Jump to content


I'm confused about people complaining on WoT maps


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

Poll: Should maps be: (64 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battle in order to participate this poll.

Should maps be:

  1. Full of corridors (10 votes [15.62%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.62%

  2. With wide open space (54 votes [84.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 84.38%

Vote Hide poll

LordMuffin #41 Posted 18 January 2019 - 05:45 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 53496 battles
  • 13,409
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011

View PostDorander, on 18 January 2019 - 05:33 PM, said:

 

On the other hand, those maps were all changed, quite significantly. Would you say their new incarnations are better or worse than the old ones?

 

Old maps have some serious misses too, remember Dragon Ridge? The original Abbey, or even the current Abbey? There are additionally some removed maps which I can't even remember the names of because I don't miss them for a second. Then there's that horrible 600m-with-a-dyke-in-the-middle low-tier map that I believe has been around forever... there's probably a reason they went for a fairly formulaic setup where they try to cater to every class in predictable ways, my best guess is that they too realize the results of attempted unique maps are catastrophic :P.

 

 

 

It depends on whether you see corridors as open corridors or as walled off tunnels, e.g. the difference between the west side of Fisherman's bay and the west side of Lakeville. You do have a point though in that nobody tends to go middle without physical protection because you're in a line of crossfire, people have used map edges for protection since the start of the game. Murovanka village these days is pretty viable near the end of the fight or if their heavies camp in the back, else you run into the TD line. Typically if you push past the houses in a heavy on the west flank, you're dead.

But there haven't been a good new map released in 2 years.

 

Yes, WG made some bad maps in the start, but all good maps are from that time aswell. 

 

Murovanka got its forest changed, which was a long time ago,  like 4 years.

Prokhorovka and Malinovka have barely been changed at all since they were released.

Redshire is also an old map afaik.

Steppes aswell, though changes made it worse.

Sand River, though latest changes are questionable.

 

The thing is, WG haven't made a good change to a map (that isn't a removal) in the past 2 years.

So it might be that their map creating ideas are bad, since the result they get with changes are always bad.



AngelofAwe #42 Posted 18 January 2019 - 05:49 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 40742 battles
  • 3,185
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011
I made a quick google search to see if I could find a decent real life example of what I mean by open maps. Remove half the forest in this picture and you have a little cover, you have camo, you have hills and ridges BUT there are no corridors as you can freely move and flank in every direction. Nothing forces you down a specific road, you can go anywhere.

Gardar7 #43 Posted 18 January 2019 - 07:02 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 24205 battles
  • 2,132
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

View PostAngelofAwe, on 18 January 2019 - 02:49 PM, said:

I made a quick google search to see if I could find a decent real life example of what I mean by open maps. Remove half the forest in this picture and you have a little cover, you have camo, you have hills and ridges BUT there are no corridors as you can freely move and flank in every direction. Nothing forces you down a specific road, you can go anywhere.

 

I would like to see a Hungarian map coming with their tech tree. Last summer I have been at lake Balaton and the landscape was spectacular. It would be a perfect map for WoT, hills, mountains, vineyards, old volcanoes, geysirs, caves, small villages and small rivers, lake(s), fountains, forests, fields, etc. 

 

Spoiler

 


Edited by Gardar7, 18 January 2019 - 07:04 PM.


Inappropriate_noob #44 Posted 18 January 2019 - 07:07 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 17379 battles
  • 5,252
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    09-23-2011
Maps should be absolutely covered in bushes, full of dips and dunes, add in a few cliffs where you can fall off for the fun of it, they should also be designed by us the playerbase.:trollface:

Nishi_Kinuyo #45 Posted 18 January 2019 - 08:57 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 9181 battles
  • 6,440
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011
Players are like rats: they hate wide open spaces.

etody77 #46 Posted 19 January 2019 - 10:57 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 75985 battles
  • 1,468
  • [JMA] JMA
  • Member since:
    09-12-2015

View PostLordMuffin, on 18 January 2019 - 09:51 AM, said:

 

I just have a feeling that the newer a map gets,  or the more recent WG have fiddled with it, the worse I believe it gets, in general.

There are occasions when WG make a good map change. Like when they removed Charkov, or now when they are going to remove assault in Empires

 

Or when they removed water in sand river?

no more place for LT to sneak and kill arty?



arthurwellsley #47 Posted 19 January 2019 - 04:11 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 54061 battles
  • 4,018
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View PostAngelofAwe, on 18 January 2019 - 04:49 PM, said:

I made a quick google search to see if I could find a decent real life example of what I mean by open maps. Remove half the forest in this picture and you have a little cover, you have camo, you have hills and ridges BUT there are no corridors as you can freely move and flank in every direction. Nothing forces you down a specific road, you can go anywhere.

