Jump to content


Good Map Played Badly?


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

LethalWalou #21 Posted 11 March 2020 - 04:22 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 35440 battles
  • 3,161
  • [OISPA] OISPA
  • Member since:
    09-17-2012

View Posttajj7, on 11 March 2020 - 02:33 PM, said:

Spoiler

 

 

I could give a donkeys arse about some ''good player'' disagreeing with me when you or they aren't able to produce any valid counterargument for what I say... You on the other hand still seem to value the ''i'm better than you/this player is better than you so you are wrong and I don't have to prove why'' argument over anything else. You and Muffler make an adorable couple.

 

With Fjords I would love to know why you guide people to go to a position you yourself know to be a weak one, and then you use that same position to support your argument of why east side on Fjords has an advantage... Sadly I doubt we'll get an answer for that as then you'd have to agree to contradicting yourself and finally admit that you were talking nonsense since you aren't able to counter anything I used to prove you wrong with.

 

Block Quote

 But you seem completely oblivious to how WOT players play the game, people are not going to make a risky move for a position that gives no reward, achieving parity is NOT a reward for risk, thus making it a pointless risk. 

 

The team that gets the control of the dip on Live Oaks gets the advantage of it. It's not a useless position for north. It's a position where they force the enemy (south) to bad positions where they have hard time to fight from, while the north team can have crossfire and suppressive fire on them (as I explained K0 countering anyone peeking from the lower ground on south side in K6 or J7)

 

Block Quote

  For a start, as I said there is zero guarantee north can reach it first, there are multiple factors that decide that like tank type, spawn location, route taken etc. most of the time two similar tanks are going to get there at a very similar time, barely a few seconds in it, enough to make it irrelevant in the outcome.

 

North does get there faster as they have solid ground to travel on and no climbs to do. South has the water which pretty much everyone goes through, and even if they were to take the better route, only faster tank could get there just after north. This means north is there faster and able to do it with wider variety of tanks. The mistakes north makes that gives you the illusion of their side not being faster is that they often stop to shoot an LT getting spotted towards the city or that they don't commit to the dip and just wait for 10-20s in the bushes for south to come.

 

This part from you sounds like the Fjords one again. For that you even linked a twitch clip from Skill showing that skill got spotted extremely early going to middle. Yet you kept claiming that west doesn't reach F3 faster than east gets to middle. It took a long time but finally you accepted some time ago the fact that west gets to F3 faster than east to middle. Can we just fast forward this one as well to the point where you once again admit and understand that north gets there first?

 

Block Quote

 Secondly, it's a risk, you have to commit to it, you have to crest a ridge and can quite easily put yourself in a position where there is little support fire. (It's also more risky from north because they have to take that risk directly going over a ridge line that enables plenty of shots into them as they do it, whereas south team can go the low side and limit the LOS and shots into them) 

 

Again with the contradicting... So committing to the dip is a risk? This is actually what you are saying. Yet it's not a risk when east team yolos the dip on Fjords. For that you said it's the right play and guaranteed win, and not a risk. Almost every move you do in the game is a risk. It's not a risk if you for a fact know what you will meet.

 

It doesn't matter if the south goes through the lower ground, they are still there later than north. And they aren't there shooting or spotting a north tank that goes over the ridge. For south you either are on the top side and spot and shoot if someone goes over the ridge or you go through the lower ground and aren't able to do that. It's called a trade-off. And north tanks can still shoot you if you go through the lower ground as they can use the bush on the ridge and pull back once they shoot. This is something they shouldn't do and they should just take control of the dip. Anything else is just again, giving the advantage to the enemies voluntarily. Something you still think that is a good tactic.

 

Block Quote

 IF you take that risk from north, all you are doing is denying a position to the enemy and reaching a point of stalemate where neither side has a real advantage. (and south team can retreat more easily from their side anyway so you can't 'stick' them there like south can trap people in the cross fire and they can't run away as easily).

