Jump to content


How hard is it to make maps?


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

Metalsniper #1 Posted 01 July 2018 - 01:04 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19475 battles
  • 494
  • [F-K-S] F-K-S
  • Member since:
    03-01-2012

Hi. How hard is it to make maps? Why is there so little maps in the game, with most of the enjoyable ones being removed for fixes and then years later.... still no return. I mean for a company that is making so much money it is not too much to ask for more maps? Especially considering that most maps are small and corridor in nature, thus easy to create.

 

There has been a lot of occasions when I load into battle and people note; aw I hate this map, this side always loses, this maps crap for my tank etc. Now that the game has finally upgraded to HD I hope to see more maps coming in at a consistent rate. I realise there are two new maps coming soon which actually look decent, but I hope to see more of this. Not just....''heres two maps'', then 3 years later and 100 premium tank releases later... ''here is another two maps''.

 

I also hope that the developers start making balanced maps in the way which suits most tanks, theres nothing worse than loading into maps and feeling that your tank is utterly useless for it. Furthermore, I hope they re-release all the old 'broken'' maps, with ''fixes'' that are needed for them. How many years has it been now since dragon ridge was removed? Sigh.


Edited by Metalsniper, 01 July 2018 - 01:08 PM.


OIias_of_Sunhillow #2 Posted 01 July 2018 - 01:17 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 24109 battles
  • 2,367
  • Member since:
    07-20-2011

It does seem a bit of  mystery.

Especially when you realise players were making their own maps for, Call Of Duty; United Offensive.

But I guess designing maps isn't profitable. 

 



Metalsniper #3 Posted 01 July 2018 - 01:21 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19475 battles
  • 494
  • [F-K-S] F-K-S
  • Member since:
    03-01-2012

View PostOIias_of_Sunhillow, on 01 July 2018 - 01:17 PM, said:

It does seem a bit of  mystery.

Especially when you realise players were making their own maps for, Call Of Duty; United Offensive.

But I guess designing maps isn't profitable. 

 

 

Depends if they look at profit in a black and white fashion. If the game is better overall i.e. more interesting diverse range of maps, then maybe more players will remain, and purchase stuff from the store. For example frontlines, I know it was more of a game mode, but I found the map on that so free flowing and balanced, absolutely loved it, and it was the reason I came back after a long time not playing. 

Edited by Metalsniper, 01 July 2018 - 01:26 PM.


Rati_Festa #4 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:06 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 41407 battles
  • 1,079
  • Member since:
    02-10-2012
Good post OP, i've often wondered what the issue is with ceeating quality regular maps.

If they produced 1 map a release imo it would create a lot of interest. Interest keeps people buying premium accounts at the bare minimum...

There stubbornness towards producing regular map content is bewildering to me.

Rati_Festa #5 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:07 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 41407 battles
  • 1,079
  • Member since:
    02-10-2012
Good post OP, i've often wondered what the issue is with ceeating quality regular maps.

If they produced 1 map a release imo it would create a lot of interest. Interest keeps people buying premium accounts at the bare minimum...

There stubbornness towards producing regular map content is bewildering to me.

Bordhaw #6 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:10 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 10828 battles
  • 1,986
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017

View PostOIias_of_Sunhillow, on 01 July 2018 - 12:17 PM, said:

It does seem a bit of  mystery.

Especially when you realise players were making their own maps for, Call Of Duty; United Offensive.

But I guess designing maps isn't profitable. 

 

 

I remember reading the Frontline mode maps were farmed out and developed and produced by another company. 

kaneloon #7 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:17 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27355 battles
  • 1,260
  • [OBLIC] OBLIC
  • Member since:
    11-18-2011

WG could put a map builder online and let us work. It shouldn't be so great a feat as I hope they already have that.

We have lots of player with historical knowledge and time to spend.

Then WG could make some map competition with some nice gifts for the winners.



Aikl #8 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:18 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25167 battles
  • 4,253
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostMetalsniper, on 01 July 2018 - 12:04 PM, said:

Hi. How hard is it to make maps? Why is there so little maps in the game, with most of the enjoyable ones being removed for fixes and then years later.... still no return. I mean for a company that is making so much money it is not too much to ask for more maps? Especially considering that most maps are small and corridor in nature, thus easy to create.

