Jump to content


Sand River Assault fixed when?


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

tajj7 #1 Posted 17 August 2017 - 02:58 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 24849 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

How long does this broken map have to be in the game before you fix it? It's basically an auto-win for defenders because you gifted them every good position on the map.

 

66% of games are won by the defenders, 66%, 2 out of every 3 FFS -

 

http://www.vbaddict.net/statistics_maps.php?tier=0&tanktype=0&nation=0&premium=0&modeid=513&team=1&groupby=0&fieldname=won_lost_ratio

 

No map in the game comes close to being the unbalanced, think the worst is an encounter map with about 56% to one side.  

 

0.01% of the playerbase win 65% of their games, but we have a map that gifts one team 66% and it has been like this for years now, Sand River defending team is better than most super unicums at winning games!

 

I like assault mode, but what is the point of playing it when you get this map where everything just favours the defending team? 

 

Put a couple of Maus on that defending team and you are probably pushing that to like 80-90% chance to win. 



Strappster #2 Posted 17 August 2017 - 03:04 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23695 battles
  • 8,926
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015
Putting invisible walls on the hills in the NE would prevent the defenders winning so many of those battles where half the attacking team spend most of the battle driving up there only to find they're out of range of the defenders when they finally arrive.

suvicze #3 Posted 17 August 2017 - 03:07 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 19297 battles
  • 659
  • [CS-TB] CS-TB
  • Member since:
    08-07-2010

Yeah, I would say I have pretty much similar experience in terms of %. Doesnt stop me from loving this map on assault as a defender with my Scorpion G though :D

 Although I would say that part of the reason why it is so bad is the shorter time limit for assault mod coupled with quite common MM screw up where it puts heavy tanks on defending team and tds on attacking team and we all know how most people play their td not that they have much of a choice with often worse viewrange and subpar armor.



ApocalypseSquad #4 Posted 17 August 2017 - 03:13 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 26257 battles
  • 2,011
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011
I don't care.  It all evens out in the end and I like some asymmetry.  Or even a lot.  It feels so much better when you prevail.  This constant cry for an entirely symmetrical game is going to result on us all playing with a single identical tank (albeit with different names) on billiard table maps with no cover.  Is that really what we want?

kripton69 #5 Posted 17 August 2017 - 03:20 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1208 battles
  • 389
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

I think what the map needs is a fix of those dunes in the south-west corner. In every game mode they're contributing nothing positive to the game, just creating camping platforms with good reach for bots. Right now the reach to the middle is way too good with little chance of being spotted in return.

 

Having said that, I'm still happy to roll assault Sand River because even if it's the worst of the assault maps, it's still better than almost all standard maps. It is unquestionably broken but it's still better than the other two game modes of the same map. I'm much more concerned with maps like Arctic Region, Abbey and Mines. The good thing about assault is also that even if the odds are stacking against you, the game mode rewards good play and you can often make a big difference even on a map in which you're seemingly a big underdog.



Suurpolskija #6 Posted 17 August 2017 - 03:34 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18692 battles
  • 1,642
  • [URHO] URHO
  • Member since:
    01-26-2016

So, a year ago I deselected the assault mode because I thought it was unfair on any map for the attackers. I mean, 10 minutes and all defenders have to do is kemp bush with vision to cap.

 

Last week was turn for encounter to fly in the trash can. Mostly because Mines, though. I didn't mind other maps but every time I got mines encounter, you could pretty much tell the end result before the count down even started.

 

Topic: But yeah, the way I've seen Sand river assault played by some youtubers, I feel sorry for the attacking team. Pls fix.



8126Jakobsson #7 Posted 17 August 2017 - 03:41 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 62675 battles
  • 3,094
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

It is a bit too easy to defend but I don't mind attacking either. It's usually not that bad as long as you don't have a bunch of edited parked on E1.

Just go midal and shoot stuff  http://wotreplays.co.../3150016#stats 



Lycopersicon #8 Posted 17 August 2017 - 03:45 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 10600 battles
  • 3,563
  • Member since:
    07-30-2014
I am always happy to have assault in that map, whether attacking or defending. Be it unbalanced, it is interesting to play anyway.

