Jump to content


Next Ranked season maps. More lies?


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

laulaur #1 Posted 01 September 2017 - 01:00 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46460 battles
  • 986
  • [-WBZ] -WBZ
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

 

From a Gamescom Q&A:

  • Two maps were removed from the Ranked Battles, because skilled players are more likely and quick to find imbalanced positions.    

https://thedailyboun...-developers-qa/

What? You removed 2 maps from a gamemode that is supposed to reward skill because those maps rewarded the skilled players? Yeah, it sounds legit....

 

But they removed just 2 maps? Let's see if we are not lied again.

 

From the official site we have the maps for the upcoming ranked season:  https://worldoftanks...e-announcement/

Also from the official site we got the list of maps for the first ranked season:  https://worldoftanks...nd-regulations/

 

I compared the lists of maps (btw, who made those articles and lists is a total incompetent, no alphabetic order or anything....)

The result is the following: green for maps that stayed in both seasons 

                                           orangefor removed maps

                                           blue for new added maps

  • Mines
  • Prokhorovka  Prokhorovka
  • Abbey  Abbey
  • El Halluf  El Halluf
  • Airfield  Airfield
  • Malinovka  Malinovka
  • Himmelsdorf  Himmelsdorf
  • Murovanka  Murovanka
  • Paris
  • Karelia  Karelia
  • Lakeville   Lakeville
  • Siegfried Line
  • Sand River  Sand River
  • Erlenberg
  • Arctic Region  Arctic Region
  • Tundra
  • Ensk
  • Swamp
  • Westfield   Westfield
  • Fisherman's Bay   Fisherman's Bay
  • Highway   Highway
  • Serene Coast   Serene Coast
  • Windstorm
  • Fjords   Fjords
  • Pilsen

Ruinberg

Cliff

Redshire

Steppes

Mountain Pass

 Live Oaks

Winter Himmelsdorf

 Fiery Salient

Winterberg

 

 

Oh, look - two of the worst maps ever made it to ranked battles: Paris and Pilsen.

 

Conclusion: WG did not remove just 2 maps, they removed 9 maps - and added  other 9 maps.

 

 

 


Edited by laulaur, 01 September 2017 - 01:01 AM.


Penzijon3r_2017 #2 Posted 01 September 2017 - 06:35 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 5629 battles
  • 234
  • Member since:
    07-19-2017

View Postlaulaur, on 01 September 2017 - 01:00 AM, said:

 

 

Conclusion: WG did not remove just 2 maps, they removed 9 maps - and added  other 9 maps.

 

 

 

 

Oh how terrible!!!! Lets WHINE now!!!

Spurtung #3 Posted 01 September 2017 - 06:40 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 61581 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 01 September 2017 - 02:00 AM, said:

  • Two maps were removed from the Ranked Battles, because skilled players are more likely and quick to find imbalanced positions.    

(...)

 

But they removed just 2 maps? Let's see if we are not lied again.

 

They just say two maps were removed for that reason.

They don't say they only removed two maps.

They don't say maps get removed for only that reason.

 

You're a victim of a fallacy created by yourself.


Edited by Spurtung, 01 September 2017 - 06:41 AM.


laulaur #4 Posted 01 September 2017 - 06:42 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46460 battles
  • 986
  • [-WBZ] -WBZ
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View PostPenzijon3r_2017, on 01 September 2017 - 05:35 AM, said:

 

Oh how terrible!!!! Lets WHINE now!!!

 

Oh look, a failed reroll suddenly appeared and posted something totally irrelevant and unconstructive.....:deer:

Please go back to your T32 and come back when you have a tier 10 tank. Or just post from your main account, if you are not ashamed.



MauDaFOCA #5 Posted 06 September 2017 - 08:48 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 31875 battles
  • 117
  • [POR-1] POR-1
  • Member since:
    12-07-2012

View PostSpurtung, on 01 September 2017 - 05:40 AM, said:

 

They just say two maps were removed for that reason.

They don't say they only removed two maps.

They don't say maps get removed for only that reason.

 

You're a victim of a fallacy created by yourself.

 

and you are a victim of idiosincronity spurtung.

 

The initial post IS correct. wg is all but acurate on its comunications and like the post says.. too many lies.

 

could go on giving lots of examples, but you dickhead would start arguing and refusing... no point than.

 

AND HOW ABOUT THE BUGS WARGAMING??? HOW MUCH MORE TIME UNTIL YOU FIX CRASH BUG? CAPPING BUG?? SOUND BUG??? will it go on like this until next version???

 

or are you going to FIX IT..?

 

 



CmdRatScabies #6 Posted 06 September 2017 - 08:52 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 35723 battles
  • 3,793
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View PostSpurtung, on 01 September 2017 - 06:40 AM, said:

 

They just say two maps were removed for that reason.

They don't say they only removed two maps.

They don't say maps get removed for only that reason.

