Jump to content


Can we please have Ghost Town removed from the game?


  • Please log in to reply
117 replies to this topic

Poll: How would you rate the map? (174 members have cast votes)

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

How do you like Ghost Town?

  1. One of the absolute worst maps in the game (31 votes [17.82%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 17.82%

  2. Bad (24 votes [13.79%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 13.79%

  3. Average (45 votes [25.86%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 25.86%

  4. Good (51 votes [29.31%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 29.31%

  5. One of the best maps in the game (23 votes [13.22%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 13.22%

Vote Hide poll

kripton69 #1 Posted 11 March 2019 - 01:21 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1209 battles
  • 406
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

For the longest time I was a believer that Mines was the absolute worst map ever and it wouldn't be possible to make a worse one. I was wrong. Wargaming have added Ghost Town to the game and completed that objective. To make the matters worse they added it to all 3 game modes which means you see it much more than any other map. Here's the minimap:

 

 

This map used to be an eSports map and you could also see it in formats like Team Battles. Recently Wargaming reworked it completely and added it to randoms. So what exactly is wrong with this map? The short answer would be: Unplayability. Everything about this map screams "don't do it". "Don't make the play". Risk-averse camping is always better than doing something. Are you a top tier heavy tank who needs to take initiative? No, it's better to camp. Are you a scout who should make a spotting run? Not worth it unless you're an armored car. Just sit behind that ridge and point your gun into the city and hope the enemy team has an idiot heavy who tries to play the game. Are you a medium tank who should try to flank the enemies? No, the chance of being obliterated out of nowhere is way too high. Let's all just camp and hope the enemy gets bored first.

 

Yesterday I had a game on my RU251 where an enemy IS-2 with 42% win rate sat behind one of the bushes and he could effortlessly outspot me Now before someone says he played super well and I need to learn the vision mechanics and how bushes work, the problem in this map is that due to the extremely open nature of it, there's simply no counterplay against a player who sits behind a bush. Once he's there you have no means of digging him out and any effort you put tends to get you either artied or demolished by all the campers who are sitting at the awesomely designed elevated hills next to both spawns that offer both soft and hard cover. There's no opportunity to flank him or dig him out. The only play you have is finding your own bush somewhere else and hard camping it. Why do we have map design like this where proactive play is simply not possible and the correct play for everyone is to camp like [edited]ing [edited]s?

 

The city is unplayable because it's too small and a single enemy heavy tank can easily block all your plays by just camping the corner. Your only options are overcommitment or doing the same as him and making yourself useless. Then if you try to go the other way you are forced to cross through one of the open areas and the campers outside the city will shoot you. Basically there is no viable play available in most situations.

 

To make the matters even worse you have all these armored cars driving around and getting you spotted randomly and due to the extreme openness of the map you can be shot at from countless directions without any counterplay available. The cars are pretty much the only vehicles that can do anything proactive in the map.

 

Basically the correct way to play this map even in a heavy tank is to go to one of the camping platforms and hope the enemy "plays the game" more than your teammates. The philosophy of the map is that the team that camps more wins.

The only player type that "benefits" from this sort of map design is the brainless camper bot whose idea of playing the game is driving 100m in the beginning of the battle to the first camping position and sitting there all game without any reaction, waiting for the draw to happen and hoping that his team carries him. These are the players you never want on your team who are still terrible after 40k battles who don't do anything for the team but who are going to complain how they always get "noob teams" and "noob scouts" who don't dedicate their lives to suicide scouting for them. And yet at the same time you don't want them on the enemy team either simply because they are not fun to play against either. These are the players who just want to selfishly sit in base, who absolutely refuse to learn the basics of the game and want others to do all the so they can farm a few shots of damage now and then without having to get their shoes wet. This is the player type that benefits of Ghost Town being the way it is. The map offers zero playability and far too generously rewards the worst kind of players.

 

This map is a total rotten apple and it's the new worst map of the game. Please Wargaming remove it from randoms. These maps that just encourage everyone to never leave their base are just beyond terrible and shouldn't be in the game.