 

There has been a lot of occasions when I load into battle and people note; aw I hate this map, this side always loses, this maps crap for my tank etc. Now that the game has finally upgraded to HD I hope to see more maps coming in at a consistent rate. I realise there are two new maps coming soon which actually look decent, but I hope to see more of this. Not just....''heres two maps'', then 3 years later and 100 premium tank releases later... ''here is another two maps''.

 

I also hope that the developers start making balanced maps in the way which suits most tanks, theres nothing worse than loading into maps and feeling that your tank is utterly useless for it. Furthermore, I hope they re-release all the old 'broken'' maps, with ''fixes'' that are needed for them. How many years has it been now since dragon ridge was removed? Sigh.

 

Why do you assume that it isn't intentional that the maps are generally small, lane-based and lacking 'tactical' options? Also, there are arguably quite a few maps. There could very well be more, but I prefer quality over quantity. Both Counter-Strike and Battlefield 2 had fewer maps - but they were of course either better or bigger.

 

There are very good arguments for making maps the way they are. Some prefer the instant gratification and lack of variety that going to a brawling corner in a corridor or taking a sniper position involves. Having straight-ish corridors and few options for flanking enemies also mean a top-tier tank is even more powerful.

Wargaming, by their own words, want it that way. Whether it is a good or bad thing is probably down to opinion.

I think it's a terrible idea to forego elements of a 'tactical shooter' for a game focused entirely on getting you an occasionally awesome experience to keep you hooked rather than to make sure the gameplay itself is so fun you want to play more.

There are probably many, paying, players that don't agree. Even if it is a good business decision, it's hardly a great sign for a game - and the variety of skill among the playerbase is a good thing for the game.


Edited by Aikl, 01 July 2018 - 02:22 PM.


Solstad1069 #9 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:24 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 40085 battles
  • 3,093
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013
They should just release maps on the testserver and give their playerbase a chance to try them and listen to the feedback they get.

Solstad1069 #10 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:25 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 40085 battles
  • 3,093
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013

View Postkaneloon, on 01 July 2018 - 02:17 PM, said:

WG could put a map builder online and let us work. It shouldn't be so great a feat as I hope they already have that.

We have lots of player with historical knowledge and time to spend.

Then WG could make some map competition with some nice gifts for the winners.

 

This!

 

Then release a number of maps on the testserver for people to try.

And vote!

 


Edited by Solstad1069, 01 July 2018 - 02:29 PM.


Metalsniper #11 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:28 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19475 battles
  • 494
  • [F-K-S] F-K-S
  • Member since:
    03-01-2012

View Postkaneloon, on 01 July 2018 - 02:17 PM, said:

WG could put a map builder online and let us work. It shouldn't be so great a feat as I hope they already have that.

We have lots of player with historical knowledge and time to spend.

Then WG could make some map competition with some nice gifts for the winners.

 

Great idea, but free gifts from WG? Good luck :D

Jigabachi #12 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:30 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17858 battles
  • 18,515
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

Making maps is fairly easy. Making good maps isn't.

 

But yes, maps are among the top3 problems that plague the game. Mapdesign in general is laughable, as the only thing they can come up are corridos or giant deathtraps.



Metalsniper #13 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:30 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19475 battles
  • 494
  • [F-K-S] F-K-S
  • Member since:
    03-01-2012

View PostAikl, on 01 July 2018 - 02:18 PM, said:

 

Why do you assume that it isn't intentional that the maps are generally small, lane-based and lacking 'tactical' options? Also, there are arguably quite a few maps. There could very well be more, but I prefer quality over quantity. Both Counter-Strike and Battlefield 2 had fewer maps - but they were of course either better or bigger.

 

There are very good arguments for making maps the way they are. Some prefer the instant gratification and lack of variety that going to a brawling corner in a corridor or taking a sniper position involves. Having straight-ish corridors and few options for flanking enemies also mean a top-tier tank is even more powerful.