 

You're a victim of a fallacy created by yourself.

 

I blame the comma.

Spurtung #7 Posted 06 September 2017 - 08:57 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 61581 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostMauDaFOCA, on 06 September 2017 - 09:48 PM, said:

 

and you are a victim of idiosincronity spurtung.

 

The initial post IS correct. wg is all but acurate on its comunications and like the post says.. too many lies.

 

could go on giving lots of examples, but you dickhead would start arguing and refusing... no point than.

 

AND HOW ABOUT THE BUGS WARGAMING??? HOW MUCH MORE TIME UNTIL YOU FIX CRASH BUG? CAPPING BUG?? SOUND BUG??? will it go on like this until next version???

 

or are you going to FIX IT..?

 

I don't know what you're on about, or wtf "idiosincronity" is supposed to mean.

He draw conclusions reading between the lines, while the text is perfectly clear: 2 maps were removed for that reason. Nothing about the reasons behind the removal of other maps, and nothing about adding any maps.

 

We obviously agree that WG fails repeatedly in communicating things, I've said that before.

 

Then there's some name calling and rabble rabble that I can go well without. Got anything else to say, or did you make a fool of yourself enough?

 

View PostCmdRatScabies, on 06 September 2017 - 09:52 PM, said:

View PostSpurtung, on 01 September 2017 - 06:40 AM, said:

 

They just say two maps were removed for that reason.

They don't say they only removed two maps.

They don't say maps get removed for only that reason.

 

You're a victim of a fallacy created by yourself.

 

I blame the comma.

True, it makes it sound a bit off. But far too many people fail at punctuation anyway, putting in commas as if they were pauses for taking a breath while speaking. You kinda have to learn how to read beyond all that to get the sense of what was meant.

Either way, that "Gamescom Q&A" came from a third party website, the official one doesn't even mention any of that:

https://worldoftanks.eu/en/news/gamescom/gc17-player-party-recap/


 

ZlatanArKung #8 Posted 06 September 2017 - 09:05 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
WGS ranked map pool is a [edited]joke, and the guy(s) who thought adding Pilsen, Paris, Mines, Shitstorm and Tundra while removing Fiery Salient, Steppes and Red Shire are really [edited]stupid and incompetent and should never ever be able to take decisions about what is a good/bad map.

It is just incompetence beyond imagine a toon at work. WG really trying their hardest to break ranked battles ASAP.

HundeWurst #9 Posted 06 September 2017 - 09:49 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 67720 battles
  • 4,277
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

View PostZlatanArKung, on 06 September 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

WGS ranked map pool is a [edited]joke, and the guy(s) who thought adding Pilsen, Paris, Mines, Shitstorm and Tundra while removing Fiery Salient, Steppes and Red Shire are really [edited]stupid and incompetent and should never ever be able to take decisions about what is a good/bad map.

It is just incompetence beyond imagine a toon at work. WG really trying their hardest to break ranked battles ASAP.

 

Nothing more to add there.

I mean I guess they try their hardest to make the mode fail as hard as possible. Maybe they want to create a "Told you so" for later use.



Kartoshkaya #10 Posted 07 September 2017 - 12:04 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23368 battles
  • 335
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015

Now that Mine and Ensk are in the list I can't wait for El halluf and Lakeville to be replaced by Mittengard and Province.

 

Tier X map pool masterrace



laulaur #11 Posted 07 September 2017 - 06:59 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46460 battles
  • 986
  • [-WBZ] -WBZ
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 01 September 2017 - 05:40 AM, said:

 

They just say two maps were removed for that reason.

They don't say they only removed two maps.

They don't say maps get removed for only that reason.

 

You're a victim of a fallacy created by yourself.

 

Let's take this hypothetical situation:

Your boss says to you: 'Spurtung, i removed 200 euro from your salary, because you were late at work'

And at the end of the month you receive 900 euro less because reasons.....

You would be happy? You would feel lied?

 



Junglist_ #12 Posted 07 September 2017 - 07:20 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35855 battles
  • 1,331
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013

Removing open maps like Steppes, Fiery Salient or Cliff and instead adding shitty tiny corridors like Paris and Pilsen is unbelievable!

I guess Murazor himself wants to take his OP Maus out for a spin in ranked without risking to play on open maps too much. Thought they said they're gonna improve the next season... Must've forgot to add improve for super HT players.



Spurtung #13 Posted 07 September 2017 - 07:52 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 61581 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 07 September 2017 - 07:59 AM, said:

 

Let's take this hypothetical situation:

Your boss says to you: 'Spurtung, i removed 200 euro from your salary, because you were late at work'

And at the end of the month you receive 900 euro less because reasons.....

You would be happy? You would feel lied?

 

 

You really think that analogy is similar to what happened here?

And even if it were, there's also the slight issue of how you got the information. It wasn't WG saying it, you can't quote that information from their own official sources, can you? It would be more like some guy saying they talked to my boss and were told that.