 

As said, it's not. You are taking the strong position that you can use to force the other team to choose between A) bad positions and B) abandoning the flank and also losing map control (Live Oaks is another open map where map control is extremely useful, unlike on Fjords which is a more closed up map)

 

And again, what is this ''easier'' route to retreat? They can't climb up towards K1, their only option is through or along the water to behind the factory. To counter this, north has to just climb up from the dip and spot them by peeking over the railroad. Base campers then have the opportunity to do the rest. North team on the other hand has a solid ground to run through with their team having defensive positions at the back where they will shoot any enemy that follows. Another difference is that the south team has to come out of the dip and drive 100-150m forwards to have a position to spot anyone running from. This position is also open to base campers if the south team decides to shoot and get spotted. So both teams can get away, but north seems to have it easier.

 

Block Quote

 For north team there is no carrot, there is no incentive so they won't bother. Whereas people from South know if they take that dip, they will more often than not win that flank because they gain such an advantage, they take the dip and pretty much anyone from north spawn who has progressed down the 9 line is stuck and as long as they don't play stupidly they will win the flank easily. 

That is the carrot.

And if you play the game and observe players behaviour (which you clearly do not) you will see that most WOTs players know this, and players from the north side are more wary of committing to a riskier move than gains them nothing, but if they spawn south they are more likely to commit to a risky move because is has an actual reward. 

 

You really have an extremely flawed idea of the game and the map... The dip is not useless for north. I repeat, they gain the same advantages that south does and they get there faster. Your defeatist mentality is not a valid tactic, the ''oh this is so unbalanced map that I won't even contest the important spots and just give away the advantage to the enemies for free''. This same mindset is deep in the minds of the playerbase too. That is why Live Oaks is a good map but played badly. Same applies to Cliff, Murovanka, Mines, Fjords and Mannerheim line.

 

Block Quote

 Which then tends to make players from the north either not go to the 9 line at all or play defensively on it, which is actually the best play on that map because of the disadvantage they have and the strong base camping position comes into play. 

 

No, camping is not the best play. It's the second worst play you can do on Live Oaks, going full lemming to city is the worst. A valid tactic is to ignore the 9-line but also clear the city and push along the water to the south base. Passive play on such an open map with loads of soft cover, is a horrific tactic. And here's the same :facepalm: back at you for this.



ZlatanArKung #22 Posted 11 March 2020 - 06:31 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1537 battles
  • 5,753
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
Getting dip from North is not really important. Yes, it can make you win rails, so best outcome from winning it is to get a few enemy tanks killed, and that way an advantage. But you are not threatening the south base by winning dip and rail area, and if enemy is good, they will retreat and you basically got nothing from it.

Same applies by taking dip from south. You just hope to get as many tanks down as possible and that way get an advantage, but pushing up and closer to base is still a high risk move which requires gathering of more information. A good enemy tank will stay close to rails in the large dip and then if he have some TD or similar behind, you have to invest huge amount of hp to push forward.


Personally, I usually don't go for dip at all. It is not good enough to warrant the risk, when knowing how easy it is to defend a push from rails from either side.

LethalWalou #23 Posted 11 March 2020 - 06:44 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 35440 battles
  • 3,161
  • [OISPA] OISPA
  • Member since:
    09-17-2012

View PostZlatanArKung, on 11 March 2020 - 05:31 PM, said:

 

 

The advantages of taking the 9-line flank in control are following:

-You limit the direction of attack for the enemies

-You get an alternative angle to support base push

-You can initiate the base push from there

-You gain map control that is easy to hold onto. This comes with the added bonus that as it offers safety so your arty, if smart enough, can move to that flank to get an better firing angle to another area.

 

If the enemies retreat, it opens up the lower ground next to the water which is the way to push in and clear the base. 



