Jump to content


Incompetence or just laziness?

maps unbalance unplayable camping

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

Alice_Shimada_Chan #1 Posted 11 August 2018 - 06:02 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28295 battles
  • 319
  • Member since:
    12-09-2012

Greetings lads and lasses,

 

Right now I am pissed off so much that I wanted to create this topic out of anger but also make it serious and ask you about your opinion about infamous WoT maps. First: I don't say I would be able to create good map if I had some limited time for it, and I am sure making good map with balanced sides so that both teams could have about 50 % chance to win must be really really hard, but also I can't help myself but I think people in WG working on maps are just lazy, or totally incompetent in their work.

 

1. They add new maps that look good, with nice enviroment, but map itself is totally unplayable or playable with one tank class or type - hulldown tanks, ...

2. While working on WoT 1.0 and HD maps they did some changes on some maps and maps are nice/ok/playable (steppes for example), but they also changed some maps that were bad before and turned them into even worse maps (Erlenberg as example), and in the end, when they had time and could work on maps before releasing 1.0, they left some bad maps untouched (Paris, Airfield) - they could make changed to awful maps, but they just left them unplayable and instead of trying to improve some maps they made some bad maps even worse. Seriously?

3. Sometimes when they open maps to rework them, rework some positions, ... they just add some OP position for one team/one spawn, but they forget there is also second team in that battle. Again WG, are you serious?

 

Paris - joke map playable with heavies or hulldown mediums, or if you are lucky to take and survive in middle town square or whatever that is. One flank is totally useless. WG could rework this map while working on 1.0, they did nothing.

Airfield - good luck trying to be active and do anything on this map if enemies are not stupid and block every attemp to push by having enough campers + annoying light behind rocks.

Province - Person responsible for this EDIT should be fired and never allowed to work on maps again.

New Erlenberg - I am almost sure this map was done by same person who is responsible for Province, or I dunno if there were more of them. Just put large open field there and da comrades map is done.

 

Again I don't say I would be able to create good/decent balanced map if I was trying to make one, but it really seems that people in WG aren't even trying. Having like what, 50 % maps that are unbalanced and just stupid is really great thing for the game.



Hellraiser0201 #2 Posted 11 August 2018 - 06:11 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23411 battles
  • 259
  • Member since:
    02-21-2013

Incompetence or just laziness?

Probably both of them and they just don't care knowing that even if they fail they won't be fired or sanctioned.

Nobody listens the community and there is no chance that WG will ever change the staff who are destroying the game. So they continue to get paid for doing literally nothing. Life is unfair. You can't expect justice dealing with company WG

The only way to change anything is to stop paying them money. That is the only thing they understand and care for. And the only way to show them that we don't like the game anymore for certain reasons.

WG is saying game is working as intended. Why to change game if it's working fine...

At least they keep saying it is -||-

 

Erlenberg, Fjords, Glacier, Mines, I stopped playing because of these.


Edited by Hellraiser0201, 01 September 2018 - 05:26 AM.


Alice_Shimada_Chan #3 Posted 11 August 2018 - 06:16 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28295 battles
  • 319
  • Member since:
    12-09-2012

Yes I forgot about Glacier - you win heavy flank and then you must cross again this huge open field. Da comrades put here field map done.

And I also forgot about mountain pass - why one spawn still has safer crossing than other? Couldnt they fix it while working on wot 1.0?

 

Or is vodka is cheap in belarus? :trollface:


Edited by Erwin_Chan, 11 August 2018 - 06:17 PM.


NitroDeluxe #4 Posted 22 August 2018 - 05:04 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29083 battles
  • 238
  • Member since:
    04-18-2014

As bad as Paris is, there would have been some relief if at the time they introduced it WG retired another poor city map Ensk. 

 

Now we have a Ensk 3.0 coming called Minsk (Pilsen is Ensk 2.0). Why are we getting multiple same built up/city maps?

 

The changes to Erlenberg have been too much and have ruined assault mode, like they ruined Sand River assault. 

 

So yes, both incompetence and laziness. 


Edited by NitroDeluxe, 22 August 2018 - 05:07 PM.


Mediums_X_are_OP #5 Posted 23 August 2018 - 06:13 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 50240 battles
  • 2,475
  • [TUN] TUN
  • Member since:
    04-28-2012

View PostErwin_Chan, on 11 August 2018 - 06:02 PM, said:

Greetings lads and lasses,

 

Right now I am pissed off so much that I wanted to create this topic out of anger but also make it serious and ask you about your opinion about infamous WoT maps. First: I don't say I would be able to create good map if I had some limited time for it, and I am sure making good map with balanced sides so that both teams could have about 50 % chance to win must be really really hard, but also I can't help myself but I think people in WG working on maps are just lazy, or totally incompetent in their work.

 

1. They add new maps that look good, with nice enviroment, but map itself is totally unplayable or playable with one tank class or type - hulldown tanks, ...

2. While working on WoT 1.0 and HD maps they did some changes on some maps and maps are nice/ok/playable (steppes for example), but they also changed some maps that were bad before and turned them into even worse maps (Erlenberg as example), and in the end, when they had time and could work on maps before releasing 1.0, they left some bad maps untouched (Paris, Airfield) - they could make changed to awful maps, but they just left them unplayable and instead of trying to improve some maps they made some bad maps even worse. Seriously?