 

View PostKartoshkaya, on 07 September 2017 - 01:04 AM, said:

Now that Mine and Ensk are in the list I can't wait for El halluf and Lakeville to be replaced by Mittengard and Province.

 

Tier X map pool masterrace

 

I guess that would also solve the campfest.
 

laulaur #14 Posted 07 September 2017 - 08:07 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46460 battles
  • 986
  • [-WBZ] -WBZ
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 07 September 2017 - 06:53 AM, said:

 

I guess that would also solve the campfest.

 

Yeah, because 4 minutes games are sooo fun...

Kozzy #15 Posted 07 September 2017 - 08:09 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 38855 battles
  • 2,705
  • [EAB2] EAB2
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostWunderWurst, on 06 September 2017 - 08:49 PM, said:

 

Nothing more to add there.

I mean I guess they try their hardest to make the mode fail as hard as possible. Maybe they want to create a "Told you so" for later use.

 

I don't usually get as mad as most posters on the forum but this has really pi55ed me off.  What do you think the real reason is for removing these maps, which require way more skill than just face-smashing in super-heavies, while putting in stupid maps like Paris?  What are WG thinking with this mode?  

Spurtung #16 Posted 07 September 2017 - 08:16 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 61581 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 07 September 2017 - 09:07 AM, said:

 

Yeah, because 4 minutes games are sooo fun...

 

If I have to say it's sarcasm so people like you can understand it, it kinda loses the point. But that was sarcasm, nobody wants 15v15 tier 10 in bloody Ensk

laulaur #17 Posted 07 September 2017 - 08:32 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46460 battles
  • 986
  • [-WBZ] -WBZ
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 07 September 2017 - 07:16 AM, said:

 

If I have to say it's sarcasm so people like you can understand it, it kinda loses the point. But that was sarcasm, nobody wants 15v15 tier 10 in bloody Ensk

 

And how should i know that you were sarcastic??

You wrote this:  'I guess that would also solve the campfest. '

 

Could have written it like this:   'I guess that would also solve the campfest.......'

Or like this: 'I guess that would also solve the campfest. :facepalm:'

Or like this: 'Yeah, I guess that would also solve the campfest for sure....'

 

For someone posing like a specialist in using commas and talking/writing, you don't use the punctuation very much :sceptic:

 

As for WG changing the maps, and i having that 2 maps change thing from a unofficial source: that does not change a thing.

Even if no one from WG told that they are changing 2 maps (or just 2 maps), does not change the thing that they removed 9 maps and added 9.

Why is is not stated on the WG portal?

They could have wrote: 'We removed these 9 maps, and added these 9 maps''

They posted just a list of maps, not even in alphabetical order......



Spurtung #18 Posted 07 September 2017 - 08:39 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 61581 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostKozzy, on 07 September 2017 - 09:09 AM, said:

What are WG thinking with this mode?  

Moar hevis, MOAR!

 

I don't think we will even be seeing those 2 arties per game, with this roster.



Cannes76 #19 Posted 07 September 2017 - 08:41 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 64433 battles
  • 1,610
  • [3V] 3V
  • Member since:
    04-16-2011

I don't understand why Steppes and Redshire isn't included. I totally agree with the removal of Ruinberg and Live Oaks, though. Those maps were horribly imbalanced.

And OP: You are (purposefully?) misintepreting what they mean by removing it "because skilled players are more likely and quick to find imbalanced positions". This is obviously just their way of saying: Our map department fucked these maps up so bad, that one specific spawn always wins.



Spurtung #20 Posted 07 September 2017 - 08:42 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 61581 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 07 September 2017 - 09:32 AM, said:

And how should i know that you were sarcastic??

About 70% of my posts are sarcastic.

How do you know if someone's being sarcastic? That takes some practice, as part of it is being ridiculous in some claims. Sometimes people mistake it for a true statement and think the person is stupid, therefore sarcasm needs to be just right, can't be overdone.

 

 

View Postlaulaur, on 07 September 2017 - 09:32 AM, said:

As for WG changing the maps, and i having that 2 maps change thing from a unofficial source: that does not change a thing.

Even if no one from WG told that they are changing 2 maps (or just 2 maps), does not change the thing that they removed 9 maps and added 9.

Why is is not stated on the WG portal?

They could have wrote: 'We removed these 9 maps, and added these 9 maps''

They posted just a list of maps, not even in alphabetical order......

It changes everything, I'm afraid. For starters, you can't claim they lied about it, as we don't even know exactly how TDB got that information to begin with.

 

All we know, and that's official news, is the map list for the beta season contained some maps, and now they have another list of maps that will be featured. No explanations, no reasoning, nothing. That's as technical as it gets.

 

The order at which they're displayed, who cares? Certainly not worth to nitpick that one.


Edited by Spurtung, 07 September 2017 - 08:48 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users