Jump to content


Why do we hate maps?

maps discussion prosandcons design mm

  • Please log in to reply
68 replies to this topic

Tomotorqemada #1 Posted 16 November 2017 - 08:36 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13278 battles
  • 388
  • Member since:
    03-21-2017
It is definitely a huge deal of battles when the team chat opens with "***k this map" and a multiple applause afterwards. I find it totally understandable, cos thera different reasons to dislike them - map can be a total misfit with your vechicle type, some of them are utterly depressive, some others are around since tier 1 and youve really got enough of em. 
As often as it happens ingame.. Would expect many of those here on the forum. Which maps do you hate and why?

UPD Ok I forgot 1 of the points most important for me personally))) I hate the maps being castrated by WG by the means of glass walls and all that kind of BS just because lots of moaners still cant accept living in a 3-dimensional world. This parade of mediocrity makes some maps total garbage.

Edited by Tomotorqemada, 16 November 2017 - 08:59 PM.


Jigabachi #2 Posted 16 November 2017 - 08:44 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17753 battles
  • 17,651
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
Most of them. Too small, especially for higher tiers. Too old and boring. Corridors and bottlenecks everywhere.

qpranger #3 Posted 16 November 2017 - 08:47 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 30751 battles
  • 5,061
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013

I hate them simply because even the biggest ones are so pathetically small.

I watch War Thunder replays on YouTube sometimes and I salivate.

Why can't we have such vast expanses for quality gameplay?



Bennie182 #4 Posted 16 November 2017 - 08:54 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 50384 battles
  • 1,091
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

View PostJigabachi, on 16 November 2017 - 08:44 PM, said:

Most of them. Too small, especially for higher tiers. Too old and boring. Corridors and bottlenecks everywhere.

Exactly.. bottlenecks are the most gamebreaking in my opinion. A lot of maps don't give enough variety to avoid fighting a Type 5 heavy, for example. Take Abbey for example: if I play a light or med, I can go middle and camp and be probably useless or take one of the flanks and probably meet that superheavy. Not much choice. I want more maps where you can have more influence on.

 

Too many to name.



Tidal_Force #5 Posted 16 November 2017 - 08:55 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 16000 battles
  • 6,774
  • Member since:
    08-29-2012

View Postqpranger, on 16 November 2017 - 07:47 PM, said:

quality gameplay?

 

:teethhappy:

Spurtung #6 Posted 16 November 2017 - 08:58 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60146 battles
  • 5,521
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postqpranger, on 16 November 2017 - 09:47 PM, said:

I hate them simply because even the biggest ones are so pathetically small.

I watch War Thunder replays on YouTube sometimes and I salivate.

Why can't we have such vast expanses for quality gameplay?

 

Because then WG would create 50 vs 50 Grander Battles.

Tomotorqemada #7 Posted 16 November 2017 - 09:01 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13278 battles
  • 388
  • Member since:
    03-21-2017

View PostJigabachi, on 16 November 2017 - 08:44 PM, said:

Most of them. Too small, especially for higher tiers. Too old and boring. Corridors and bottlenecks everywhere.

 

View Postqpranger, on 16 November 2017 - 08:47 PM, said:

I hate them simply because even the biggest ones are so pathetically small.

I watch War Thunder replays on YouTube sometimes and I salivate.

Why can't we have such vast expanses for quality gameplay?

 

Good points, I probably should update the OP with a list of points.
 

View PostSpurtung, on 16 November 2017 - 08:58 PM, said:

 

Because then WG would create 50 vs 50 Grander Battles.

 

Sounds fun to me especially it'd be available from tier 6
 

Spurtung #8 Posted 16 November 2017 - 09:05 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60146 battles
  • 5,521
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostTomotorqemada, on 16 November 2017 - 10:02 PM, said:

 

Sounds fun to me especially it'd be available from tier 6

 

Have I told you about the 100 vs 100 Grandest Battles yet? They're the bestest!

K_A #9 Posted 16 November 2017 - 09:17 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 13566 battles
  • 4,656
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013
I just don't fully get WG's map policy these days. Where previously if a map had some problems they'd try to fix it by making changes to the map, but nowadays they just scrap the whole fupping map and bring in a new city map to replace it. We have more than enough city maps already, I want to see more open maps. Komarin (although had it's problems, wasn't completely lost imo), Pearl River, Northwest, South Coast. I didn't find anything completely game-breaking in many of the maps pulled out that couldn't have been changed with some light tweaking. And what we got in return, Kharkov and Stalingrad for example are some of the worst maps in rotation at the moment.