3. Sometimes when they open maps to rework them, rework some positions, ... they just add some OP position for one team/one spawn, but they forget there is also second team in that battle. Again WG, are you serious?

 

Paris - joke map playable with heavies or hulldown mediums, or if you are lucky to take and survive in middle town square or whatever that is. One flank is totally useless. WG could rework this map while working on 1.0, they did nothing.

Airfield - good luck trying to be active and do anything on this map if enemies are not stupid and block every attemp to push by having enough campers + annoying light behind rocks.

Province - Person responsible for this EDIT should be fired and never allowed to work on maps again.

New Erlenberg - I am almost sure this map was done by same person who is responsible for Province, or I dunno if there were more of them. Just put large open field there and da comrades map is done.

 

Again I don't say I would be able to create good/decent balanced map if I was trying to make one, but it really seems that people in WG aren't even trying. Having like what, 50 % maps that are unbalanced and just stupid is really great thing for the game.

 

Except for the fact that WG doesn´t add maps but removes them from the PC version under any pretext and adding them to the consoles version under the propaganda of exclusivity... As the console players would care if the PC players are playing the maops laso or not...
Dumb and discriminatory policy of WG thus losing its PC player base while hardly gaining any console player... So the game became repetitive and boring for a player wich plays daily for hours.
I deinstalled this game and who knows if l´ll ever reinstall it again.

 


Edited by Mediums_X_are_OP, 23 August 2018 - 06:13 PM.


Solstad1069 #6 Posted 26 August 2018 - 07:34 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 41019 battles
  • 3,210
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013

They gave us Pilsen that was bad (now being reworked) then they gave us the awful Paris map.

 

But they dropped the bar even lower, yes they gave us Provins. The ultimate crap that promotes nothing but camping. Its basicly move and your dead.

Thats normally also what i do when i get this map, i move, make a few shots get spotted and die.

 

A couple of times i manage 2-3 other battles before this one comes back with your not unexpected DRAW.

 



Alice_Shimada_Chan #7 Posted 01 September 2018 - 04:17 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28295 battles
  • 319
  • Member since:
    12-09-2012

WG makes maps that look visually really good, but gameplay is more important factor than if map is good looking.

 

View PostSolstad1069, on 26 August 2018 - 06:34 PM, said:

But they dropped the bar even lower, yes they gave us Provins. The ultimate crap that promotes nothing but camping. Its basicly move and your dead.

Thats normally also what i do when i get this map, i move, make a few shots get spotted and die.

 

Agree with this. Province is probably the worst map ever created.



PointZero #8 Posted 01 September 2018 - 05:31 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 43443 battles
  • 1,098
  • Member since:
    02-03-2011
I haven't been on the factory side of the reworked Pilsen map due to playing LT's but the more open side got made worse, surprise surprise. It's now mainly flat ground with a labyrinth of coal piles to give soviet brawling meds a place to brawl it out topped with the WG classic - a sniping balcony at the back that provides soft and hard cover for TD's so they can safely snipe away and still have a line of sight to their base.

Hellraiser0201 #9 Posted 01 September 2018 - 05:33 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23411 battles
  • 259
  • Member since:
    02-21-2013

Province is decent map but only for low-mid tiers, im happy that WG limited it to tier 4-7.

 

Problem is there are more maps that need to be limited the same way. These seem to be Mines, Ensk etc., the smallest maps. They are not good for high tier gameplay because games end way too fast, turbo roflstomps.



Alice_Shimada_Chan #10 Posted 01 September 2018 - 06:00 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28295 battles
  • 319
  • Member since:
    12-09-2012
That is good suggestion. I personally still enjoy Ensk and Mines on tier8, but not that much on tier IX, X. I think that on tier8 - top tier, full 8, 7/8 , these two maps are still decent, ok playable or how to put it, but for example in full tier X, I really hate mines.

NoobySkooby #11 Posted 13 September 2018 - 01:38 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 13199 battles
  • 2,843
  • [TFMB] TFMB
  • Member since:
    09-23-2011

Mines is rubbish, there should be at least another way onto the hill I have come to detest Minsk as much as Paris, same old same old, I don't even understand why they had to remove maps in the first place, game play is now getting repetitive, the Studianski map though i like, mainly oddly enough for the music.

 

I would like to see Stalingrad and Swamp return, I have no idea how maps are rendered, built up but they could do a lot better, too many flat spots, lack of bushes, just a few minor things which affect heavies for hull down situation, lights and TD's for being sneaky.

 

But the big question of the day, could we do any better?



StuffKnight #12 Posted 14 September 2018 - 12:10 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 30847 battles
  • 894
  • [_RBP_] _RBP_
  • Member since:
    06-09-2011

Both.

 

View PostNoobySkooby, on 13 September 2018 - 12:38 PM, said:

 

But the big question of the day, could we do any better?

 

Yes. It's not hard to design a map that isn't some idiotic hill-rush with bushes all around the redline.

Paripovic #13 Posted 20 September 2018 - 05:48 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 24127 battles
  • 16
  • Member since:
    09-20-2011
Minsk is worst map WG made ever.





Also tagged with maps, unbalance, unplayable, camping

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users