 

The map I would like to see is an historical battle from 1939

Battles of Khalkhin Gol

Looks similar to Prokhorovka except that the ditch up the 1-0 line is a river, the central ridge is also a river, and the railway is also a river. The high ground is in a similar sort of area. In WoT the rivers would be created with banks. For gameplay purposes the rivers would all be relatively small in width and depth, and so fordable by all tanks, at any place on the map (although historically I think the main river was deeper and wider in some of the places where the battle took place, but there were places that were fordable by tanks).

Soviet Tank and infantry advance (BT-7 or T26?)

Japanese Tank (Type 95 Ha-Go?) at Khalkin Gol

 

I have put this map into the suggestion thread here;

http://forum.worldof...8#entry16568908

feel free to up vote it there.


Edited by arthurwellsley, 19 January 2019 - 06:31 PM.


Nishi_Kinuyo #48 Posted 19 January 2019 - 10:10 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 9181 battles
  • 6,440
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

Afaik, that is a BT-5 or BT-7 (can't tell from the side, afaik). and a Type 95 Ha-Go.

 

And such a map would be horrible since no-one would want to move forward for fear of getting rekt by 15 enemies at once.

Just look at heatmaps for maps like Malinovka or Highway or Steppes to see how much players enjoy those wide open fields.

And guess what; it's just arta and TDs that like them.

 

I'd rather see a map like Iou-tou or Burma or some such, maybe Singapore: Asian jungles for the most of it.

Or heck, even locales from more to the north like China, Manchukuo, Korea, Japan, Okinawa, etc.

 

But no, WG had to remove every single Asian map with the 1.0 thingy and before, leaving us just with the China Wall that they added later.



OMG_Abaddon #49 Posted 19 January 2019 - 10:31 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13954 battles
  • 744
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011

Wide open maps are toxic as much as those full of corridors. A good map always strikes balance between open areas and corridors. Sand river for example is completely open so all heavies either camp the base or rush down the river to die to TD fire, that's the kind of map that shouldn't exist.

 

Highway for example has a wide open area for lights and TDs to play, a cliff for hulldown and arty tactics, a city for heavy brawling and TD hunting... the wide open area is concave but has a lot of buildings cutting vision so you must play carefully.

 

I really don't want to see another map where it's all hills and the tanks that literally can't go anywhere simply camp the base because at least this way they get some shots for XP.



Dorander #50 Posted 19 January 2019 - 10:35 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21025 battles
  • 6,042
  • Member since:
    05-07-2012

View PostLordMuffin, on 18 January 2019 - 04:45 PM, said:

But there haven't been a good new map released in 2 years.

 

Yes, WG made some bad maps in the start, but all good maps are from that time aswell. 

 

Murovanka got its forest changed, which was a long time ago,  like 4 years.

Prokhorovka and Malinovka have barely been changed at all since they were released.

Redshire is also an old map afaik.

Steppes aswell, though changes made it worse.

Sand River, though latest changes are questionable.

 

The thing is, WG haven't made a good change to a map (that isn't a removal) in the past 2 years.

So it might be that their map creating ideas are bad, since the result they get with changes are always bad.

 

Okay, thanks for the year numbers, that makes things a bit clearer. Redshire is indeed a pretty old map but it too was changed. I don't exactly keep track of when each map is changed or added though I too can't come up with an example of a map I like which was introduced in the past two years, though if I tried I'm fairly sure I could come up with one that I am glad to see gone. The decision to remove crap is a positive decision in my book, even if they then release something equally crap.

 

What do you think of the new Highway?



LordMuffin #51 Posted 20 January 2019 - 12:40 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 53496 battles
  • 13,409
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011

View PostDorander, on 19 January 2019 - 10:35 PM, said:

 

Okay, thanks for the year numbers, that makes things a bit clearer. Redshire is indeed a pretty old map but it too was changed. I don't exactly keep track of when each map is changed or added though I too can't come up with an example of a map I like which was introduced in the past two years, though if I tried I'm fairly sure I could come up with one that I am glad to see gone. The decision to remove crap is a positive decision in my book, even if they then release something equally crap.

 

What do you think of the new Highway?

 

I kind of like the new highway, though I prefered the old one I think, even if changes are marginal.

 

It is good to remove bad maps indeed (like when old Pilsen was removed, or Charkov etc).

And it would be good if new good maps was introduced aswell.

 

The issue I have with WG map creating team is that they seem to have lost the ability to create interesting maps.

The older team created some bad/questionable maps aswell like.

Komarin, Severogorsk, Northwest, Pearl River, Hidden Village, Dragons Ridge (no memory of that), Port.

Personally, I didn't think Komarin or Severigorsk or Northwest was that bad, at least when I played them.

Komarin kind of worked aswell for me.

Port I didn't like, didn't like the train area.

But these where removed when I was rather bad at this game though, which probably changes my perception of said maps.

