Jump to content


5 maps are getting removed in 1.0


  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic

Simeon85 #61 Posted 19 February 2018 - 12:55 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 3,599
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostJotneblod, on 19 February 2018 - 11:48 AM, said:

 

I think the issue is that the map would have to be made HD to work in the new client which seems pointless for just a training room map. The impression I have is that it's impossible to have old and new maps in the client at the same time.

 

Good point, though wouldn't see why. 

Cobra6 #62 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:34 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16340 battles
  • 15,981
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Going to miss Swamp and Sacred Valley

 

Cobra 6



Gremlin182 #63 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:44 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 49560 battles
  • 8,332
  • Member since:
    04-18-2012

Never thought there was a need to remove any maps at all and certainly no need to remove a map to work on it.

In the first case whatever you remove will please some and disappoint others so why not make them optional.

We can already choose to play or not play Encounter and Assault modes.

Add a new tab call it what you will all those that tick the tab can play on those maps those who do not tick the box never see them.

I suppose it could complicate the MM but it seems to handle the other options well emough.

 

Secondly if you are rebalancing or changing a map why remove it let us play the map as it is now then swap in the new version when its done.

What I wish you would do with these map changes would be to increase the number of desert and winter maps whats the point of there being only 3 desert and 7 winter maps compared to 30+ summer maps



Ze_HOFF_fverhoef #64 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:50 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 15186 battles
  • 3,136
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    03-18-2012

They should keep mittengard for a special bonkers mode (open to all tiers), but not as some map teaching newbies the basics of the game.

 

As of that new map.... looks very artificial, with trademark wargaming sniping spots, funnels and other weird crap. I hope it will be nice.



CmdRatScabies #65 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:58 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 37626 battles
  • 4,506
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015
Glad to see Sacred Valley go.  Games always seem a total mess unless you're in a heavy or your team pushes.  Seems to require decent team play to get a decent game on the non heavy side.

Zinomov #66 Posted 19 February 2018 - 02:01 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20960 battles
  • 231
  • [DIGIN] DIGIN
  • Member since:
    10-13-2014

one of the ways to help the game is by bringing back the old maps aswell as making new ones

cuz the map rotation is getting under my skin atm !



ares354 #67 Posted 19 February 2018 - 03:54 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73934 battles
  • 3,290
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010
SO many maps we have in Wot, that WG remove 5. 

We will play like 5 maps OVER AND OVER. Good. 

Good OLD maps wont return...

WHAT kind of brain sick people work there. How stupid you are to not see what Community want. 

Edited by ares354, 19 February 2018 - 03:54 PM.


ZlatanArKung #68 Posted 19 February 2018 - 04:09 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,111
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
That new map looks rather terrible to me.
Like a huge Malinovka field and a small passage on 1 side.

Simeon85 #69 Posted 19 February 2018 - 04:24 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 3,599
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostZlatanArKung, on 19 February 2018 - 04:09 PM, said:

That new map looks rather terrible to me.
Like a huge Malinovka field and a small passage on 1 side.

 

Actually think the new map looks all right, there is a huge open area which might an issue, but there seem to be quite a lot of different routes through the map and there seem to be plenty of spotting opportunities for lights. 

ZlatanArKung #70 Posted 19 February 2018 - 04:29 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,111
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostSimeon85, on 19 February 2018 - 04:24 PM, said:

 

Actually think the new map looks all right, there is a huge open area which might an issue, but there seem to be quite a lot of different routes through the map and there seem to be plenty of spotting opportunities for lights. 

Maybe it will be good, but to me it looks like the K <-> 0 line route will be the only viable play.



malachi6 #71 Posted 19 February 2018 - 04:40 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 50430 battles
  • 3,682
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
If every map every person disliked was removed.  No maps in the game.  Circular discussion this one.

Simeon85 #72 Posted 19 February 2018 - 04:44 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 3,599
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostZlatanArKung, on 19 February 2018 - 04:29 PM, said:

Maybe it will be good, but to me it looks like the K <-> 0 line route will be the only viable play.

 

Need to look at it more, only seen a few drive throughs but on early sight it seems a better fare than what the WG map team has delivered recently. 