So_So_English #24 Posted 12 March 2020 - 01:37 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11409 battles
  • 354
  • Member since:
    03-26-2018

View PostZlatanArKung, on 11 March 2020 - 06:31 PM, said:

Getting dip from North is not really important. Yes, it can make you win rails, so best outcome from winning it is to get a few enemy tanks killed, and that way an advantage. But you are not threatening the south base by winning dip and rail area, and if enemy is good, they will retreat and you basically got nothing from it.

Same applies by taking dip from south. You just hope to get as many tanks down as possible and that way get an advantage, but pushing up and closer to base is still a high risk move which requires gathering of more information. A good enemy tank will stay close to rails in the large dip and then if he have some TD or similar behind, you have to invest huge amount of hp to push forward.


Personally, I usually don't go for dip at all. It is not good enough to warrant the risk, when knowing how easy it is to defend a push from rails from either side.


except the south push towards north base on 0 line not so hard ?

 

you can either follow red line on 0 line so staying largely safe from camping tds  and getting loads assistance when they shoot or you simply cut under bridge and push on the inside of the rails creating a crossfire on campers and then flanking the city tanks before coming back to mop up the B0 stragglers

 

contesting the dip when you spawn north for my money still the best option


Edited by So_So_English, 12 March 2020 - 01:38 AM.


LethalWalou #25 Posted 12 March 2020 - 02:51 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 35440 battles
  • 3,161
  • [OISPA] OISPA
  • Member since:
    09-17-2012

View PostSo_So_English, on 12 March 2020 - 12:37 AM, said:


except the south push towards north base on 0 line not so hard ?

 

you can either follow red line on 0 line so staying largely safe from camping tds  and getting loads assistance when they shoot or you simply cut under bridge and push on the inside of the rails creating a crossfire on campers and then flanking the city tanks before coming back to mop up the B0 stragglers

 

contesting the dip when you spawn north for my money still the best option

 

There really is no point in pushing the 0-line into north base. Doing so, you cross over open ground and at the end of that area the defenders have soft and some hard cover to hide behind. Inb4 tajj yells "BuT iTS bAd MaP DeSiGn" , it's not. Like with pretty much every map that has such positions, they can be avoided by taking another route. You mentioned that route too and it is to go next to the water and drive under the enemy guns and spot them. I've defended both sides and when the attackers do that correct thing, both bases are hard to defend. When defending has been easy is when enemies have driven up the 0-line. By not attacking that, you leave those tanks stuck there. They can't really give support to any direction. They can although fall back to the city.



ZlatanArKung #26 Posted 12 March 2020 - 08:21 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1537 battles
  • 5,753
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostLethalWalou, on 11 March 2020 - 06:44 PM, said:

 

The advantages of taking the 9-line flank in control are following:

-You limit the direction of attack for the enemies

-You get an alternative angle to support base push

-You can initiate the base push from there

-You gain map control that is easy to hold onto. This comes with the added bonus that as it offers safety so your arty, if smart enough, can move to that flank to get an better firing angle to another area.

 

If the enemies retreat, it opens up the lower ground next to the water which is the way to push in and clear the base. 

Last paragraph, no. You can not push south base with safety due to arty dip and corner and the hill area.

 

In order for that to work, you must not have given up city and area close to city. Otherwise you go into a crossfire.

 

From other side, if you win rails and enemy tank in dip etc so you get to behind houses. But there your advance ends unless you have city control and some tanks at the hills close to city from south spawn. Otherwise you move out into a crossfire.

 

So it is about having a foot in city area and win rails, or have a foot on rails and win city area, so you that way can create crossfire into enemy base area.

 

Giving up one area completely is questionable and mostly turn the map into a fight in a different direction.

07:28 Added after 6 minute

View PostSo_So_English, on 12 March 2020 - 01:37 AM, said:


except the south push towards north base on 0 line not so hard ?

 

you can either follow red line on 0 line so staying largely safe from camping tds  and getting loads assistance when they shoot or you simply cut under bridge and push on the inside of the rails creating a crossfire on campers and then flanking the city tanks before coming back to mop up the B0 stragglers

 

contesting the dip when you spawn north for my money still the best option

Depends on how enemy set up, but with 2 tanks at the bushes and supporting and 1 in the dip with water (can spot any enemy trying to crest ridge from dip with bridge, and then support can shoot that) with a turret that can spot. You have to give up a lot of hp (and some tanks) if you go for the 0-line.