Edited by kripton69, 11 March 2019 - 01:32 AM.


SuedKAT #2 Posted 11 March 2019 - 01:30 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 7,741
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014
Overall I find it to be a decent map but the glaring problem is the sniper nests, with them removed you have a playable map, shame that they tend to nestle those snipers nests into every map now a days. There are far worse maps out there, this one is in my opinion at least fixable. 

Edited by SuedKAT, 11 March 2019 - 01:31 AM.


Homer_J #3 Posted 11 March 2019 - 01:30 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 31398 battles
  • 34,111
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

Woohoo a poll where we can vote for all options. :great:

 

I didn't though, just the top 3.

 

I really like the map.

 

I'm confused by your RU251 example, you talk about a 1v1 situation then you talk about the campers and arty backing him up.  Where were the rest of your team?



XxKuzkina_MatxX #4 Posted 11 March 2019 - 01:46 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 53201 battles
  • 3,702
  • [OBY] OBY
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

Nope, the map is well designed and the strong positions you're talking about can be countered. Not an easy task for sure but it's doable and it's actually the exact same thing you're asking for, "playability" and "proactive play"!

 

An armored medium or a fast heavy can rush one of those sniper position at the start and get under their guns. Spotting them and making the stronghold a trap for them as they will be bombarded non-stop by your arty and your second line backup.

 

What you describe happens when your team are supposed to attack but instead stop at the E line to snipe. After a few minutes the situation gets locked and a push is way more dangerous than at the start, can't blame the map design for that!

 

The city is well designed too, it's almost symmetrical. You can side scrape and you can go hull down in a lot of positions as long as you avoid exposing your sides to the snipers outside on the E1 or E0. A push through the city is almost useless though as you can't benefit from such move without your team clearing the 0 and 1 lines.

 

Lacking aggression isn't the map's fault, it's the player's and there are numerous examples of this on other maps. The 0 line push on live oaks, the forest in Murovanka, the hill in Tundra, etc. All good examples of "you've to do something to gain something" but blaming a TD or a heavy for taking a good position and holding it is not really going to help winning/enjoying games.


Edited by XxKuzkina_MatxX, 11 March 2019 - 01:47 AM.


kripton69 #5 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:04 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1209 battles
  • 406
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

View PostHomer_J, on 11 March 2019 - 02:30 AM, said:

Woohoo a poll where we can vote for all options. :great:

 

I didn't though, just the top 3.

 

I really like the map.

 

I'm confused by your RU251 example, you talk about a 1v1 situation then you talk about the campers and arty backing him up.  Where were the rest of your team?

 

No worries, I fixed the poll. Somehow this forum has a bad system where you can select "Allow users to choose [1] option" during the set-up, but it gets negated as you add more options. I also don't really understand why people intentionally vote as badly as possible instead of just choosing the option that best describes their opinion.

 

For the most part I thought it was the T-54 Lightweight who spotted me but this proved out to be false as he completely left the position and yet the IS-2 was able to outspot and shoot me again(and kill me), only being spotted after he fired his gun. During the time of the screenshot the only player in the vicinity was the IS-2. The SU couldn't have possibly spotted me from his position which you can see.

 

This is what I loathe about the map. Camping is always the better play. My RU251 is elited, my crew has full camo, full view range perks, BIA, carries optics and food and the tank has outstanding base view range of 410m. Yet I can't outspot a camping, blind Russian heavy tank without him firing his gun at me first. He can however spot me if I don't sit behind that hill. No number of friends or teammates can help you in situations where your stealthy top tier light tank with pretty much the maximum view range and camo boosters gets outspotted by a Russian heavy tank with 350m base view range. Yes, he is behind a bush which obviously gives him more camo but this just illustrates the very problem with the map design - the camping positions are this powerful. This isn't the only part of the map where things like this happen. The map is full of "camper always wins" situations and similarly unplayable situations where the active player simply doesn't have the opportunity to do anything.

