Jump to content


Bring the old maps back petition

Old maps Province Port Hidden Village Make WoT great Again Komarin Pearl River Dragon Ridge South Coast Severogorsk

  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

Poll: Bring back old maps! (156 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

I want old maps back.

  1. I agree. (147 votes [93.63%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 93.63%

  2. I disagree (10 votes [6.37%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 6.37%

WG should rework existing maps

  1. I agree. (116 votes [74.36%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 74.36%

  2. I disagree. (40 votes [25.64%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 25.64%

I want more city maps.

  1. I agree. (33 votes [21.15%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 21.15%

  2. I disagree (123 votes [78.85%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 78.85%

I want more open maps.

  1. I agree. (134 votes [85.90%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 85.90%

  2. I disagree (22 votes [14.10%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 14.10%

Vote Hide poll

HrX89 #1 Posted 15 February 2017 - 12:55 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 30202 battles
  • 64
  • [VFORV] VFORV
  • Member since:
    09-29-2012
Hello guys.

I am certain that most of you miss some maps we had some time ago. :child:
WoT developers are providing us with new vehicles and new branches (which is okay), but they have kind of neglected maps.

I, personally, am sick of "map rotation" which often puts me in a fight on 3 or 4 same maps, despite playing all 3 battle modes (standard, encounter, assault/defence) or just standard battles. :angry:

We had such great maps that for some reason got removed.
And, when the WG add a new map (if they do so), they put either a copy of existing map (Ruinberg on fire, Winter Himmelsdorf,  Winterberg, Fiery Salient) or a sloppy (semi) urban map such as Paris, Kharkov, Pilsen, etc.

Do you guys think that the WG should bring back the maps they removed, and enable them for all 3 battle types?
This post is open for discussion and I hope that this will reach the WoT developers and WG in general.

 

DOCT0R_ #2 Posted 15 February 2017 - 01:34 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21981 battles
  • 719
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    11-24-2011

All removed maps were removed for good reason, they weren't balanced.
Could that have been avoided? Easily, if map developers were actually up to the task. Of course, their recent ideas show otherwise.

Do we need more city or open maps? No.

Why?
Because we need maps that are more than just straight forward as 3 lines with corridors. Open maps don't solve this, because if we look at WG map design philosophy, it only means that they will make 70% of the map unusable, Campinovka or Prohorovka style.

 

What we need is new map devs that, preferably those who are more keen on thinking like Natural Selection 2 developers.
But that's foolish of me to think.



Zeebad #3 Posted 15 February 2017 - 01:42 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 25462 battles
  • 261
  • [WOPR] WOPR
  • Member since:
    12-29-2012
Serious question: Why does it matter if maps are a little bit unbalanced? On average, you will get it from both sides the same amount. The WR differences from one end to the other pale int insignificance given the randomness of the matchmaker.

DOCT0R_ #4 Posted 15 February 2017 - 01:58 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21981 battles
  • 719
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    11-24-2011
Because it's "fun" getting that worse side?

HrX89 #5 Posted 15 February 2017 - 02:38 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 30202 battles
  • 64
  • [VFORV] VFORV
  • Member since:
    09-29-2012

In my opinion, existing maps mostly favour only one or two out of five vehicle types.

For instance:
Urban maps like Kharkov, Paris, Himmelsdorf, etc are HT heaven. If you drive a light tank on such map, you can either camp behind your heavies, or try to rush a position that would grant you and your team a strategic advantage. By doing so, you risk your HP. LT's are redundant on such maps. SPG as well, but that type of vehicle is being reworked for "better gameplay".

Open maps such as Malinovka and Prokhorovka are TD and SPG heaven, given that their scouts do the job efficiently. Imagine being a Maus, KV-4 or any other HT in such map. As soon as your 6th sense goes off, you're a prime target.

I like maps such as Murovanka or Redshire, where there is a lot of room to manoeuvre, to hide, to progress, to camp/snipe. You are not bound only to certain part of the map due to your HP or armour.

Another thing I really hate are maps with a lot of unused areas. Take Fjords for example - more than half of the map is covered by high mountains or water. 

That's my point of view on the topic. Different people tend to play different tanks in different ways. Some may agree with me on what I just wrote above, and some may disagree.

Bottom line, I suggest that WG add more different kinds of maps. That would increase game diversity.



SlyMeerkat #6 Posted 19 February 2017 - 11:31 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13495 battles
  • 1,155
  • [FILO] FILO
  • Member since:
    01-29-2013
I personally wish they should just keep adding maps, never removing and when one is really bad, just rework it like they have done others instead of taking it out completely, i dont get the point of that?

ir1cx #7 Posted 20 February 2017 - 10:21 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 2166 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    07-16-2015

Depends on which version of the old maps should be brought back. 

 

The last version of Severgorsk was a dull as ditch water corridor fest, the original was much better it just needed that north OP TD camp spot removed.  Bring back the original.