 

You can rush him, at a cost.

 

Yes you can cross under bridge and go into city, if city tanks hold. If your city tanks are dead and enemy have control over city and say the 2 TD hills closer to South base. Then such an option is not really possible.

 

Currently I sometimes go and win city and the area surrounding it and snipe those rail tanks who then go out in the open by crossing the rails.

 

It is a timing based thing, where you have to do your side before the enemy have done theirs to be in position to shut it down. 

 



LethalWalou #27 Posted 12 March 2020 - 02:15 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 35440 battles
  • 3,161
  • [OISPA] OISPA
  • Member since:
    09-17-2012

View PostZlatanArKung, on 12 March 2020 - 07:21 AM, said:

Last paragraph, no. You can not push south base with safety due to arty dip and corner and the hill area.

In order for that to work, you must not have given up city and area close to city. Otherwise you go into a crossfire.

From other side, if you win rails and enemy tank in dip etc so you get to behind houses. But there your advance ends unless you have city control and some tanks at the hills close to city from south spawn. Otherwise you move out into a crossfire.

So it is about having a foot in city area and win rails, or have a foot on rails and win city area, so you that way can create crossfire into enemy base area.

Giving up one area completely is questionable and mostly turn the map into a fight in a different direction.

 

Depends on how enemy set up, but with 2 tanks at the bushes and supporting and 1 in the dip with water (can spot any enemy trying to crest ridge from dip with bridge, and then support can shoot that) with a turret that can spot. You have to give up a lot of hp (and some tanks) if you go for the 0-line.

You can rush him, at a cost.

Yes you can cross under bridge and go into city, if city tanks hold. If your city tanks are dead and enemy have control over city and say the 2 TD hills closer to South base. Then such an option is not really possible.

Currently I sometimes go and win city and the area surrounding it and snipe those rail tanks who then go out in the open by crossing the rails.

It is a timing based thing, where you have to do your side before the enemy have done theirs to be in position to shut it down. 

 

In fact, you can push south base. With my amazing drawing skills I drew it on the map.

Spoiler

 

When south has either fallen back from the K5 or isolated there, you can move up towards south base from the 9-line flank. To attack south base you follow the red line, with the branches being positions you can go up to the ridge and spot the enemy from. Generally it would be advisable to go through them in order and not just speed through as there can still be tanks on the house that will spot you and then the hill towards city at E2 can shoot you. Even if there is tanks at the hill, you can make your way unspotted to the nearest bush of them and spot them from it. That is how you clear any supporting spot for south base. Then all that is left really is the dip, or stragglers on K1. For the dip attack, you put someone on D/E1 where they have soft cover, and someone uses the buildings to break LOS and moves towards the dip from the central area. If they peek from the dip, D/E1 is able to shoot at them.

 

Of course if city is still fighting, all you try to do is clear the base and limit the south team to certain areas and then your team can move into the city to help. You don't need to have control of the city if you want to use the areas marked on the map from the rail side. It's good to control city when you make the final push to the base, which is of course the reason why you would push the base as there would be no enemies anywhere else.

 

Block Quote

 Giving up one area completely is questionable and mostly turn the map into a fight in a different direction.

 

I wouldn't advise either leaving one area open, but if your team does, it means that they have to clear the other side quite fast. On Murovanka I often see perfect examples of what not to do. South team goes to the west and then they do nothing there, just wait. Same will happen if your team goes to either flank on Live Oaks and does nothing, and gives map control away.

 

Block Quote

 Depends on how enemy set up, but with 2 tanks at the bushes and supporting and 1 in the dip with water (can spot any enemy trying to crest ridge from dip with bridge, and then support can shoot that) with a turret that can spot. You have to give up a lot of hp (and some tanks) if you go for the 0-line.