 

Here's a screenshot for those who want to see it with their own eyes. And no, I did not fire my gun.

 

The second image illustrates my point about the camping platforms and explains why I don't just take my RU251 to another part of the map and make a flanking play. The chances are that there's always going to be some camper who is easily going to outspot you and way too often, get you killed if he has friends. I drew a few lines to show just how broken these camping positions are and how they have insane amounts of reach throughout the map. The worst part is that I didn't even draw all the lines to keep it somewhat simple. The bottom line is that the map offers beyond ridiculous "defensive" positions and makes the map completely unplayable for a proactive player.

 

 

And if someone wants a "before" and "after" screenshot here they are:

 


Edited by kripton69, 11 March 2019 - 02:13 AM.


kripton69 #6 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:23 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1209 battles
  • 406
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 11 March 2019 - 02:46 AM, said:

Nope, the map is well designed and the strong positions you're talking about can be countered. Not an easy task for sure but it's doable and it's actually the exact same thing you're asking for, "playability" and "proactive play"!

 

Tell me how exactly you counter these camping positions. Do you make a ballsy scouting run through... what area exactly? There is literally not a single valid approach to get anywhere near those hills until the clean-up phase when there are only a few tanks remaining on one(or both) team(s). You get outspotted, even if the camper is a Russian heavy tank with 350m view range. He probably also has a few teammates who will also spot and shoot you next to him, or in the other camping positions(such as behind the "medium hills" that can only be shot at from the city, and they can shoot back into the city). Do you make a super cunning flanking play through the border of the map and pray that you don't get spotted on your way? Because almost every time you will be outspotted by a camper sitting behind a bush with insane reach and then after eating 3-4 shells you generally get the idea that this isn't going to work out - if you happen to be alive. Or do you play the other side of the map and run into the same exact problem? Do you go into the city and run into a different variant of the same problem? No, you just camp because it's the only correct play.

 

Why don't you draw me a good approach on the blank minimap I posted in the original post. I'm eager to know, and I'll happily respond and explain why it won't work most of the time.


Edited by kripton69, 11 March 2019 - 02:30 AM.


NoobySkooby #7 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:29 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 16116 battles
  • 4,424
  • [S052] S052
  • Member since:
    09-23-2011
No way we need more maps, not less, remove anything make it minsk and mines

XxKuzkina_MatxX #8 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:31 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 53201 battles
  • 3,702
  • [OBY] OBY
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View Postkripton69, on 11 March 2019 - 03:23 AM, said:

Why don't you draw me a good approach on the blank minimap I posted in the original post. I'm eager to know, and I'll happily respond and explain why it won't work most of the time.

 

How about i disprove your explanations and show you that your play was too "continental" and the map being kind of new didn't help either? We can do this much faster if we keep skipping the condescending bull! :)

Edited by XxKuzkina_MatxX, 11 March 2019 - 02:34 AM.


kripton69 #9 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:34 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1209 battles
  • 406
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

View PostNoobySkooby, on 11 March 2019 - 03:29 AM, said:

No way we need more maps, not less, remove anything make it minsk and mines

 

Quantity over quality, I take it?

 

I personally don't understand why people ask for more maps when every new one seems to be worse than the previous ones. Province, Minsk, Studzianki, Ghost Town, the reworked Pilsen... What next? Can we please have yet another "city&camping" map where you first design a map for Russian heavy tanks and then turn it unplayable by adding unflankable, elevated camping positions with tons of cover next to both bases for TDs where they can sit all game and shoot at the chokepoints without any chance of being shot back at? The game doesn't have enough of those and we need diversity!


Edited by kripton69, 11 March 2019 - 02:52 AM.


fwhaatpiraat #10 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:35 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 54256 battles
  • 1,192
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013
At first I didn't like it, but now even more since I agree that it is basically unplayable. High ramps overseeing 100s of meters all around and the cap, with plenty of bushes is such horrible game design. Just like Komarin used to be, or Swamp before the big rework. Or the magical forest in the old Murovanka that was so hard to counter and rewarded 'just sitting' gameplay.

