Jump to content


Maps that should be removed from T7+ games.


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

ZlatanArKung #1 Posted 23 December 2017 - 01:40 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

1: Mines.

Map is to small, hill is to important.

Got strong TD spots at both ends which also promotes a passive play.

And with arty it is even worse, due to like 1 or max 2 areas to fight around, and both being exposed to arty if you want to push, which, combined with the strong TD positions at both ends just further increase the defenders advantage.

Conclusion: Brings stale and passive gameplay.

 

2: Abbey.

2 corridors, but at least both are somewhat useful. Heavily favours armoured tanks over anything else, especially heavies with derps since they always do damage. The engagement range is slightly to long so it is hard to punidh derp tank for shooting by shooting him twice. And again, if you push, you are open to 3nemy arty. If you don't, you are arty safe.

This map at least doesn't have stupid TD positions in the back covering all corridors.

There is a mid area, but it is so-so, a play ground for meds with some slight relevance. To win, you need to take control over one of the corridors.

Conclusion: Frontal engagements with heavy armour and derp wins, thus a bad map.

 

3: Malinovka

At first it looks open and that flanking is a possibility, but rather soon you realise that isn't the case. The open are at the caps are a death zone, just like the area above the lake. So you find yourself fighting over the windmill in hope of winning that area. A fight that favours turret armour and decent gun depression.

Mobility is somewhat useful on this map, just like camo and viewrange. The problems of the map lies in the extremely powerful camping positions both sides have below the hill area. Which makes winning Hill important, but a push down very costly, due to you being shot by invisible tanks when you go down.

Arty just furthers increase the defensive powers with their stun and often tracking splash damage.

It is one of the best maps to rack up spotting damage on, due to the campy nature of it.

Conclusion: Camping is extremely strong, thus a bad map.

 

4: Mountain pass.

On this map you have an ice road, which is useless to go to. A bridge where you have to cover a big span of open space, open to arty fire and hull down tanks at other end. So not a good prospect for a push unless you do like a 3-man fast medium tank push from the start and hope to not meet to many enemies.

The general fight takes place in the corner to the left. Favours armoured tanks and alpha damage. But the fight is generally arty safe.

Both sides have rather strong camping Hill positions for some reason. So even if you win the fight, you have to fight enemy camping TDs in strong position. But it usually goes well, due to the numerical advantage you picked up.

Conclusion: The winning take part in a small area which favours heavy tanks with high alpha, very limited flanking. Bad map.

 

5: Stalingrad: Somewhat ok, because the 2 different fighting areas are open and big enough for some small creative movements. But since they are not connected in any way,  and the big mid area is a death zone, it becomes a pac-man game, where you chase each other around.

It also mainly focus on heavy armoured tanks with good alpha.

Comclusion: Bad die to pac-man style of gameplay, and because it promotes heavy tank with good alphaover anything else.

 

6: Charkov

Just a bad design from start to finish. Only heavy tanks are viable, the so called open area at the top gets shut down by a TD or two in strong positions. The fight take place at at most 50m range in isolated areas/corridors with almost no interaction between them.

The area at the buttom are plain bad.

Conclusion: a bad design from start to finish.

 

7: Sacred Valley: Got better with removed boost, but still bad, another 50m brawling map which favours heavy armour. Though the bug chunk of destructible stuff in the mid section makes for more interesting stuff. To bad that whole area is not really useful.

Flanking is very very limited, to not possible.

If you push top side, be prepared to get arty when pushing. Further increasing defensive power.

Conclusion: Favours heavy tank in 50m brawl.

Arty prevents pushing at the top "heavy corner" of the map.



AlbertL612 #2 Posted 23 December 2017 - 03:12 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 8314 battles
  • 72
  • [ARM] ARM
  • Member since:
    07-14-2012
Just remove arty and tds instead and every map becomes playable

Edited by AlbertL612, 23 December 2017 - 03:12 AM.


EnglishBob_ #3 Posted 23 December 2017 - 03:14 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 478 battles
  • 99
  • Member since:
    04-27-2017
Remove HTs and LTs and we almost there in Paradise .. amirite  :P

Mahamudra #4 Posted 23 December 2017 - 03:27 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 22790 battles
  • 55
  • [LT-18] LT-18
  • Member since:
    01-30-2012

View PostEnglishBob_, on 23 December 2017 - 03:14 AM, said:

Remove HTs and LTs and we almost there in Paradise .. amirite  :P

 

dude comments more that plays the game. amirite

EnglishBob_ #5 Posted 23 December 2017 - 03:30 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 478 battles
  • 99
  • Member since:
    04-27-2017
urrite .. here anyway ..... Asia is home for me .. but I go where the wind blows me .. NA, EU and Asia  :great:

Desyatnik_Pansy #6 Posted 23 December 2017 - 04:28 AM

    Bartender

  • Player
  • 16440 battles
  • 25,859
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostZlatanArKung, on 23 December 2017 - 12:40 AM, said:

5: Stalingrad: Somewhat ok, because the 2 different fighting areas are open and big enough for some small creative movements. But since they are not connected in any way,  and the big mid area is a death zone, it becomes a pac-man game, where you chase each other around.