 

And this is exactly why the attack along 0-line to north base is a bad tactic. It's so easily defended where the shooters at back will stay unspotted. In south the shooters at back can easily get spotted if they try the same. Towards north you have to cross so much open ground, and that is always a bad thing to do, especially when you can avoid doing it and use other route.

 

Block Quote

 Yes you can cross under bridge and go into city, if city tanks hold. If your city tanks are dead and enemy have control over city and say the 2 TD hills closer to South base. Then such an option is not really possible.

 

It is possible, and the correct thing to do. There are these huge trees in the water that will cut LOS to the ''TD hills''. Along the green line you can attack the north base and spot anyone camping on the near part. The only options the north team has at that point is to either fall back from those positions or commit to clear out you or whoever is there spotting them. And again, you don't need to control city to do this from the 9-line flank. This is an attacking tactic when you have either won the 9-line or isolated the enemies so that they can't shoot or spot you driving there. Usually the north team falls back to F0 in hopes to spot anyone poking the ridge and base campers shooting them.



ZlatanArKung #28 Posted 12 March 2020 - 03:42 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1537 battles
  • 5,753
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostLethalWalou, on 12 March 2020 - 02:15 PM, said:

 

In fact, you can push south base. With my amazing drawing skills I drew it on the map.

Spoiler

 

When south has either fallen back from the K5 or isolated there, you can move up towards south base from the 9-line flank. To attack south base you follow the red line, with the branches being positions you can go up to the ridge and spot the enemy from. Generally it would be advisable to go through them in order and not just speed through as there can still be tanks on the house that will spot you and then the hill towards city at E2 can shoot you. Even if there is tanks at the hill, you can make your way unspotted to the nearest bush of them and spot them from it. That is how you clear any supporting spot for south base. Then all that is left really is the dip, or stragglers on K1. For the dip attack, you put someone on D/E1 where they have soft cover, and someone uses the buildings to break LOS and moves towards the dip from the central area. If they peek from the dip, D/E1 is able to shoot at them.

 

Of course if city is still fighting, all you try to do is clear the base and limit the south team to certain areas and then your team can move into the city to help. You don't need to have control of the city if you want to use the areas marked on the map from the rail side. It's good to control city when you make the final push to the base, which is of course the reason why you would push the base as there would be no enemies anywhere else.

 

 

I wouldn't advise either leaving one area open, but if your team does, it means that they have to clear the other side quite fast. On Murovanka I often see perfect examples of what not to do. South team goes to the west and then they do nothing there, just wait. Same will happen if your team goes to either flank on Live Oaks and does nothing, and gives map control away.

 

 

And this is exactly why the attack along 0-line to north base is a bad tactic. It's so easily defended where the shooters at back will stay unspotted. In south the shooters at back can easily get spotted if they try the same. Towards north you have to cross so much open ground, and that is always a bad thing to do, especially when you can avoid doing it and use other route.

 

 

It is possible, and the correct thing to do. There are these huge trees in the water that will cut LOS to the ''TD hills''. Along the green line you can attack the north base and spot anyone camping on the near part. The only options the north team has at that point is to either fall back from those positions or commit to clear out you or whoever is there spotting them. And again, you don't need to control city to do this from the 9-line flank. This is an attacking tactic when you have either won the 9-line or isolated the enemies so that they can't shoot or spot you driving there. Usually the north team falls back to F0 in hopes to spot anyone poking the ridge and base campers shooting them.

I use those arrows, but it is possible to deny them aswell. D2/D3 deny push to north base.

And North TD hill deny the red arrow.

Something I also do.

 

So yes, it is a timing thing.


Edited by ZlatanArKung, 12 March 2020 - 03:43 PM.


LethalWalou #29 Posted 12 March 2020 - 03:52 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 35440 battles
  • 3,161
  • [OISPA] OISPA
  • Member since:
    09-17-2012

View PostZlatanArKung, on 12 March 2020 - 02:42 PM, said:

I use those arrows, but it is possible to deny them aswell. D2/D3 deny push to north base.