Wargaming, by their own words, want it that way. Whether it is a good or bad thing is probably down to opinion.

I think it's a terrible idea to forego elements of a 'tactical shooter' for a game focused entirely on getting you an occasionally awesome experience to keep you hooked rather than to make sure the gameplay itself is so fun you want to play more.

There are probably many, paying, players that don't agree. Even if it is a good business decision, it's hardly a great sign for a game - and the variety of skill among the playerbase is a good thing for the game.

 

I never said it was not intentional just not enjoyable and the vast majority of players that I have met seem to agree. At the moment it feels like we have neither quantity nor quality, of course everything in life is subjective therefore judgement normally follows the majority of views. 

Edited by Metalsniper, 01 July 2018 - 02:31 PM.


Enforcer1975 #14 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:32 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20559 battles
  • 10,546
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

New Glacier map because so many players complained that they got lost....

 


Edited by Enforcer1975, 01 July 2018 - 02:35 PM.


Lycopersicon #15 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:38 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 10600 battles
  • 3,563
  • Member since:
    07-30-2014
Given that there is probably not a single cm2 in all of the maps that nobody has complained about, it must be pretty tough, if not impossible, to make a good map.

Bexleyheath #16 Posted 01 July 2018 - 02:40 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 4268 battles
  • 279
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    01-07-2018

As a professional 3D muppet, I have to disagree. Making a map that looks as good as those in WoT is difficult and time-consuming. Making a map that actually plays well too is insanely hard.

 

 

Though I do agree that WG seems to have some odd ideas about what makes a map good. If your aiming at the wrong target to begin with, it doesnt matter how much hard work you put into it.



arthurwellsley #17 Posted 01 July 2018 - 03:35 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 51268 battles
  • 2,814
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

1. Finding a map idea is pretty easy for WG. As an example any of the areas fought over in the Battle of the Bulge (Operation Watch on the Rhine) could be used. From the use of Bastogne itself to Elsenborn Ridge. Those real life areas could give a basis for a map.

In the same way Dragon Ridge is gone from the map rotation. Both the French and later the Americans used tanks in Vietnam, there must be maps there available to use as a basis for WoT from some real life encounters.

Hidden Village and Pearl River maps have both gone. So there is not presently a Japanese map in the rotation. No tanks battles were fought in Japan. However their were plenty of battles fought during the Shogunate that could form the basis of a map.

2. Making it look good is time consuming although I suspect that work could be farmed out.

3. Making the map "balanced" for both spawns is the hard part, and I suspect as well as logarithms takes rather alot of trial and error internal testing.

 

Highway, Northwest and Port were all American themed maps. Again no tanks battles fought on the American homeland, but plenty of civil war battles that could form the basis of a new map.

 

The issue is not finding an historic battle ground, nor even the work entailed by computerising the art for it once found.

 

The time consuming costly part of map design is probably balancing them.


Edited by arthurwellsley, 01 July 2018 - 03:36 PM.


Metalsniper #18 Posted 01 July 2018 - 04:31 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19475 battles
  • 494
  • [F-K-S] F-K-S
  • Member since:
    03-01-2012

HTvsAOf.png

 

Cash back? Good luck ;)



Element6_TheSprout #19 Posted 01 July 2018 - 05:43 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29043 battles
  • 10,342
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostOIias_of_Sunhillow, on 01 July 2018 - 01:17 PM, said:

It does seem a bit of  mystery.

Especially when you realise players were making their own maps for, Call Of Duty; United Offensive.

But I guess designing maps isn't profitable. 

 

Were these maps made with characters having a top speed of 14 km/h and 65 km/h in mind?



Long_Range_Sniper #20 Posted 01 July 2018 - 06:01 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 30571 battles
  • 8,269
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

It would be good if there was a map designer for WoT that players could use, and then be able to upload them into the training rooms to play. That way it wouldn't impact on the game, and WG get thousands of people designing maps for free. Saves them a load of work, and they could take the best ones and develop them further with an acknowledgement back to the player. Win/win.

 

You'd still get someone wanting corridor maps though. At least it's arty safe!

 

Image result for multiple tunnels






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users