feel like this part of my hearsay also needs to be stressed: from listening to Cardinal and Logjam feedback, let alone anybody complaining about a map, is even if players think your map needs to be better otherwise not be played at all - they absolutely 100% know you're doing your best and appreciate that effort. I want people to tell you both those sentiments for themselves.