It also mainly focus on heavy armoured tanks with good alpha.

Comclusion: Bad die to pac-man style of gameplay, and because it promotes heavy tank with good alphaover anything else.

 

Obligatory Pacmangrad gif.



alienslive #7 Posted 23 December 2017 - 04:42 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 88257 battles
  • 1,809
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013
malinovka is ok, rest are crap from the list...

ZlatanArKung #8 Posted 23 December 2017 - 08:00 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostAlbertL612, on 23 December 2017 - 03:12 AM, said:

Just remove arty and tds instead and every map becomes playable

Arty and TDs are really problematic on some maps.

 

Especially those that shovels tanks into 1 or 2 corridors, where you are arty safe until you push and try to attack, and that also have good TD spots at the end of the corridors from where TDs can sit and shoot if one team tries to push.

 

But there are other maps, like Steppes, where TDs are not a problem.



Balc0ra #9 Posted 23 December 2017 - 08:34 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66298 battles
  • 16,320
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Considering what you have complained about, but no Ensk on your list? And going by your points, you could add half the maps to the list to.  And Kharkov is getting reworked. It's map size is increasing, and half the town is going away to favor other classes then HT's.

 

Then again for high tiers most of those maps work fine enough. Mines is the only one on your list that needs to have tier limitation to 6 max. Just like Widepark. As I'm sure some here remember how fun that map was with tier X's. 6 tier X HT's brawling for the narrow bridge. Or meds brawling for the small railway corner? And spotted everyone camping at the back from the top hill? That's more or less Mines now, but still that "works".



T4T #10 Posted 23 December 2017 - 08:54 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 32714 battles
  • 60
  • Member since:
    02-22-2012


jack_timber #11 Posted 23 December 2017 - 09:31 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 33449 battles
  • 2,078
  • Member since:
    07-26-2014

View PostAlbertL612, on 23 December 2017 - 02:12 AM, said:

Just remove arty and tds instead and every map becomes playable

 

Young Albert wash your mouth out with soap:)

ZlatanArKung #12 Posted 23 December 2017 - 09:32 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostBalc0ra, on 23 December 2017 - 08:34 AM, said:

Considering what you have complained about, but no Ensk on your list? And going by your points, you could add half the maps to the list to.  And Kharkov is getting reworked. It's map size is increasing, and half the town is going away to favor other classes then HT's.

 

Then again for high tiers most of those maps work fine enough. Mines is the only one on your list that needs to have tier limitation to 6 max. Just like Widepark. As I'm sure some here remember how fun that map was with tier X's. 6 tier X HT's brawling for the narrow bridge. Or meds brawling for the small railway corner? And spotted everyone camping at the back from the top hill? That's more or less Mines now, but still that "works".

Enskilda and Pilsen should be added, just like Paris. But forgot them.

And some should be removed completely.

Mines can work up to T6, like Ensk.

 

I think Himmelsdorf is rather good though.



ZlatanArKung #13 Posted 23 December 2017 - 09:33 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostT4T, on 23 December 2017 - 08:54 AM, said:

Another retard?



ortega456 #14 Posted 23 December 2017 - 10:07 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 62740 battles
  • 1,057
  • Member since:
    06-08-2012
Lol. Can't take you serious if you don't mention Ensk.

ZlatanArKung #15 Posted 23 December 2017 - 10:11 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
Windstorm should be added aswell.

TankkiPoju #16 Posted 23 December 2017 - 10:14 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 20432 battles
  • 6,203
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

You can tell ZlatanArKung doesnt play light tanks.

 

Otherwise he would not have included Malinovka, but Ensk,

 



HundeWurst #17 Posted 23 December 2017 - 10:45 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 70001 battles
  • 4,337
  • [ROIDS] ROIDS
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

 

1. Mines

Yeah that map is stupid. It should be removed in general since the map is unbalanced on top. There is the one area dominating it all, that alone could and should be considered as bad design, however on top the northern (!?!?!?) spawn has an advantage getting the hill. Bad map through and trough.

