Jump to content


Remove Malinovka from VIII / IX / X MM Pool.


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

Riggerby #1 Posted 08 April 2018 - 10:56 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 7428 battles
  • 364
  • Member since:
    10-31-2011

I know everyone has their maps they dislike, But, I actually dont mind malinovka in lower tier tanks, It can be enjoyable, Its just, High tiers, Seem so horrific, Especially the all tier X lobbies.

 

You start off with a tiny field between you, The map literally FORCES light tanks to suicide at the start (If one teams dosen't.. the other teams still will and have a huge advantage). So he suicide rushes to those middle bushes, Lights up the entire other team in the first 10 seconds, And within 30-45 seconds, 1-5 tanks are already dead with many more hit and damaged... Literally before you can drive more then 50m out of your spawn your dead or hit, 

 

And now lets say you do make it out of there, Now what?. Considering for the first 90% of the map time that entire flat lower part of the map is void on the basis its suicide land, You basically have to go north, but, 80% of north plateu is void on the basis its, Once again, Suicide zone, So that leaves you with 2 options that are the same for both sides, Either camp, or go up hill. Camping is horrendeous, Boring gameplay on this map, And pushing the hill is literally just a chore of getting slammed by artillery the entire time, Tanks with poor gun depression may aswell just drown themselves at the start, And should you actually win the hill youre rewarded by being flung into a suicide run down the other side to the other teams camp zones...

 

The gameplay on this map, Is literally so toxic and stale, And so punishing of actually doing well its a joke, it works at low tier because generally there is less camping, When people are paying stupid amounts to repair their tier X and usually people wanting to do well stat wise they'd rather camp.

 

I mean, Prokorovkha (99% sure i spelled that wrong i know)  is equally bad in many ways, And tbh thats the map ive always hated more then any other, But, There are things you can do to make that map work, Pre arty change it was just the single worst thing ever, But i guess now its bareable. But this map is just so... bad for high tier, Just the view ranges and damages guns have up there, The map is just literally so so so so so punishing of actually trying to have dynamic gameplay. Its so boring and stale to literally camp for an entire match just seeing which side gets bored of doing it first. 

 

 

 

What do you guys think? Agree or disagree?



K_A #2 Posted 08 April 2018 - 11:01 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 13577 battles
  • 4,666
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013
Much rather see Mines removed from tiers 8-10.

Spurtung #3 Posted 08 April 2018 - 11:05 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 61046 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

The map analysis is atrocious.

 

You can leave spawn without being detected or shot, regardless of tank.

Scouts seldom go to that place anyway.

Hill is fun, with or without gun depression.



divsmo #4 Posted 08 April 2018 - 11:06 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 31306 battles
  • 230
  • [BEXF] BEXF
  • Member since:
    07-08-2012

View PostK_A, on 08 April 2018 - 10:01 PM, said:

Much rather see Mines removed from tiers 8-10.

This, i quite like malinovka it's good for getting those high spotting personal missions completed :D



HundeWurst #5 Posted 08 April 2018 - 11:06 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 67720 battles
  • 4,265
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

Well in all of that only the third pic actually is meaningfull.

 

The camping spots marked on that picture are to powerfull for randoms. They can only be spotted by basically suicidespotting, they cannot get outplayed.

Malinovka could be twice as good if the "camp here" spots amrked on the second pic could spot these campers.



Jigabachi #6 Posted 08 April 2018 - 11:21 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17852 battles
  • 18,162
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
Most maps are to small for hightiers. But before we remove Campinovka, let's first remove Mines. And Ensk. And... a lot of other maps.

Schepel #7 Posted 08 April 2018 - 11:31 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 57099 battles
  • 2,994
  • Member since:
    05-13-2013
There are much better ways of scouting on Malinovka. Otherwise, it is a map that requires teamwork. Pure camping hardly ever works, in fact, it is in my experience a very good way to lose, but blind lemming trains rarely do well, either. Malinovka requires vision control and multi-pronged assaults. Simply put, this is a map that rewards good play.

Strappster #8 Posted 08 April 2018 - 11:32 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23695 battles
  • 8,889
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

Disagree. I've rarely seen scouts rush out to the bushes you indicate in the first pic, it's usually a race to the best bushes on the lake side of the field and you can usually withdraw from those positions with some cover if you're compromised.

