Jump to content


Test Version of a Map


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

eekeeboo #1 Posted 10 December 2018 - 05:24 PM

    EU Video Content Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 50999 battles
  • 2,601
  • [MEME] MEME
  • Member since:
    07-25-2010

Greetings Tankers, 

Today we start testing on a location prototype. We’re not sure if it will become a new map: our prime intention is to assess new configurations of in-game objects and getting data for further development of maps.

Screenshot_2.pngTestmap_city_01_ULTRA_001.png

This test location contains a set of non-standard objects and tactical assault options. It is a rough prototype to be improved based on test results. Currently it has no historical or geographic setting.

The landscape is mixed, combining city blocks with relatively open space on the left flank where the uneven terrain may be used as cover.

1) The air defence sites on the western edge of the map are round-shaped caponiers lending shelter from enemy fire while attacking through the open space. Heavy vehicles may enter these only by road, manoeuvrable tanks may get there over the slopes (provided they have experienced drivers). There’s a large artificial mound in the centre of this zone, holding the command bunker. The mound is covered in trees and is the key point when you advance onto the shrubbery. From it, you can ‘light up’ the TD positions in Zone 2 and/or build on your attack, moving further to the most distant caponiers.

2) The knolls near both bases are for TDs and other snipers. Sitting here, you can defend your base against oncoming attacks from the shrubbery. The knolls are also the last lines of defence against advancing enemies coming from the city.

3) In the centre the railway station and the military base provide scattered positions that provide some cover but will not fully protect you from enemy artillery and direct fire. You can still use these to advance through the zone, move to another flank or duel it out with a random foe. Though the station will provide some protection you cannot drive inside.

4) The city blocks over the river in the east are the designated heavy tank arena. The bridges are covered from cross-fire from the centre of the map, a timely ‘light-up’ of the square by the railway station will allow you to avoid receiving enemy fire you can’t return. The embankment is curved, creating some cover, but still is a dangerous place. The key points for heavies are the quads and the passages leading into them. There are two of the latter, one has two concrete blocks that enable you to engage in hull-down gameplay. Yet this position can be threatened by TDs hiding in the bushes inside the quads. The passage without the concrete blocks will suit side-scrapping tanks.

Spoiler

Depending on test results, we’ll decide what happens to this ingot of a map. Follow the news and best of luck in all your battles!

 

Good Hunting! :honoring:


Edited by eekeeboo, 11 December 2018 - 05:25 PM.


fighting_falcon93 #2 Posted 11 December 2018 - 06:52 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 32560 battles
  • 4,393
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

I'm really glad that you're experimenting with new map designs WG. Looking at the images, it looks way better than some of the maps that we have today, but there are still some problems:

 

- It looks quite small. Might want to make it a bit bigger so the viewrange game works properly.

- Don't forget the bushes and natural cover such as craters, hills, ridges etc.

- The river is not a good choice. Crossing the bridges makes you extremely exposed, meaning they're easily defended.

 

And then I still see the classical old mistake, that you divide the map into "sections". Here it looks like area 4 is the classical heavy tank brawling zone, area 1 is the classical light tank spotting zone, and area 2 is the classical tank destroyer sniping zone. Area 3 is interesting though, it looks like a combination of the other zones. The only problem, area 3 is how the entire map should be designed like, and not only the middle.

 

My recomendation is that you drop the idea of creating a city in (almost) every map. If we look at it historically, tanks tried to avoid urban warfare because they're clumpsy in that kind of environment. In reality, they can't turn their gun barrels through buildings, and there might be infantry in the buildings that gets easy access into the tanks weak side armor with AT weaponry. That's why tanks prefer to fight outside of urban areas or areas with rough terrain (mountains, jungles etc). This should be represented in the game aswell.

 

Why don't you create some historically inspired maps instead? There're many examples here:

 

Battle of Kursk

 

Spoiler

 

A very mixed map. Open areas mixed with hills, craters and anti-tank ditches. Some areas have dense forest, while some areas only have a few bushes. There's another advantage with avoiding loads of buildings, and that is that you can implement deformable terrain. Yes, an artillery that missed you (or if we had dive bombers), will give you a nice new hulldown location. Look at the terrain in the image above to get a general idea of what I mean.

 

Battle of the Bulge

 

Spoiler

 

A snowy and hilly map with very dense forest. There should be a lot of bushes and trees. The trees will naturally slow down fast tanks so passive spotting is preffered. In order to extend the visual atmosphere, you can even make it snow heavily. Look at the terrain in the image above to get a general idea of what I mean.

 

Battle of El Alamein

 

Spoiler

 

Quite a flat desert map, add some dried out desert bushes here and there, and then add loads of craters, small hills and light ridges. You could even add random weather effects such as sandstorms that reduces the viewrange by X% for the duration of the sandstorm. Look at the terrain in the image above to get a general idea of what I mean.

 

These are just examples, there are so many more options. Yes, I know, most of these realistic maps are open, but I honestly don't think that city maps are good for this game. The problem is not that the map is open, but that you need to add natural cover in these open areas, such as craters, hills, ditches, ridges and so on. And then we have the problem with artillery. If you removed artillery or atleast limited it to 1 per team, then people wouldn't avoid using these positions.