These maps where played when I began to get some skill in this game (closing in on 3k recent Wn8 and 60% recent WR).

Pearl River was ok for me, my issue was that the mid area was a bit to strong. Otherwise, perfectly OK, could be a good map with some small changes I think.

Hidden Village was bad because the village was useless for the most part and everything was decided in the upper corridor more or less. And a mountain taking up 1/4 of the map or more.

Could also be made better if it was easier to approach cap/mid under some small cover (it was like a 200+m drive in the complete open where enemies had hulldown position and bush cover if they wanted to protect that side). And the other change would be to use the 1/4 of the map that was a mountain to something useful, like space to drive tanks in.

 

But that said, I think that Komarin, Northwest, Pearl River, Severogorsk where more interesting to play then Paris, Pilsen, Studzianski, Minsk or any other newly added maps which isn't Overlord.

I left Hidden village out because that map was as bad as the recent maps imo.

And Dragons Ridge because I don't have any clear memory of ever playing that map.


Edited by LordMuffin, 20 January 2019 - 12:42 PM.


Tom_Deekanarry #52 Posted 20 January 2019 - 12:46 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13687 battles
  • 520
  • Member since:
    06-28-2012

For me the maps are just too small, view range is over half the map regularly, this stops any kind of real manoeuvre, you get spotted and then shot from half a map away, maps need to be much bigger with more woods and small rises, not the stupid rocks and vertical hills, where are the woods and forests for instance?

 

Empires Border is a prime example of how NOT to make a map, three choke points around huge rock hills, you might as well just make a wall with three gaps in it.



Paul_Kouadio #53 Posted 20 January 2019 - 01:47 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 6148 battles
  • 165
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-03-2017

I actually wanted to make a thread about this (who the f* cares man?). I think it's clear that maps are crucial to the game; larger, more open maps with more possibilities makes a good scout so much more useful. Corridor maps are crap because everyone knows where everyone else will be so scout tanks are useless (except when teams are moronic and all take a single flank). Anyways, I think what we need in this game are more pseudo-corridor maps. What's that? Think Steppes, Studzianki, Highway etc. These are maps that have corridors, but these are not set in stone (like Lakeville valley, or Empire's Border (bleh!!) where inaccessible and untraversable terrain divides the map into corridors). Flanking is a possibility, in fast tanks and the like (yes, early game you could get wrecked, and a 750 alpha TD can cream you). The point is that it opens up gameplay, and also makes arty less necessary.

Pseudo-corridor maps force players to be careful, but rewards well calculated risks and daring plays. Every class is happy, but I'd say arty isn't necessary in the slightest. Arty is far less necessary on Steppes than on Lakeville valley.

We also have open maps, like Prokh, Muro, etc. and we have corridor maps, like Mountain Pass, Fjords, etc. and we have city-field maps, like Ruinberg, Siegfried Line, Paris, etc. Then we have other maps like Westfield, Sand River etc. Now, we can see that maps are closely tied to the performance of classes. For example, on an open map, or a pseudo-corridor map, we don't need arty to sh*t on Type 5s and Maus' etc. because players can flank em. Try doing that on the ice road on Mountain Pass. 

Maps like Empire's Border are atrocious. So is Tundra, and Mines as well, mostly because they're so small and cramped. 

Take a map like Paris.

Flanking is suicide here; the city streets are completely exposed and flankers will get killed in seconds. Even late game, crossing the mid is a surefire way to get spotted.

Corridors are bad; pseudo-corridors and open maps are better. Open maps have their own issues, but at least gameplay is dynamic and unpredictable. 

 

WG should really avoid making maps that have large quantities of unusable space, and small maps. I remember when I used to play my T-50 on Murovanka, when I'd spawn in the south, in the mid-game I would move from the base through the town, going northeast (J line to around B7 or B8), and that way I could penetrate behind enemy lines. That was only possible because the map was large, and at Tier 6 or 7, view range isn't maxed out so my Tier 5 tank could make those sneaky plays and get away with it. The point here is that we need bigger mpas, beyond 1000m*1000m, to allow stealthy plays.

 

If WG can shift the game towards more psuedo-corridor maps, I think players will be happy, because lights and meds will remain crucial, TDs will support their team and hold flanks, and heavies won't lose everything because their armor will still be relevant, but not problematic. Sorry for the rant.

 

Edit: And please, WG, allow players to come up with map ideas that can go for testing. Give us a map editor or something. Think of a creative mode... You have players ready to help out:

http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/696507-ghioroc-a-unique-village-map-proposal-with-pictures-and-minimap/

http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/695775-arad-%E2%80%93-a-non-corridor-city-map-proposal-with-pictures-and-minimap/

(Credit to grizly1973)


Edited by Paul_Kouadio, 20 January 2019 - 01:53 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users