Jump to content

HD maps, yay or ney?

  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

Condono #1 Posted 23 April 2018 - 12:01 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 10028 battles
  • 423
  • [13KIL] 13KIL
  • Member since:
So now that we have had lots of time to play around on them, how do you like them? Are they upgrade or downgrade from previous maps? I am personally sad that so many alternative angling spots were removed and for some reason, the rocks make flipping some tanks quite easy now. How do like them?

Edited by Condono, 23 April 2018 - 12:01 PM.

Flavortown #2 Posted 23 April 2018 - 12:07 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 16141 battles
  • 800
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:

Fjords -  worse
Ensk - still same god awful ensk

Glacier - unplayable 

paris - why is it in the game

rest - kinda ok


TungstenHitman #3 Posted 23 April 2018 - 12:11 PM


  • Player
  • 20700 battles
  • 3,819
  • Member since:

I won't start listing the various maps and what needs fixing or what needs to be removed. Overall, the maps are much fresher, have a large and expansive feel and the better graphics were badly needed so would I switch back to the old low definition maps? no, so it's a very generalized yay from me. Plenty to tweak but it's a good start and was needed. Graphics don't make great games but equally the improved graphics are stunning and make my tanks all nice and shiny. Tanks... I like em :P 


Edit- I was on the verge to quitting WoT shortly before the update because I had got about as much as I wanted from it and was a bit bored of it after 18k battles so the fact I am still playing for another while yet says it all.

Edited by TungstenHitman, 23 April 2018 - 12:15 PM.

ripfactory #4 Posted 23 April 2018 - 12:40 PM


  • Player
  • 251 battles
  • 137
  • Member since:
considering the ridiculously high amount of broken texture and object hitboxes on so many maps' crucial chokepoints im far from approving the new designs

Agent_327 #5 Posted 23 April 2018 - 12:52 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16594 battles
  • 394
  • [CAF] CAF
  • Member since:

I think that it's mostly an improvement. Many maps have changed some are more or less the same but others are like completely new maps.

I'm mostly yay and even though I mostly play fast tanks have I still to experience crashing over small rocks as ppl complain about on forums. Fjords and Erhlenberg are all new maps and i like the change a lot.

TankkiPoju #6 Posted 23 April 2018 - 12:53 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 20014 battles
  • 6,192
  • Member since:

I really dislike some general design changes in maps - like how you cant drop from Mines hill anymore without just about killing yourself.


But then again light tanking is easier now with the small bushes around maps.

Dava_117 #7 Posted 23 April 2018 - 01:03 PM


  • Player
  • 18559 battles
  • 2,748
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:

I like the new maps in general. I like how they looks and I'm quite liking how I can play them. Some could have been fixed, like Live Oaks imbalances. My new favourite map is Fjord: I love the looks, the music and the south corner get better IMO. Erlemberg get better too and I like the new map Glacier. In general all the maps looks better, even if in most of them gameplay didn't change much.

The problems I noticed are mostly bugs, bad optimization and the fact that the map pool is a bit small now.



In general I like HD maps and think WG did a good job on 1.0. Never the less they should continue to optimize the new engine, solve bug and add new map to the pool.

jack_timber #8 Posted 23 April 2018 - 02:34 PM


  • Player
  • 32454 battles
  • 1,886
  • Member since:

Yay... Rather nice detail now, some are right impressive such as driving through deep water with a bow wave and ripples, yes I know easily impressed:).

The old (new) maps are good the only fault is knowing where the edge of the map is, driven right up to red line without noticing think it's time to make map border larger.

So a resounding yes from me...

Nethraniel #9 Posted 23 April 2018 - 02:40 PM


  • Player
  • 12528 battles
  • 1,584
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:

I absolutely love the new visuals...


However, I have some issues with Fisherman's Bay, Fjords, and Paris...

LordMuffin #10 Posted 23 April 2018 - 02:42 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 48080 battles
  • 10,849
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
Looks: Yay.

