Jump to content


Supertest News: Pearl River


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

vuque #1 Posted 24 September 2019 - 12:26 PM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 18955 battles
  • 3,903
  • [6-45] 6-45
  • Member since:
    08-05-2010
Hello Commanders,
 
Remember Pearl River? Indeed, it’s one of the older maps in World of Tanks. We removed it from the game a couple of years ago because it was too linear and maze-y. Since then we continuously received requests from many of you to bring it back into Random Battles. Now, we are happy to have a prototype ready for testing, let’s see what do you think about the map.
 
The following changes have been introduced to the map:
The flanks for the medium tanks were reworked as they were, as said above, too linear and maze-y. That was one of the main points for criticism.
A safe passage has been added for the team starting from the lower base. Now it roughly corresponds to the upper base passage. Before, there were two approaches from the upper base, but only one from the lower base.
 
Spoiler

 

 
All changes to the Pearl River map depend on the test results.


Denton_0451 #2 Posted 24 September 2019 - 01:43 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 26399 battles
  • 1,844
  • Member since:
    02-18-2011
This is some amazing news. Please do Dragon's Ridge next.

Inappropriate_noob #3 Posted 24 September 2019 - 03:41 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 17513 battles
  • 5,354
  • Member since:
    09-23-2011
Just bring all the old maps back,and add more bushes on the open ones please

vuque #4 Posted 24 September 2019 - 05:00 PM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 18955 battles
  • 3,903
  • [6-45] 6-45
  • Member since:
    08-05-2010

We have 2 more pictures available for you guys but please remember still on the early stage of a redesign! ;)

perlriver minimap draft1.png perlriver minimap draft2.png



Gkirmathal #5 Posted 24 September 2019 - 05:13 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8602 battles
  • 1,741
  • [2VTD] 2VTD
  • Member since:
    01-14-2013

Looking very good!

 

But I do hope they do not go overboard with their new design dogma of: creating too artificial defensive map positions. Like the two hills on Kharkov, overlooking the flat open fields. The Studzianki defensive hill rows in front of the bases and the rest of the fields being completely flat. The central flat killing field of Fjords, that was never a problem pre HD 1.0.

 

This new design dogma (for a lack of another term) to me is a real deterioration to overall game play and map enjoyment, compared to ALL pre HD maps that existed before 1.0.


Edited by Gkirmathal, 24 September 2019 - 05:14 PM.


SerKaN_2013 #6 Posted 24 September 2019 - 07:12 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 29970 battles
  • 4
  • [AYRSZ] AYRSZ
  • Member since:
    07-12-2013
I think climbing should be made available again. If it is possible to bring wheeled vehicles into play, you can also make them possible! It's time to break down the walls!

bbmoose #7 Posted 25 September 2019 - 07:53 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13117 battles
  • 266
  • Member since:
    11-25-2013

View PostGkirmathal, on 24 September 2019 - 04:13 PM, said:

Looking very good!

 

But I do hope they do not go overboard with their new design dogma of: creating too artificial defensive map positions. Like the two hills on Kharkov, overlooking the flat open fields. The Studzianki defensive hill rows in front of the bases and the rest of the fields being completely flat. The central flat killing field of Fjords, that was never a problem pre HD 1.0.

 

This new design dogma (for a lack of another term) to me is a real deterioration to overall game play and map enjoyment, compared to ALL pre HD maps that existed before 1.0.

 

I always have to agree with this dude. 

 

But hey, we are getting Pearl River back, pure nostalgia from the days that gameplay wasn't ruined by bad balance (bias) and OP premium tanks. When was this one removed? 2014?

 

I haven't played Dragon Ridge and Port, but I would love to see those back too. WoT is in need of more maps. And better balance.



Cobra6 #8 Posted 25 September 2019 - 08:03 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16531 battles
  • 17,656
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Pearl River was a very nice but the problem was that bad players did extra bad on it. Hopefully this will be fixed without making the map vastly worse and without introducing "TD sniping ridges with bush cover" all over the place. Like on Erlenberg where entire flanks can be locked off by a TD or two because everyone has to cross an open killing field without cover to get to them.

 

Cobra 6



xx984 #9 Posted 25 September 2019 - 02:07 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 65083 battles
  • 3,583
  • [SHEKL] SHEKL
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013

View PostCobra6, on 25 September 2019 - 07:03 AM, said:

Pearl River was a very nice but the problem was that bad players did extra bad on it. Hopefully this will be fixed 

 

Cobra 6

How is that bad?

 

Bad players should learn and get better to do well



bbmoose #10 Posted 25 September 2019 - 03:16 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13117 battles
  • 266
  • Member since:
    11-25-2013

View Postxx984, on 25 September 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

How is that bad?

 

Bad players should learn and get better to do well

 

The whole game is catered towards Steve and his friends. It's more profitable that way. That's why almost all the maps are linear, so the battle is always in front of Steve.



Cobra6 #11 Posted 26 September 2019 - 07:29 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16531 battles
  • 17,656
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View Postxx984, on 25 September 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

How is that bad?

 

Bad players should learn and get better to do well


I think you misunderstood, the map was fine as it was but because bad players did badly on it, Wargaming felt the need to change the map rather then ignore that none-issue and thus get players to improve over the long run.

 

Cobra 6



xx984 #12 Posted 26 September 2019 - 08:52 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 65083 battles
  • 3,583
  • [SHEKL] SHEKL
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013

View PostCobra6, on 26 September 2019 - 06:29 AM, said:


I think you misunderstood, the map was fine as it was but because bad players did badly on it, Wargaming felt the need to change the map rather then ignore that none-issue and thus get players to improve over the long run.

 

Cobra 6


ah my mistake :)



sokolicc #13 Posted 26 September 2019 - 03:04 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 32400 battles
  • 375
  • [OXIDE] OXIDE
  • Member since:
    04-14-2016

View PostGkirmathal, on 24 September 2019 - 05:13 PM, said:

Looking very good!

 

But I do hope they do not go overboard with their new design dogma of: creating too artificial defensive map positions. Like the two hills on Kharkov, overlooking the flat open fields. The Studzianki defensive hill rows in front of the bases and the rest of the fields being completely flat. The central flat killing field of Fjords, that was never a problem pre HD 1.0.

 

This new design dogma (for a lack of another term) to me is a real deterioration to overall game play and map enjoyment, compared to ALL pre HD maps that existed before 1.0.

 

Don't forget they destroyed Fisherman's bay, especially by removing houses in mid and making mid more flat than before and completely bald, or with bushes that doesn't work.
I don't know why Fisherman's bay needed rework but okay... :/

So since 1.0 patch i lost hope they will add proper map. And introduction of old ones - i am scared what will they do with it...

Only maps that speeds up gameplay and forces hull-down-impenetrable-turret meta. More battles, more consumables, more credits needed, more premium accounts sold. Math is correct, WG is not charity, but ffs, destroying so many maps without any reason is so dumb... :/






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users