 

I certainly felt I saw more than 1/2 viable flanks which is what most maps have and it felt big with longer sight lines. 



Enforcer1975 #73 Posted 19 February 2018 - 04:48 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20912 battles
  • 10,913
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View Postsmokeytheband1t, on 17 February 2018 - 04:30 PM, said:

 

Don't think they will tho.. it's in line with the meta they are going for ..

 

They only need one design and vary the textures.

 This one even has a brawling corner

 Whoever gets to the T-crossing first has map control. 



Anthony_1972 #74 Posted 19 February 2018 - 05:21 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 8499 battles
  • 153
  • Member since:
    03-29-2016

Thank god they remove Mittengard.  That stupid maps sets up the wrong attitude for new players.

 

​I don't understand why Swamp needs to go.   Sure, it needs a little update to get more balanced.  But Swamp is one of the few maps where there the HT zone doesn't consist of exactly one corner.   That area is quite dynamic, and actually also allows other tank types to join the fight, and flank heavies.    Also the right flank isn't fixed on one exact location.    I think a few little changes would be sufficient to keep the map.

 

 

​Certainly, with the big difference in view range in the tiers, it makes a lot of sense to have maps specific for high tiers and/or low tiers.   I think that possible map inbalance might be quite tier linked.    That might be enough reason to for example removed a map from high tiers, but keeping it for low tiers.   

​And for making larger maps for high tiers, that are not necessary for low tiers. 



VarzA #75 Posted 19 February 2018 - 10:15 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22622 battles
  • 1,508
  • [USAGI] USAGI
  • Member since:
    06-17-2011

I liked Swamp, sure it sucked, but everyone knew it sucked so the meta started to change, to one where going to the castle from the north spawn was not done, all you had to do was say in chat 'pls no castle, you will all die to camping td's' and everyone's memory was instantly jogged. :)

 

Mittengard, never really liked it, and i never understood those 2 huge slopes and why they were needed.

 

Sacred Valley is also a map that could have been fixed, to allow the medium corridor to be more dynamic.

Biggest problem was that going up towards that small town you kept getting shot in flanks by practically anything going up the inner slope. On top of that, foliage does not work on that map at all.



ZlatanArKung #76 Posted 19 February 2018 - 10:16 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,111
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostSimeon85, on 19 February 2018 - 04:44 PM, said:

 

Need to look at it more, only seen a few drive throughs but on early sight it seems a better fare than what the WG map team has delivered recently. 

 

I certainly felt I saw more than 1/2 viable flanks which is what most maps have and it felt big with longer sight lines. 

You have all the lower ice area, but base is easily covered from other side, and after you win that corner (top left), you have to go through a rather open area to get to the base. Which of course seems to have an elevated position covered with bushes at the end.

 

You also seems to have elevated position with bushes and hulldown covering both caps from the K-0 lime, depending on which starting point you get. 


Edited by ZlatanArKung, 20 February 2018 - 09:16 AM.


Jam_in_a_Tank #77 Posted 20 February 2018 - 03:48 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15335 battles
  • 271
  • [ENZYM] ENZYM
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015
Meanwhile... 2018 and i get my tier X vehicles in ENSK............. :sceptic:

Amun_RA #78 Posted 20 February 2018 - 12:13 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 43815 battles
  • 328
  • Member since:
    09-27-2011
I find the removal of maps very detrimental to the game. Sure, there are problems with some of the maps in the game. But they should be improved!

You realize we lose at least 1 open map for lights, Swamp.  I really like that map.  Sacred Valley also brings some variety to the game.

Now we'll play even more often Erlenberg and Ruinberg. Sometimes I get the feeling only those two maps exist.

Why not removing then all maps with problems? And they are a lot.

This is really incompetent from WG. We need more maps!

baribal_80 #79 Posted 20 February 2018 - 01:41 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 22218 battles
  • 509
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012

View Postadameitas, on 17 February 2018 - 04:29 PM, said:

i kinda liked swamp, games at least lasts longer in it... Wont gonna miss all others. Also why not add hellparis to this list?

 

I support this message

SaintMaddenus #80 Posted 20 February 2018 - 02:10 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35434 battles
  • 1,599
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    03-04-2011

Mittengard...  but but   well  some how appropriate the 30 second count down timer...






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users