K_A #11 Posted 23 April 2018 - 02:56 PM


  • Player
  • 13581 battles
  • 4,663
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
It's a yay for me. Some maps were completely stupid before the HD maps, and while some of the worst ones were removed, some new ones got added to the stupid list, so nothing has really changed in that regard, all the graphics just got upgraded. 

Balc0ra #12 Posted 23 April 2018 - 02:58 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 64400 battles
  • 15,432
  • Member since:

View PostFlavortown, on 23 April 2018 - 12:07 PM, said:

Fjords -  worse
Ensk - still same god awful ensk

Glacier - unplayable 

paris - why is it in the game

rest - kinda ok



My beef with Fjords is the same as with Fiserman's bay. Way to much bush cover in some places. You can fall back and relocate across half the map and not get spotted. And A8 is depended on having a light or med on the middle road spotting closer. If not, it's a waste of time. As they can have half their team camping up north. And you would not know it. Remove 70% of the bushes there on that field. So they can have some support fire un-spotted there vs all of their team.


Glacier is not bad. It's just that most meds and lights need to realize that the 0 line is a waste of time. And North needs to learn not to push to hard. Middle is key. And when you have no one in the middle. Then I hate it. But when you do. It's a fun map tbh.


Besides that I actually hate Himmelsdorf more now. As they gave hill more cover all along the hill wall. They can fire down more effective, but you can't fire up equally effective. And most low profile meds can drive past it and not get spotted. So now they promote hill camping as a valid tactic. Even more of you have a strong turret. And I've lost more games to hill lemmings on that map now vs before.

xx984 #13 Posted 23 April 2018 - 02:59 PM


  • Player
  • 52988 battles
  • 2,381
  • [GO-IN] GO-IN
  • Member since:
Like the improvemts to Fjords sand derpenberg, derpenberg still isn't great but atleast it's not unplayable like before.. overall I'm yay

MaxxyNL #14 Posted 23 April 2018 - 03:06 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 11114 battles
  • 788
  • Member since:

I like all the maps. Keyword here is: Adapt



IncandescentGerbil #15 Posted 23 April 2018 - 03:44 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35666 battles
  • 1,443
  • Member since:
Too many invisible ridges etc blocking shots. Looks better, but still a long way from realistic. I prefer the way some maps play now; others are less fun. Still nowhere near enough of them. All very meh from my point of view, and in no way disguises the fact the game has massive issues.

Ethoathiel #16 Posted 23 April 2018 - 05:23 PM


  • Player
  • 10111 battles
  • 4
  • Member since:

Fisherman bay, crapiteration, north wins 9 out 10 games

Lakeville, 2 corridors unplayble unless you are in top tier fast armored heavy or med.

Mines, why this is even above tier 4?

Tundra, one position rules all, need redesing fast, if you win hill you win game.

Cliff, south spawn has huge advatance, better spawn to 1 2 line, better position allround

Enks still too small

Erlenberg, have you allready fired that guy that made this iteration off this map? Pure cancer map. There is nothing good about this, even worse than before. yes team spits. camping bushes on end off map, corridor that is 200 meter and cant shoot trough. what idiotic map. 


Also maps has flattend too much most cases, less hull down positions, unless you are in soviet medium.



Lloyd5 #17 Posted 23 April 2018 - 05:55 PM


  • Player
  • 29178 battles
  • 65
  • [-GOC-] -GOC-
  • Member since:

Apart from the hitbox issue , as a mainly light tank driver nowadays Im liking the changes I ( I'm always up for getting more bush !so that will be a )


When im playing i don't really look too much at the scenery , only when viewing my replays so it does suggest that the looks are far less important than the gameplay.


So that will be a guarded Yay from me.

Tankyouverymuch2 #18 Posted 23 April 2018 - 06:07 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29707 battles
  • 1,267
  • Member since:
The many manyMANY rockside cliffs and sheer dropoffs have made several maps next to unplayable in the old way, i.e. it's a lot harder to escape a hill with your light tank after for example, you've taken the hill first, but then the enemy overruns it and you either face them or faceplant the ground off a cliff, dying anyway... plus ther's an entire thread, or multiple of, about rocks being more slippery than a- [preemptive-edited] :trollface:

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users