I quite liked the last but one version of Komarin, but should be brought back as encounter mode only, tier 7 max IMO. 

South Coast;  what was so wrong with that?  Ohh yes TDs had a good game on it, thats not allowed anymore.  Bring it back.

Pearl River;  apparently unbalanced, because reasons. Should be brought back

Hidden Village;  Should be brought back as an encounter map.

Westfield Assault should be given another try now that the terrain has been lowered.

 

 

 



HrX89 #8 Posted 23 February 2017 - 12:42 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 30202 battles
  • 64
  • [VFORV] VFORV
  • Member since:
    09-29-2012
Share this with your friends, let's see if the WG people care :P

WaryShadow #9 Posted 03 March 2017 - 12:19 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 6453 battles
  • 32
  • Member since:
    06-27-2013

We definitely need more variety more interesting maps with more routes less corridors more terrain like dips and small hills houses rocks bushes open maps with small towns or villages city maps with open squares fields etc wide open spaces with lots of dips dives small hills and bushes and some dense urban maps with lots of routes for possible flanking . 

 

atm theirs to many maps that alienate lights spg's and td's ive stopped playing TD's as honestly 90 percent of maps now penalise you so unless you can brawl or flank like in an su-122-44 or e-25 or su-100 then things are just plain boring 

look at the likes of airfield what a terrible map one bit where all the heavies go to brawl hardly any places for lights to make them selves useful and one corridor really for td's and even then hardly i have 3 mastery badges for 2 td's my dicker max and my su-85i i used to love playing td's was grinding the german and russian td line now i dont bother :( mite not be the best examp[le but honnestly i cant remember the names of most maps infact some are just copys and others feel like copys. 

 

lets have some variety some new innovative thinking maps wish push the boundaries a bit not all the maps are bad but we need more balanced maps that offer a varied playstyle  for all the classes having 5 spgs on your team(has happened but this is just an arbitrary number ) on say that russian city with the factory's for the life of me i cant remember its name or say himmelsdorf  means 5 allmost useless players lights are extremely useful for showing where the enemy are pushing and more maps that play to these strengths would be great 

 

i digress i could add more but ive written enough i think  i apologise if it seems incoherent.



kaspervdh #10 Posted 03 March 2017 - 08:55 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5784 battles
  • 4
  • [DUAL] DUAL
  • Member since:
    09-09-2012
Why don't they just include an option that allows you to disable specific maps? Just like you can do with battle types.

HrX89 #11 Posted 10 March 2017 - 01:41 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 30202 battles
  • 64
  • [VFORV] VFORV
  • Member since:
    09-29-2012

View Postkaspervdh, on 03 March 2017 - 08:55 PM, said:

Why don't they just include an option that allows you to disable specific maps? Just like you can do with battle types.

 

I was thinking the same, but then you'd have people playing only few maps they like and mission rigging would become a normal thing.

When you are in a platoon, you get types of battles (and probably maps) that the players who clicks "battle" button has enabled - so, you get on same server, enable only few maps that suit your vehicle and mission type, do countdown and get in the same battle.

Nice idea, but people would abuse it.

justintime4t #12 Posted 10 March 2017 - 02:08 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21457 battles
  • 376
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    12-29-2012
check out the planed update, there is talk that the mm will pick a map that's not been used by the 30 competitors very often - so although they are not expanding the map pool, at least it will be better than a 2 hour session, mostly containing just 3 maps.

HrX89 #13 Posted 11 March 2017 - 02:27 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 30202 battles
  • 64
  • [VFORV] VFORV
  • Member since:
    09-29-2012

View Postjustintime4t, on 10 March 2017 - 02:08 PM, said:

check out the planed update, there is talk that the mm will pick a map that's not been used by the 30 competitors very often - so although they are not expanding the map pool, at least it will be better than a 2 hour session, mostly containing just 3 maps.

 

Yeah, I've seen that.
But there are identical maps which system recognises as different maps: prokhorovka - fiery salient for example.
Paris is almost as same as Ensk, you've got urban point (E2 in Ensk or K7 in Paris) where heavies brawl, and a field where all the rest tormented souls go die or do something to earn some experience.
Someone in the development section was lazy and just took existing map, added/removed some foliage and - Bob's your uncle - we've gotten a BRAND NEW map.
Person who did that deserves "Not my freaking job" award ASAP imho.

It is true that most of the maps have 2-3 main routes, and that is due to map size and environment. But it is up to a player how to use them and read the minimap.
 

Capt_B_Willard #14 Posted 28 March 2017 - 02:38 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 52177 battles
  • 141
  • Member since:
    09-13-2011

What is the problem with Sverogorsk, North-west, large Komarin, Simple-Dragon ridge and South -coast......................

Come on....

WG We want North-west back !  Large maps with funny stuf in it.


 

I cannot understand why its so difficult to put new(old) maps in .....


 

There are two reason for playing less.....Map stupidity......mines, mountainpass and himmelsdorf

two Team Matchmaking


 

Nowadays even tier 8-10 are filled with .......................