 

Agree with everyone saying no more Mines at high tiers though. It's a silly map for high tiers, much like Ensk which doesn't see any variety in approach and the faster tanks don't have room to move. Pilsen is a better version of Ensk simply by virtue of being slightly larger.



Bitter_Kipper #9 Posted 08 April 2018 - 11:39 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23301 battles
  • 390
  • Member since:
    07-10-2014

View PostK_A, on 08 April 2018 - 10:01 PM, said:

Much rather see Mines removed from tiers 8-10.

 

^^​This before Campinova

_Anarchistic_ #10 Posted 09 April 2018 - 03:32 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35842 battles
  • 1,065
  • [SKIL3] SKIL3
  • Member since:
    01-07-2015

best map in game and you want it removed?

 

its already an endangered species, should be every tier, every day



Shaade_Silentpaw #11 Posted 09 April 2018 - 04:37 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21542 battles
  • 354
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

Good high tier map, imo - great for lights.

 

If anything is going to be removed from high tier, it should be Ensk.



ogremage #12 Posted 09 April 2018 - 04:45 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32408 battles
  • 1,386
  • [KAZNA] KAZNA
  • Member since:
    06-26-2011
Bring back the old Malinovka.

Mr_Burrows #13 Posted 09 April 2018 - 04:49 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 43718 battles
  • 1,757
  • Member since:
    02-17-2012

View Postogremage, on 09 April 2018 - 04:45 AM, said:

Bring back the old Malinovka.

 

One of the best but this one is absolutely top notch too, compared to most other maps. 



Tipperty #14 Posted 09 April 2018 - 04:59 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19027 battles
  • 450
  • Member since:
    12-27-2013
Malinovka is fine as tier ten. I would rather see WG restrict Ensk or Mines to tier 8 and below, plus introduce more maps that are 1200x1200 or 1500x1500 for high tiers or strictly for tier 9-10. I mean honestly WG have it in them to take older maps and expand the borders from 1000 to 1500. That way they could still keep Ensk and Mines in the rotation for tier 10, but have room for teams to flank. well maybe mines would be a problem, as the map is flanked by water or mountains, but you get what I mean.

Makotti #15 Posted 09 April 2018 - 05:44 AM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 12909 battles
  • 241
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    10-04-2010
Maybe try something else than heavy tanks ? This is one of the rare maps where light tanks and agile mediums can actually do something (granted, 1.0 map changes imho made maps overall better for previously mentioned classes).

LordMuffin #16 Posted 09 April 2018 - 06:51 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 47395 battles
  • 10,515
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011
Malinovka is a bad map due to picture 3, and that reason alone is enough for a removal.

But it is still better then Mines, Ensk and Paris imo.

Excavatus #17 Posted 09 April 2018 - 07:42 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18897 battles
  • 1,653
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-28-2013

Most played high tier tanks are Heavy tanks..

Doesnt like open maps..

 



veso_vn #18 Posted 09 April 2018 - 08:22 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 18615 battles
  • 72
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014
One of the best maps .........

Boogeyman44 #19 Posted 09 April 2018 - 08:24 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 19782 battles
  • 24
  • [-MYS-] -MYS-
  • Member since:
    01-26-2015

How about no?

 

It is one of the very few open maps this game still has and you want it removed? 

 

You must be one of those people who can't function whitout a coridor to funnel you in a frontal engagement with other heavys. You need high buildings to cover all sides of yout tank so you don't get flanked because reading the minimap is hard. 

 

I think you should l2p some more. People like you make the game dumb. You need 1 tunnel where you can blast HE in your type 5 against another type 5.



4nt #20 Posted 09 April 2018 - 09:12 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 21904 battles
  • 103
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013
No for removal. Good map, and I definitively don't agree with the sizes of 'suicide lands'. After 1.0 hit live, I've noticed that north more often pushes west flank- more often than not, I've had to swerve back to def base when push is succesful. The swamp/lake beach is useable from both mid and west with gun dep meds or lights. The windmill is paramount, but solo heavies won't break camp at the foothill, just as before it needs teamwork to rush forests. Multibushing is effective but requires someone to do the spotting.

All in all, mal didn't change much at 1.0, can't remember how the older version was. The core play at mal seems to have changed more by meta changes than by map changes. The west push is far more viable due to heavier armor of more recent tanks, and the shift towards less camp at S spawn west due to this, with S team sacrificing hard cover for depth of defense.

My below average 2 cents.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users