HundeWurst #10 Posted 16 November 2017 - 09:41 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 67583 battles
  • 4,184
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

Well many and more mix up two very different problems or issues here: One are technical issues - aka objective problems a map has, that can be considered in various ways, and the other whether a or the map is liked by the player or not.

 

 

I i.e. dont like Himmelsdorf at all, yet its technically a decent map. I like Ruinberg much more, yet technically speaking Ruinberg is flawed a lot.

 

Also there is another problem: Maps are repetetive. Since roughly 90% of them are tunnle corner brawling maps, which are just different due to another skin, they become repetetive in no time. Its always the same old same old, with a slightly different look.

Now I dont think making good and diverse maps is easy, actually its rather hard for various reasons, but I would much rather have 10 or lets go as far as 20 maps which are technically alright and differ from each other than the current 40 maps of which 30 are flawed and undesirable to play on.

 

Overall maps often WAY to small for higher tiers, due to the weird scaling of viewrange accuracy and such, and are also terribly designed for one or another reason. However I also tend to belive that a lot of the bad design decisions are made or even have to be made due to the small overall size.

Then again, maps cannot be to small but to big maps are also problematic since there then will be hardly any "action" left.

 

I for one think that the best way towards new maps would be to use the creativity of the commuinity. WG should or could release a mapmaker tool which then could be used by players to make new maps. Ofc WG still has to do a lot and has to select, optimize and verfiy these maps but oh well, it cannot get much worse than right now.



jack_timber #11 Posted 16 November 2017 - 09:53 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 31214 battles
  • 1,611
  • Member since:
    07-26-2014

Personally I like the wide open spaces where the pungent aroma of cordite wafts in the breeze.... I could wax lyrically more but no.

Generally play TDs and arty so city maps can be a pain, playable just, so larger maps please. The GB is good got something for all more of the same or similar. 



Aikl #12 Posted 16 November 2017 - 10:19 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 4,042
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

Small, stale, not varied enough, and they enable most (if not all) of the main issues with the game.



Erwin_Von_Braun #13 Posted 16 November 2017 - 10:20 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 36118 battles
  • 3,928
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

View PostSpurtung, on 16 November 2017 - 07:58 PM, said:

 

Because then WG would create 50 vs 50 Grander Battles.

 

View PostTomotorqemada, on 16 November 2017 - 08:02 PM, said:

 

Sounds fun to me especially it'd be available from tier 6

 

That does sound like fun - a proper tactical battle instead of this 'whack-a-mole' abortion we have now.
 

View Postjack_timber, on 16 November 2017 - 08:53 PM, said:

Personally I like the wide open spaces where the pungent aroma of cordite wafts in the breeze.... I could wax lyrically more but no.

Generally play TDs and arty so city maps can be a pain, playable just, so larger maps please. The GB is good got something for all more of the same or similar. 

 

Weird thing is, I completed SPG15 War Gods with honours on........................Stalingrad:unsure:
 

JakeRoook #14 Posted 16 November 2017 - 11:33 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 260 battles
  • 276
  • Member since:
    04-20-2013
I think you hate spot mechanics, not maps. In all kind of map is possible to get hand of god token or kamikaze.

Edited by JakeRoook, 16 November 2017 - 11:37 PM.


_EXODUZ_ #15 Posted 16 November 2017 - 11:47 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34165 battles
  • 1,935
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    11-05-2014

View PostJakeRoook, on 16 November 2017 - 11:33 PM, said:

I think you hate spot mechanics, not maps. In all kind of map is possible to get hand of god token or kamikaze.

 



I don't enjoy city maps so much when I play scouts. Otherwise I don't hate anything.
 

Tomotorqemada #16 Posted 17 November 2017 - 01:09 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13278 battles
  • 388
  • Member since:
    03-21-2017

View PostSpurtung, on 16 November 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

 

Have I told you about the 100 vs 100 Grandest Battles yet? They're the bestest!

Well, have I told you about the battle of Kursk?))) The Fiery Salient, i'd like to have it not only in a map name. A real small war for half an hour. I'd sign up

View PostWunderWurst, on 16 November 2017 - 09:41 PM, said:

Well many and more mix up two very different problems or issues here: One are technical issues - aka objective problems a map has, that can be considered in various ways, and the other whether a or the map is liked by the player or not.