 

Can you please release your map designer for public use? I would really like to help you by showing what I mean by an example :)


Edited by fighting_falcon93, 11 December 2018 - 06:55 PM.


WindSplitter1 #3 Posted 26 December 2018 - 01:43 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 21825 battles
  • 4,211
  • [WINDY] WINDY
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

Thank you Fighting Falcon for being the voice of EU WG actually needs to hear.

 

I understand development has their own objects whenever creating such ventures, but there's something very important that we cannot stress enough:

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 11 December 2018 - 05:52 PM, said:

And then I still see the classical old mistake, that you divide the map into "sections". Here it looks like area 4 is the classical heavy tank brawling zone, area 1 is the classical light tank spotting zone, and area 2 is the classical tank destroyer sniping zone. Area 3 is interesting though, it looks like a combination of the other zones. The only problem, area 3 is how the entire map should be designed like, and not only the middle.

 

Maps like Ensk, Paris and, Siegfried line are designed like this, where each class is assigned a specific area of the map. What our user here just described shows how predictable the matches will unfold.

 

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 11 December 2018 - 05:52 PM, said:

My recomendation is that you drop the idea of creating a city in (almost) every map. If we look at it historically, tanks tried to avoid urban warfare because they're clumpsy in that kind of environment. In reality, they can't turn their gun barrels through buildings, and there might be infantry in the buildings that gets easy access into the tanks weak side armor with AT weaponry. That's why tanks prefer to fight outside of urban areas or areas with rough terrain (mountains, jungles etc). This should be represented in the game aswell.

 

Not only that, but when you factor in the current state of the matchmaker (Heavy Tanks and Tank Destroyers dominate), it creates situations where players are overly reliant on those two classes to perform well, under the penalty of losing an entire flank or even the match.

 

Heavy Tanks gravitate towards cities because of mobility restrictions and additional cover they provide to their flanks. And artillery, of course.

How can you solve this without resorting to city maps?

 

1 - Spawn HTs closer to the center of the action.

In an HT you need just enough room to make a decision as to where do you go, that also allow a change of heart but quick enough to actually get there and make a difference. All vehicles don't need to spawn in the exact same spot (Westfield).

 

2 - Create Terrain features that can be used as cover from observation and fire.

I see you have AA sites on this map. That's a great innovation and just the sort of material our maps are in need of. These should provide a temporary cover to allow an HT crossing, an autoloader refill their clip, etc. Good work there.

 

3 - Shape the terrain in elevations/depressions.

Making the terrain odd hinders indirect fire. This should be made in key areas where the action is more likely to take place so that SPGs can't always land a shot there without repositioning (Serene Coast). Same for long range Tank Destroyers.

 

In short, Area #4 needs not to become a city but perhaps the opposite of the AA site, yet still provide marginal cover for fast vehicles in transition so that TD/SPG can't always rain fire.

 

Here are a few examples. I think this is what Fighting Falcon is talking about. Do correct me if I'm wrong:

 

Spoiler

 

Or if you really wanna mix it up:

 

Spoiler

 

Another way to put is... tanks should have places they can use their abilities rather than places to go to. Adding cities tends to draw armour to them where it becomes too difficult for tanks without them to attack, same bushes with winding fields attract Tank Destroyers and Artillery or open spaces for Lights and Mediums.

 

As a last resort, I would say enlarge the map to be as big as possible (Westfield or Prokhorovka), decrease the city size from the west to the east and augment the AA sites' area.



4nt #4 Posted 26 December 2018 - 05:12 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 31261 battles
  • 1,673
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013
It seems that there is very little for MTs and LTs to do in this map. West flank and center are unusable due to size and vast open areas, where TD hills allow for locking down whole flank regardless of attack direction. City region has pretty large percentage of unusable or meaningless space, and even tho the streets are better than, say, Himmelsdorf or Ruinberg, it still is clear HT flank.

I agree with previous posters in most regards, and would like to add- maybe instead of essentially mirror maps, there could be attempt to make less 'equal' maps with differing strengths of spawns? At this map, I'd disband the sniper perches or place spawns at C0 and J1, and move both sniper perches to current spawn spots.

_PanzerBitterbal_ #5 Posted 15 March 2019 - 12:32 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11473 battles
  • 261
  • Member since:
    03-02-2013

View Posteekeeboo, on 10 December 2018 - 05:24 PM, said:

Greetings Tankers, 

Today we start testing on a location prototype. We’re not sure if it will become a new map: our prime intention is to assess new configurations of in-game objects and getting data for further development of maps.

 

This test location contains a set of non-standard objects and tactical assault options. It is a rough prototype to be improved based on test results. Currently it has no historical or geographic setting.

 

Depending on test results, we’ll decide what happens to this ingot of a map. Follow the news and best of luck in all your battles!

 

Good Hunting! :honoring:

 

Lets get some facts straight before anyone starts bantering about historical accuracy.

This game has drifted so far away on historical content as could possible be.

Why? because the majority off the tanks available didn't even exists in the real world but only on paper.

So claiming to be historical correct is a no go zone.

Better try to claim you want to enhance game play experience on paper, just like the tanks :bajan:

 

Just as a small pointer, there is a "new" map with modern helicopters (gunships or something like that) on the ground and in the air. Where is the "historical correct" in place on that map?


Edited by _PanzerBitterbal_, 15 March 2019 - 12:36 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users