Rushing under the enemy's ramp at the start of the game? Lmao, at a third of the map I got spotted already. I'm pretty sure I would die if I would keep driving half a minute more (500 meters) in the open towards the enemy base/ramp and 15 enemy guns.

Taking initiative in the city means taking shots from multiple angles.

I really like the new-ish Glacier map and Studzianki, although the latter one also has too many camp spots with bushes. The last iteration of Swamp was nice though and offered plenty of flanking opportunities. Still sad that one got scrapped as well, together with the real poor maps.

Homer_J #11 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:35 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 31398 battles
  • 34,111
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View Postkripton69, on 11 March 2019 - 01:04 AM, said:

 

 

The second image illustrates my point about the camping platforms and explains why I don't just take my RU251 to another part of the map and make a flanking play.

 

You missed my question entirely.

 

What is the rest of your team doing?  What is your platoon mate doing for instance?



kripton69 #12 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:35 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1209 battles
  • 406
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 11 March 2019 - 03:31 AM, said:

How about i disprove your explanations and show you that your play was too "continental" and the map being kind of new didn't help either? We can do this much faster if we keep skipping bull! :)

 

In other words you failed to find any viable approach and refuse to put your money where your mouth is.

ThorgrimBrenadim #13 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:40 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 31792 battles
  • 275
  • Member since:
    06-22-2012

We have not got enough map variety as it is and OP wants to remove Ghost Town !! Is OP crazy maps like mines need removing from high tier first but before that we need at least 5-6 NEW maps before even one is removed.

 

Oh and biggest issue with Ghost town is even when no arty the number who go into the town rather than secure the area around it first.


Edited by ThorgrimBrenadim, 11 March 2019 - 02:41 AM.


kripton69 #14 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:43 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1209 battles
  • 406
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2016

View PostHomer_J, on 11 March 2019 - 03:35 AM, said:

 

You missed my question entirely.

 

What is the rest of your team doing?  What is your platoon mate doing for instance?

 

He was with me for most of the battle and because the enemy team fed their tanks to our campers faster than we did and the flank got mostly cleared, he had the opportunity to push one of the remaining two tanks. How about the rest of the team? The minimap is there for you but let's see.

 

Arties - sitting in the redline for obvious reasons.

Emil I - doing clean-up with my platoon mate as the score is 7-5 and the only enemy tanks that haven't suicided on this flank are the two tier 7s.

ISU-152 - camping next to me. Can't blame him, the screenshots give you a good picture of what happens when you don't.

Object 257 - camping in city in the most risk-free position, refusing to advance because there isn't a practical way to do so without giving the enemy the first strike. Not engaging the enemies in the city.

T-54 Mod 1 - camping in city in the most risk-free position, refusing to advance because there isn't a practical way to do so without giving the enemy the first strike. Not engaging the enemies in the city.

SU-100M - camping the corner of the map as attacker.

Ikv 90B - camping base as attacker.

Tiger I - camping base as attacker.

 

I can see a pattern emerging...

 

If you compare the different screenshots(look at the separate minimap image with drawn lines) you can see that the enemy is losing because their Leopard PTA, Tiger I, Object 257, Emil I, T-44 and BC 12t all tried to play proactively in various parts of the map and all got shot into oblivion by our campers. In the latter screenshot(where I die) minimap you can see that all these tanks are suddenly missing and only the campers remain. Notice how our tanks have hardly moved and the T-54 Mod 1 and Object 257 have done absolutely nothing in the city because there's nothing to do.

 

The reason why my platoonmate and the Emil I could push the south is simply because our team camped harder than the enemy as result the enemy lost their tanks faster. This is actually a great description of how this map works and why it's so terrible.


Edited by kripton69, 11 March 2019 - 02:55 AM.


XxKuzkina_MatxX #15 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:44 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 53201 battles
  • 3,702
  • [OBY] OBY
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View Postkripton69, on 11 March 2019 - 03:35 AM, said:

 

In other words you failed to find any viable approach and refuse to put your money where your mouth is.