 

 

I i.e. dont like Himmelsdorf at all, yet its technically a decent map. I like Ruinberg much more, yet technically speaking Ruinberg is flawed a lot.

 

Also there is another problem: Maps are repetetive. Since roughly 90% of them are tunnle corner brawling maps, which are just different due to another skin, they become repetetive in no time. Its always the same old same old, with a slightly different look.

Now I dont think making good and diverse maps is easy, actually its rather hard for various reasons, but I would much rather have 10 or lets go as far as 20 maps which are technically alright and differ from each other than the current 40 maps of which 30 are flawed and undesirable to play on.

 

Overall maps often WAY to small for higher tiers, due to the weird scaling of viewrange accuracy and such, and are also terribly designed for one or another reason. However I also tend to belive that a lot of the bad design decisions are made or even have to be made due to the small overall size.

Then again, maps cannot be to small but to big maps are also problematic since there then will be hardly any "action" left.

 

I for one think that the best way towards new maps would be to use the creativity of the commuinity. WG should or could release a mapmaker tool which then could be used by players to make new maps. Ofc WG still has to do a lot and has to select, optimize and verfiy these maps but oh well, it cannot get much worse than right now.

Many good points here. Yes, one of the misfits that i meant is that you are in a tank that dies when spotted and your respawn is within enemy LOS.
Yes Himmelsdorf a is a good example of a regular misfit. As a unit commander i would not send arty or paper tds or scouts to storm this town. Although the map is almost beatiful (rather dull in landscape aside the hill).
Repetitiveness is a special kind of fun when you get 4 arty rounds in himmelsdorf in a row. Happened 2 me. Well, i must confess some of them were encounters, technically a different game lol.

 

But no I think thera some EASY steps in mapdesign and in mapmanagement to be made, and that will be a separate thread.

View PostErwin_Von_Braun, on 16 November 2017 - 10:20 PM, said:

 

 

That does sound like fun - a proper tactical battle instead of this 'whack-a-mole' abortion we have now.

Roma locuta

View PostErwin_Von_Braun, on 16 November 2017 - 10:22 PM, said:

 

Weird thing is, I completed SPG15 War Gods with honours on........................Stalingrad:unsure:

Just got my 3d master on S1 on the bloody ruinberg which i hate since tier 3 approximately



Coldspell #17 Posted 17 November 2017 - 02:56 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 18583 battles
  • 2,095
  • Member since:
    08-12-2013
I hate paris.... do Wargaming secretly make paris terrible just to make stalingrad look better then it... tinfoil hats on now please.

ExclamationMark #18 Posted 17 November 2017 - 03:18 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16679 battles
  • 3,727
  • Member since:
    04-12-2013
I don't like most of the maps but I flat out HATE Erlenberg. Duck that map and I hope the person that designed it steps on brand new LEGO blocks.

Indy_Bones #19 Posted 17 November 2017 - 09:19 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28328 battles
  • 1,424
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    06-06-2011

The combination of the overemphasis of corridor/city maps, combined with the horrendous map rotation system and you've got a recipe for disaster.

 

I'd rather have 'flawed' or 'biased' maps such as Port, South Coast, Northwest, Pearl River etc, than the complete dung that WG have released more recently like Stalingrad, Paris and Kharkov.

 

We don't need more city maps, we need LESS, and the addition of a selection of larger and more open maps so that tactics and strategy can actually be used instead of picking 1 of 3 corridors to die down...

 

Also, we don't endless variants of the same map with a slightly different skin either. There should only be only ONE of each variant in rotation at any point, and the sensible thing to do would be to make the others seasonal, so we'd now be playing on Winter Himm and Winterberg, with normal Himm and normal Ruinberg out of rotation until the spring.



jeffrey_mk2 #20 Posted 17 November 2017 - 12:40 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11691 battles
  • 273
  • [NLWGG] NLWGG
  • Member since:
    04-02-2013
Actually to avoid fighting on the same places on maps over and over it would be better to randomize the places where you spawn on the map with a rule build in like "must be always a certain amount of meter away from each other.
And also the cap places should change to other places on maps.
Its hard to design a map that doesnt create corridors where you always meet the enemy on the same places.
Thats because you always spawn at the same places and cap point always on the same places.
My opinion is that it never will change no matter what map you get if there's always the same spawn and cap place.






Also tagged with maps, discussion, prosandcons, design, mm

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users