And North TD hill deny the red arrow.

Something I also do.

 

So yes, it is a timing thing.

 

I'm not sure but I think you mixed up the colours. The red line is for north team to attack south base. I don't think I've ever seen anyone at the north TD hill when I push towards south base. That would mean my base has been lost already and I should be doing something else with my tank, possibly use the green line area to technically push my own base.

E: a slight correction, I've seen people come to the houses at C5 but at that point, they are again open for fire, especially if they push to the TD hill.

 

Same with the D2/3 countering the green line, although that is a fairly common place for north to push. If they do push there, they will be spotted and you can shoot at them from D8 area, or D7 even, depending on how aggressively the enemies try to get you spotted there.

 

If your own side is being pushed and you decide to use these routes, the main thing for you to do is to stay unspotted and offer assistance with crossfire. At that point I indeed wouldn't push too far up the marked lines since the further you go, the more you risk of getting spotted.


Edited by LethalWalou, 12 March 2020 - 03:56 PM.


tajj7 #30 Posted 12 March 2020 - 04:43 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29506 battles
  • 17,779
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostLethalWalou, on 11 March 2020 - 03:22 PM, said:

 

I could give a donkeys arse about some ''good player'' disagreeing with me when you or they aren't able to produce any valid counterargument for what I say... You on the other hand still seem to value the ''i'm better than you/this player is better than you so you are wrong and I don't have to prove why'' argument over anything else. You and Muffler make an adorable couple.

 

LOL no valid counter argument? What planet are you on?, here is one, it consistently works and wins games, whereas your useless positions do not and don't counter jack. 

 

That is about as valid as it gets. 

 

Also it's overwhelming expert opinion, you know like how the world works, you go consult experts in the field, very good and top wot players are experts at the game and they disagree with you. Considering no one agrees with you that i have seen, you have no evidence to support your claims that your positions work (still waiting for those replays), it's quite funny you question my argument when yours is built on sand at high tide. 

 

You do also get that burden of proof lies squarely with you, as you have the outlier opinion not supported by anything (you are the flat earther here), a burden you have consistently failed to provide. 

 

With Fjords I would love to know why you guide people to go to a position you yourself know to be a weak one, and then you use that same position to support your argument of why east side on Fjords has an advantage... Sadly I doubt we'll get an answer for that as then you'd have to agree to contradicting yourself and finally admit that you were talking nonsense since you aren't able to counter anything I used to prove you wrong with.

 

What position, if you are talking about Fjords its because it is the best of a bad bunch of options on a badly balanced map.  

 

Your useless positions are worse than trying to compete for middle, even though that is not a great option as it is. 

 

Also have to laugh at 'prove' what have you proven exactly? Besides you don't know how wot maps and games work, care to point me to this proof?

 

I asked for replays, I have asked multiple times, replays of your positions supposedly countering on Fjords, not one has appeared. 

 

 

The team that gets the control of the dip on Live Oaks gets the advantage of it.

 

It's not a useless position for north.  I didn't say its a useless position, though you do a love strawman.

 

 I said it gave them no particular advantage in taking it, taking it achieves parity, you are in a pretty even hull down fight from there.

 

It's a position where they force the enemy (south) to bad positions where they have hard time to fight from, while the north team can have crossfire and suppressive fire on them (as I explained K0 countering anyone peeking from the lower ground on south side in K6 or J7)

 

No it's none of those things.  That is not a cross fire, because people are both peaking from hull down spots, they only have side shots if the south team people push further round, which is over extending and bad play, which most people won't do, they will sit in and wait for the person K0 to peak and get spotted, and they will get shot by people from behind. 

 

You sit hull down in J8, peaking hull down to the side or using the top ridge, you have people at K6 peaking at that ridge and you have TDs working from behind that can remain unspotted from the people peeking the H8 bushes, who have to drive over the ridge to actually shoot anyone down below them, meaning they get shot by the TDs camping behind on the K line.