 

Yes i did fail to provide an alternate route of attack on those strong positions you're complaining about. Nothing in my first post hints to the solution at all. You're the one with 2.4k wn8, figure it out!

 

You don't need anyone holding your hand or drawing lines on the map for you. Meanwhile better players are magically dealing with a map design they can understand with a game play that doesn't rely on other's g-g-gullibility! :)


Edited by XxKuzkina_MatxX, 11 March 2019 - 02:54 AM.


Homer_J #16 Posted 11 March 2019 - 02:57 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 31398 battles
  • 34,111
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View Postkripton69, on 11 March 2019 - 01:43 AM, said:

 

Emil I - doing clean-up with my platoon mate

 

So, couldn't you wait for your platoon mate and the Emil to finish off the SU and then one of them perhaps get a spot on the IS-2 from a different angle?

 

Or could the IS-2 just be left until later.

 

I had a similar situation.  I was advancing south down the 1 line, got to about G1 and there were three enemy TDs, one in K1 and two in K4.  For me to push further would have been suicide.  So I waited for our heavies to advance through town while keeping the TDs occupied by letting them know I was still there.  This allowed the heavies to advance from town and catch the TDs by surprise which in turn distracted them from me allowing me to move up.



Mannanan #17 Posted 11 March 2019 - 03:05 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 27597 battles
  • 2,629
  • Member since:
    07-28-2017
In this case it was easy to counter that IS-2. You have bulb, you could peek from a side a bit and there were just a few options where he can be once you get spotted. Then you could either use blindshooting to find him or trick him with peeking to shoot at you. Instead you mindlessly exposed yourself for more than 3 seconds in front of a bush at about 250m distance (assuming it is 1km map) without checking first if that angle is free. Being impatient and doing mistakes is not called active play. You were playing T9 LT against T7, driving a killing machine on a fairly open map and failed. Maybe it is not the best map ever, I'm not decided yet as I haven't played it enough, but this particular example doesn't show to me how bad this map is.

EDIT: And I have just looked at "before" screenshot and noticed, you even knew where IS-2 is. Originally I thought IS-2 was never spotted. Just a noobish mistake, learn from it.

Edited by Mannanan, 12 March 2019 - 06:10 AM.


Mannanan #18 Posted 11 March 2019 - 03:26 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 27597 battles
  • 2,629
  • Member since:
    07-28-2017
And Homer_J is right. It was 7:4 meaning "not done yet", you are one-shot but still with a powerful gun and you rush to steal one more shot, dying in a process while there are Object 430 and Emil with plenty of HP. You could just wait till they kill SU and spot IS-2 for you.

Balc0ra #19 Posted 11 March 2019 - 03:51 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 70155 battles
  • 18,986
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

I do only have standard battle on. As encounter and assault are only good for spotting missions, nothing else.

 

And for standard battles. It's nothing special. It's not a good map, but it's not bad either. It lacks a few things to be "fine" even. It's not bad for tier X like mines is tbh. As you have more room to move here late game. And won't be lemming spotted as fast early on. Nor are there many spots to njna spot only one base from hill more easily. 



Duck_of_Death #20 Posted 11 March 2019 - 04:50 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 22751 battles
  • 800
  • [SHEKL] SHEKL
  • Member since:
    11-08-2012

Ghost Town would actuallly be a pretty good Map in my Opinion,if it wasn`t for these stupid Camper spots on the A and K Line.

 

I really don`t know why Wargaming keeps adding these spots on every new/reworked Map since 1.0, good examples for this are Steppes,Studzianki,Erlenberg,Fjords or even the recent Sand River rework.

The worst part about it is, that all of these Positions(not only on Ghost Town) are completly OP as they do provide Soft and Hard cover,(Bushes right next to stones or ridges) are often elevated and you even have to cross a mile of open Ground to attack them.

Honestly if theres one thing this game does not need more of,it`s these kind of stupid Positions...






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users