Jump to content


Ghost Town

Lazy

  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

ApocalypseSquad #1 Posted 08 February 2019 - 07:29 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 27189 battles
  • 2,213
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

Come on WG, wtf is this?  A symmetrical map?  The balancing department on holiday are they?  How lazy can you get.   

 

Boring.


Edited by ApocalypseSquad, 08 February 2019 - 07:30 PM.


shikaka9 #2 Posted 08 February 2019 - 07:32 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 70582 battles
  • 950
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:
    02-27-2013
thats bad news :mellow:

JocMeister #3 Posted 08 February 2019 - 07:33 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 27857 battles
  • 2,636
  • Member since:
    08-03-2015
Played 3 battles on it...not optimistic. 

kubawt112 #4 Posted 08 February 2019 - 07:34 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 3378 battles
  • 758
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Players have, in fact, suggested symmetrical maps quite frequently. I don't like the design much myself, but I can see why WG would try it out. While I don't mind unbalanced maps (even the old Sand River on assault, which was 60/40 def/att.), I sure can see the potential of making a fun map and then mirroring it - wouldn't have to care one bit about balancing the map.

 

Whether or not the end result is good remains to be seen. I am, as usual, not hopeful.



wsatnutter #5 Posted 08 February 2019 - 07:39 PM

    General

  • Beta Tester
  • 26446 battles
  • 9,448
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    08-25-2010
played on it once I think I will go in a training room to sus It out

fwhaatpiraat #6 Posted 08 February 2019 - 07:40 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 58586 battles
  • 1,771
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013
Played it a few times. I don't mind symmetry, but the map design is just trash. Don't try to flank or be aggressive.

BrainlessWorm #7 Posted 08 February 2019 - 07:46 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 2067 battles
  • 62
  • Member since:
    07-12-2018

Played it once last night in the Nashorn, had no clue where to go (south spawn). The typical camper spots close to base looked pointless, so I went along with some mediums and had a reasonable game peeking around and from on the first mound there and got  3 kills and then got spotted and had no decent cover from arty and that was that.

 

It is definitely not an attractive map and I think will prove to be one best suited for brawlers and meds where arty is going to be a pain in the neck for all being active. Campers can have fun guarding the spawn and be generally useless, hoping that brawlers over extend in the ruins and enter one of the angled shooting alleys.

 
 
 

Edited by BrainlessWorm, 08 February 2019 - 07:51 PM.


Balc0ra #8 Posted 08 February 2019 - 10:03 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 72793 battles
  • 20,697
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostApocalypseSquad, on 08 February 2019 - 07:29 PM, said:

Come on WG, wtf is this?  A symmetrical map?  The balancing department on holiday are they?  How lazy can you get.   

 

Boring.

 

Guess what the most common map whine over the years has been. Or what most say WG should do rather often? Symmetry. So thus you get this. And tbh, vs the original. It's not a terrible map.

the_nebuchadnezzar #9 Posted 08 February 2019 - 10:31 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 54261 battles
  • 1,662
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013
Had a great game in my Bobject two days ago on this map. Manage to ammo rack a 60TP - 2600 dmg in one shot. Was glorios. After that I manage to bounce 9000 dmg and got some shine medals.

Edited by the_nebuchadnezzar, 08 February 2019 - 10:32 PM.


XxKuzkina_MatxX #10 Posted 08 February 2019 - 11:26 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,313
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

Forming a solid opinion on a map takes some time. Be patient and wait for 20-30 battles to know the map well so you can judge its characteristics. Use a training room to familiarize yourself with the map features and speed up the learning process instead of suffering in randoms.

 

One good thing i noticed about this map is the two open flanks around the city. Two nice elevated positions with soft cover and ground depression to provide cover while moving in or out. These positions can also interact with the city fight and support allies. The city design itself is actually better IMO than the the typical Ruinberg/Himmelsdorf city maps in terms of cover and lanes of fire. The design itself doesn't look feature rich and even simplistic but functionally it's good from what I've seen so far.



FluffyRedFox #11 Posted 09 February 2019 - 12:31 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 25286 battles
  • 9,138
  • [FLOOF] FLOOF
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012
On the plus side, if they do it this way, we won't have maps that have massively favourable spawns. Personally I prefer a bad symmetrical map, to one that is both bad and favours one team over the other. Looking at you, Mines...

FataL_ShadowZ #12 Posted 09 February 2019 - 12:36 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 10737 battles
  • 327
  • Member since:
    01-19-2018
I like it a lot so far, it seems to offer all sorts of combat and not feel limited to playing in a specific area every single time. A big improvement over some of the other maps we have to suffer (Cliff/Fjords etc...)

qpranger #13 Posted 09 February 2019 - 01:08 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38883 battles
  • 5,933
  • [HAMMY] HAMMY
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013
Too small and open, insufficient secure arty positions, hence bad map.

ApocalypseSquad #14 Posted 09 February 2019 - 12:29 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 27189 battles
  • 2,213
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011
Hey! - I got a QPR like.  I was so proud until I started to question whether it was a proper one, in the true QPR tradition, or whether he might actually agree with me... :P

NUKLEAR_SLUG #15 Posted 09 February 2019 - 12:42 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 34085 battles
  • 4,413
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015
Players: Maps aren't balanced, they have one more bush than our side! Waaaaaaaah!
WG: *releases perfectly symmetrical map*
Players: Map is the same, so boring! Waaaaaaaah!

And this is why WG ignores players.

ApocalypseSquad #16 Posted 09 February 2019 - 12:59 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 27189 battles
  • 2,213
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostNUKLEAR_SLUG, on 09 February 2019 - 12:42 PM, said:

Players: Maps aren't balanced, they have one more bush than our side! Waaaaaaaah!
WG: *releases perfectly symmetrical map*
Players: Map is the same, so boring! Waaaaaaaah!

And this is why WG ignores players.

 

Possibly true, but I have consistently argued against those demanding symmetry whether it is in maps, match making, tank stats or wherever.  It is a lazy and unsightly solution to balancing a game.

LordMuffin #17 Posted 09 February 2019 - 01:38 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 52608 battles
  • 13,329
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011
Played 2 times, I think the map is trash currently.

the_nebuchadnezzar #18 Posted 09 February 2019 - 03:08 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 54261 battles
  • 1,662
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013

View PostLordMuffin, on 09 February 2019 - 12:38 PM, said:

Played 2 times, I think the map is trash currently.

 

Emipre's Border is x100 time more trash. 

JocMeister #19 Posted 09 February 2019 - 05:56 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 27857 battles
  • 2,636
  • Member since:
    08-03-2015

Played 2 more games. Good map design when nobody dares go the actual towns because redline TD bots have a clear shot at you from pretty much any angle.

 

This will turn out to be more garbage than Fjords and Empires Border combined. 



malowany #20 Posted 09 February 2019 - 07:26 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 6122 battles
  • 647
  • [H-O-A] H-O-A
  • Member since:
    06-24-2011
I dont care if maps are symmetrical or not, just make them good. Allow for some creativity and brave plays and dont mold them into the same tired crapy meta.





Also tagged with Lazy

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users