 

2. Abbey

Corriodor map which existed since the beginning of time. Only works for high alpha and or heavy armor. Everything else is basically useless. This map does not have an issue with the tank tiers but is just stupid to play on du to the extreme corridor style.

PS: There are some pretty stupid camping spots around.

 

3. Malinovka

Yet agan not an issue for high tier tanks but the design itself is lackluster. Camping is to easy are even unbreakable due to certain concealed spots which cannot be spotted. It would neeed a redesign and removal of certain bushes/trees to make the camping far less efective. One of the few maps which could be improved and kept with "minor" changes.

 

4. Mountain Pass

The brother/sister map of Abbey. Same old problems on that map, nothing new in particular, also most issue are not really based on the "tanks tier".

 

5. Stalingrad

Well I cant even pinpoint the issues, well I can but that would take more time than I am willing to invest. It boils down to 2 completly separated flanks, which dont interact whatsoever, leading to lemmingtrains and as a result cap rushes. Bad design, yet not really a problem for higher tiers, but map design in general.

 

6: Charkov

Bad map, for various reasons. But as far as I have seen there was some kind of rework around. Who knows if that is making the map better, but i doubt that very much. No issues for high tier only but the map itself is flawed.

 

7. Sacred Valley

Effectively thats as big as Ensk. Even though theoretically its 1000X1000 meters in reality its 600X600 meters. To small to cramped, stupid in general. But oh well even though I cannot stand that map its better than a lot others non the less.

 

To add one more map which actually has problems with tank tiers:

 

Tundra

Pathetic map design which is basically another version of mines. Should instantly be removed as its a bad map, doesnt offer anything new and is to small for high tiers. REMOVE.



ZlatanArKung #18 Posted 23 December 2017 - 11:37 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostWunderWurst, on 23 December 2017 - 10:45 AM, said:

 

1. Mines

Yeah that map is stupid. It should be removed in general since the map is unbalanced on top. There is the one area dominating it all, that alone could and should be considered as bad design, however on top the northern (!?!?!?) spawn has an advantage getting the hill. Bad map through and trough.

 

2. Abbey

Corriodor map which existed since the beginning of time. Only works for high alpha and or heavy armor. Everything else is basically useless. This map does not have an issue with the tank tiers but is just stupid to play on du to the extreme corridor style.

PS: There are some pretty stupid camping spots around.

 

3. Malinovka

Yet agan not an issue for high tier tanks but the design itself is lackluster. Camping is to easy are even unbreakable due to certain concealed spots which cannot be spotted. It would neeed a redesign and removal of certain bushes/trees to make the camping far less efective. One of the few maps which could be improved and kept with "minor" changes.

 

4. Mountain Pass

The brother/sister map of Abbey. Same old problems on that map, nothing new in particular, also most issue are not really based on the "tanks tier".

 

5. Stalingrad

Well I cant even pinpoint the issues, well I can but that would take more time than I am willing to invest. It boils down to 2 completly separated flanks, which dont interact whatsoever, leading to lemmingtrains and as a result cap rushes. Bad design, yet not really a problem for higher tiers, but map design in general.

 

6: Charkov

Bad map, for various reasons. But as far as I have seen there was some kind of rework around. Who knows if that is making the map better, but i doubt that very much. No issues for high tier only but the map itself is flawed.

 

7. Sacred Valley

Effectively thats as big as Ensk. Even though theoretically its 1000X1000 meters in reality its 600X600 meters. To small to cramped, stupid in general. But oh well even though I cannot stand that map its better than a lot others non the less.

 

To add one more map which actually has problems with tank tiers:

 

Tundra

Pathetic map design which is basically another version of mines. Should instantly be removed as its a bad map, doesnt offer anything new and is to small for high tiers. REMOVE.

Yes, some are more general.

But the lack of accuracy/gun handling and view range on lower tiers makes some maps more ok, despite map design flaws.

 

Ensk is kind of interesting, I don't mind the design that much, it is only the size that makes it meh, even though it is a short range brawl map.

 

Tundra is terrible by design. Short range brawl with strong camping spots covering both caps.



siramra #19 Posted 23 December 2017 - 11:44 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 25076 battles
  • 1,186
  • [DUXTR] DUXTR
  • Member since:
    08-21-2011

Mines and Ensk

Those 2 should have a tier limit or the maps needs to get bigger.



anonym_kL7qtn3e52MB #20 Posted 23 December 2017 - 11:48 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 6,815
  • Member since:
    07-10-2018

Pilsen

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users