 

The only way south team loses that engagement easily is a big mismatch in numbers and north team pushes, if they dig in with similar numbers its an extremely even fight.

 

These 'bad positions' you claim to have forced them in just don't exist. 

 

North does get there faster as they have solid ground to travel on and no climbs to do. South has the water which pretty much everyone goes through, and even if they were to take the better route, only faster tank could get there just after north. This means north is there faster and able to do it with wider variety of tanks. The mistakes north makes that gives you the illusion of their side not being faster is that they often stop to shoot an LT getting spotted towards the city or that they don't commit to the dip and just wait for 10-20s in the bushes for south to come.

 

Yeh except you have nothing that proves this, it's just your opinion and from experience tanks get there at a similar enough time to not make any real difference, and as I said Norths route is more risky, which again is another reason people don't tend to commit down, because they have to push over a ridge line where they can take several shots before going down and they will often spot people advancing already when they get to the bush. 

 

This part from you sounds like the Fjords one again. For that you even linked a twitch clip from Skill showing that skill got spotted extremely early going to middle. Yet you kept claiming that west doesn't reach F3 faster than east gets to middle. It took a long time but finally you accepted some time ago the fact that west gets to F3 faster than east to middle. Can we just fast forward this one as well to the point where you once again admit and understand that north gets there first?

 

You've yet to prove it and prove there is any significant difference that actually has an impact. I have got to that bush multiple times before in lights and lights and meds are already at the opposite bush or are already driving round the bottom edge going straight towards K0 already. 

 

Which is the actual crux anyway, because getting their slightly faster doesn't really matter to either side, people have to commit to it and have to commit to it in numbers, which is the whole crux of the argument.

 

South are more likely to commit to it in numbers and force because its more worthwhile for them to do that and less worthwhile for north to do it because of the value of the position. 

 

Who gets there first is irrelevant if one north medium gets and 5 south team tanks pile in, and south is more likely to commit to that spot because it has more value than it does for north. 

 

 

Again with the contradicting... So committing to the dip is a risk? This is actually what you are saying. Yet it's not a risk when east team yolos the dip on Fjords. For that you said it's the right play and guaranteed win, and not a risk. Almost every move you do in the game is a risk. It's not a risk if you for a fact know what you will meet.

 

Everything in the game is a risk, what a weak sauce strawman argument.  I never said going into the dip in Fjords wasn't a risk, I said it wasn't a yolo which were your words. I said it was a calculated risk, just like this is.

 

Guess what comes into the calculation?

 

REWARD and likelihood of people going there from either team. 

 

And surprise surprise if a high risk move offers little reward, people won't commit to it, hence why people consistently from the north side don't commit, because it doesn't gain them anything.

 

No contradiction at all and you are, as usual, grasping at a strawman argument because you have nothing. 

 

It doesn't matter if the south goes through the lower ground, they are still there later than north. And they aren't there shooting or spotting a north tank that goes over the ridge. For south you either are on the top side and spot and shoot if someone goes over the ridge or you go through the lower ground and aren't able to do that. It's called a trade-off. And north tanks can still shoot you if you go through the lower ground as they can use the bush on the ridge and pull back once they shoot. This is something they shouldn't do and they should just take control of the dip. Anything else is just again, giving the advantage to the enemies voluntarily. Something you still think that is a good tactic.

 

Ah again, you are putting words into my mouth, its not a good tactic, its about making the best of an unbalanced flank. 

 

Oh and it's funny you have accused me of contradicting myself (when I haven't, you just strawmanned) but you are contradicting yourself here, you claim going for the dip on Fjords is a blind yolo rush, but advocate the EXACT same play here, except you advocate it for a position that has NOWHERE near the value is has for taking the middle on Fjords.

 

CALCULATED RISK.