ApocalypseSquad #9 Posted 17 August 2017 - 03:53 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 26257 battles
  • 2,011
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View Post8126Jakobsson, on 17 August 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

It is a bit too easy to defend but I don't mind attacking either. It's usually not that bad as long as you don't have a bunch of edited parked on E1.

Just go midal and shoot stuff  http://wotreplays.co...e/3150016#stats

 

I had it last night on attack, and all of our heavies, and I mean all of them, camped on the dunes in front of the spawn.  Needless to say we lost....

MeetriX #10 Posted 17 August 2017 - 03:59 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 19563 battles
  • 2,602
  • Member since:
    08-12-2012

View PostLycopersicon, on 17 August 2017 - 03:45 PM, said:

I am always happy to have assault in that map, whether attacking or defending. Be it unbalanced, it is interesting to play anyway.

 

I like it too, but 10 min. is not enough. 

jack_timber #11 Posted 17 August 2017 - 04:02 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32385 battles
  • 1,881
  • Member since:
    07-26-2014
One map I really like, whether assault or encounter.

Steeleye_Spam #12 Posted 17 August 2017 - 04:08 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 27649 battles
  • 224
  • Member since:
    08-31-2014
Yeah, I switched off assault because of this map, and that was even though on defence I loved playing that central ramp - but assaulting it with a half decent defending team is nearly alway doomed.

ZlatanArKung #13 Posted 17 August 2017 - 04:10 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
After HD rock is done. So in 1 year or more.

pathed91 #14 Posted 17 August 2017 - 04:12 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 17807 battles
  • 194
  • Member since:
    03-09-2014

Really like the map even if it is unbalanced, but it would be great if they could make the south-west corner a bit more exposed from the middle by removing some of the rock at F1 and make the middle ridge more exposed from E1.

 

I don't have the same problem at tier 6 on the map though, due to much less armor at the tier. It's only tier 8 and above it really gets enoying to attack. 



IncandescentGerbil #15 Posted 17 August 2017 - 04:12 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35666 battles
  • 1,443
  • Member since:
    11-24-2015
I turned off assault, and encounter too. Winning games on SR assault was fun, but 90% of the time half of your team would go to the corner of fail and just sit there for the entire game. Not fun.

HundeWurst #16 Posted 17 August 2017 - 04:15 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 67720 battles
  • 4,278
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012
Please, Wargaming is busy counting their money right now... Dont interrupt them right now or they might have to start all over again.

Cobra6 #17 Posted 17 August 2017 - 04:17 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16332 battles
  • 15,518
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Funny, whenever I'm on the attacking side I never have issues winning. But then again I might be in that 33% of the teams winning for the attacking side :teethhappy:

 

It's interesting, these stats because neither as a defender or attacker I feel I'm at a disadvantage or advantage.

The attackers have the very strong mid-ridge positions and the outer sides. The defenders have the middle of the ridge and the 2/3's points left and right of it.

 

To be honest, as an attacker I'm more annoyed by that f@cking rock some sm@rtass at WG put inside a bush in the middle in front of the ridge. They really have an annoying habit of doing this, putting rocks in bushes.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 17 August 2017 - 04:20 PM.


suvicze #18 Posted 17 August 2017 - 04:17 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 19297 battles
  • 659
  • [CS-TB] CS-TB
  • Member since:
    08-07-2010
Give it 15 minutes time limit as standard and adjust the MM a bit so attacking sides dont get half the team of TDs and the map is pretty good. I like it much more on assault than on other mods. The time limit is usually the biggest problem in most of my matches followed by previously mentioned td problem. Very often we could have won but we have only around 1 minute or less remaining because we advanced and cleared the enemies carefully so we didnt lose half the team in first 2 minutes and enemy has some red line sniping med remaining who decides to run away and we cant catch him/cap in time.

_Bundesheer_ #19 Posted 17 August 2017 - 04:26 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29505 battles
  • 2,114
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011
Erlenberg nuff said.

Just have a bouncy HT as defender and keep the team on the side with the base...easy win.

ExclamationMark #20 Posted 17 August 2017 - 04:46 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16679 battles
  • 3,727
  • Member since:
    04-12-2013
First Cliff and Murovanka need to be fixed.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users