 

WG We WANT NEW (old) MAPS a lot  ! Just bring em back.         And Dont bring in new CITY maps................. What were you thinking when making Paris and stalingrad.........serious ?             ( The only funny new city map is Kharkov IMHo...)


 

NEW MaPS !!!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P.S. Question, is there any comment on Maps from the WG side ? Is there a policy or a way to communicate with them about game issues like this ????


Edited by Capt_B_Willard, 28 March 2017 - 02:59 PM.


Coal_fighter #15 Posted 28 March 2017 - 03:12 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 1485 battles
  • 60
  • Member since:
    12-06-2014
I think the biggest problem with some maps are they are just not big enough. Or they try to do to much with what little space they have. some of these half and half maps just suck.

fabik007 #16 Posted 29 March 2017 - 12:54 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 16427 battles
  • 61
  • [AF_F] AF_F
  • Member since:
    01-23-2013

+1 want old maps back and some revamps undone.

 

They removed some maps because heavies could not climb the steep roads and it took them too long to get into position. Now TDs cannot hide, because the maps are small and flat.

Half of active maps are city maps and the open maps are full of rocks and dunes because poor heavies got shot from far and they died before they could fight while charging in open.

 

And we have World of Heavy Tanks !

 

:child:


Edited by fabik007, 29 March 2017 - 12:54 PM.


HrX89 #17 Posted 09 April 2017 - 06:08 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 30202 battles
  • 64
  • [VFORV] VFORV
  • Member since:
    09-29-2012
Current maps are one or two class friendly. City maps are good for HT's and agile MT's. Open maps are good for LT's and SPG's.

As long as there are people who buy OP premium tanks (which are mostly HT), there will be new urban maps. You don't want to decrease sale/profit by selling HT's and putting them in an open map.

WG doesnt care as long as they make money. Or as long as elite clans/players (who are also source of income) are not rebellious.

NiemandXL #18 Posted 16 April 2017 - 04:51 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 37955 battles
  • 2,935
  • Member since:
    01-30-2013

I'm not sure about getting the removed maps back. Those were usually removed for good reasons and they had problems. But then any of them was easily better than either Paris or Pilsen. For example I would much rather play Camperin than all the maps they released in the last 2 years or so. Damn it WG stop with the stupid corridor/city maps already!

 

Do you even play your own game? Like with the recent light tank nerfs. You say lights do not need as much firepower because they are meant to spot. Well spotting is basically dead on all the maps you released in the last 2 years! There is no spotting in Pilsen, Stalingrad, Kharkov and other maps like those.



Sgt_Blast #19 Posted 20 May 2017 - 03:25 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 29561 battles
  • 25
  • Member since:
    10-02-2012

These balance arguments are idiotic. All the existing maps are slightly unbalanced and all the maps that were removed were slightly unbalanced.

What makes the argument even more idiotic is that the random teams are - 99% of the time - in terms of player skill completely lop sided to a joke degree. To an extent the mix of tanks is usually unbalanced also. So why the funk does it matter if a map is slightly unbalanced, when both these other issues screw balance so much harder. 

 

Variety will keep us playing and interested... and PAYING WG.

 

Only maps that are down right broken should be changed (not removed). eg Erlenberg. That map in standard is devolving into an even worse version of what it used to be. Played it earlier - enemies all went one side, my donut team all went the other (this is getting quite common) - deadlock. My nubs got bored and drowned themselves. I couldn't really blame them. THAT is a broken map... at least in random - standard mode. You used to be able to break that deadlock occasionally on the old map, even with chimps. Every single removed map is a significantly more fun and less idiotic in random battles.

 

Getting real bored with the same old, same old. At the very least why can't we have the existing maps with alternative flag capture points and why can't we have more assault and encounters versions of maps. I just don't get it. Surely this stuff should of been a matter of course and quick and cheap to do. Made this complaint before and had to take a 4 month boredom break shortly afterwards. The boredom is setting in again and it could so easily be avoided. 


Edited by Sgt_Blast, 20 May 2017 - 03:41 AM.


Gremlin182 #20 Posted 20 May 2017 - 06:02 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 41603 battles
  • 6,707
  • Member since:
    04-18-2012

View PostZeebad, on 15 February 2017 - 01:42 PM, said:

Serious question: Why does it matter if maps are a little bit unbalanced? On average, you will get it from both sides the same amount. The WR differences from one end to the other pale int insignificance given the randomness of the matchmaker.

 

It probably doesn't matter and there are maps we play on today that are unbalanced Mines being an example esp on encounter.

 

Even so the imbalance doesn't give an auto win to one side it just gives them an edge, no more than the MM gives one side or the other an edge.

 

Aim for City maps few Open maps few mixed maps loads and a roughly even spread of Summer Winter Desert or price your camo paint differently paying the same for desert or winter paint jobs when there are far fewer of those maps to take advantage of.

Desert or winter variants of the same map are a stopgap not a solution

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users