 

It's a key component of WOT play, you assess the map, your tank, the enemy tanks and then work out if I go to X position, what is the likelihood of enemy numbers there, what is the likelihood of teammates support me there, and what VALUE does X position give me.

 

When X position has big value for one team more than the other, this will impact the other considerations of numbers of supporting tanks and number of enemy tanks. 

 

The dip in Fjords and the dip on Live Oaks, for one team has BIG value because it gives them a big advantage that can often be game winning, but the same position for the opposite team has lesser value.

 

Players (apart from you apparently) know this, and this will impact numbers from each team that are likely commit to the position, with the lesser the advantage the less likely people are going to take the risk.

 

It's not a hard concept and it is literally observable in game, you yolo the dip on Fjords from East, you'll generally see more tanks go with you and less against, no different to Live Oaks, you are more likely to see South aggressively go for that spot than north, all because of value and calculated risk. 

 

As said, it's not. You are taking the strong position that you can use to force the other team to choose between A) bad positions and B) abandoning the flank and also losing map control (Live Oaks is another open map where map control is extremely useful, unlike on Fjords which is a more closed up map)

 

No LOL.

 

What bad positions? If north goes into the dip, south are fine, they fight fine from there, they have ridges to use, TDs can support them, they can fall back under the bridge to limit arty fire whilst your opponents are in the open, they can even draw the enemy into cross fire from the base campers. 

 

Where are these bad positions?

 

And LOL map control on Fjords is massive and wins the game, because taking middle more often than not wins the game, allowing you to push the enemy basically into a small corridor with little space to retreat. 

 

And again, what is this ''easier'' route to retreat? They can't climb up towards K1, their only option is through or along the water to behind the factory. To counter this, north has to just climb up from the dip and spot them by peeking over the railroad. Base campers then have the opportunity to do the rest. North team on the other hand has a solid ground to run through with their team having defensive positions at the back where they will shoot any enemy that follows. Another difference is that the south team has to come out of the dip and drive 100-150m forwards to have a position to spot anyone running from. This position is also open to base campers if the south team decides to shoot and get spotted. So both teams can get away, but north seems to have it easier.

 

This one is super simple, one team travels like one to 1.5 map squares into large building cover, the other team has to travel FIVE times the distance in the open, to retreat, or has to cross the rails, again in the open. 

 

Pretty obvious which team can fall back more easily, not that south really need to unless there is a massive numbers overload, whereas north is at disadvantage anyway. 

 

You really have an extremely flawed idea of the game and the map...

 

Ah the irony of that statement. 

 

Right back at you. 

 

 

 

 

No, camping is not the best play. It's the second worst play you can do on Live Oaks, going full lemming to city is the worst. A valid tactic is to ignore the 9-line but also clear the city and push along the water to the south base. Passive play on such an open map with loads of soft cover, is a horrific tactic. And here's the same :facepalm: back at you for this.

 

LOL no it isn't.

 

If you lose both flanks then your team is terrible, it's pretty irrelevant and I didn't say the whole team camps FFS (apparently you struggle to not only read maps but literal words as well), but if north takes a more conservative approach on the 9 line they can decimate any push with ease from that side because the bush spots at B0 are so powerful. 

 



LethalWalou #31 Posted 12 March 2020 - 04:47 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 35440 battles
  • 3,161
  • [OISPA] OISPA
  • Member since:
    09-17-2012

View Posttajj7, on 12 March 2020 - 03:43 PM, said:

 

 

Can't you really answer like a normal human being by quoting my message and writing your own in a form that can be quoted...? Everyone else manages it just fine, but not you...


Edited by LethalWalou, 12 March 2020 - 04:48 PM.


tajj7 #32 Posted 12 March 2020 - 04:51 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29506 battles
  • 17,779
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostLethalWalou, on 12 March 2020 - 03:47 PM, said:

 

Can't you really answer like a normal human being by quoting my message and writing your own in a form that can be quoted...? Everyone else manages it just fine, but not you...

 

Plenty of people respond like that, I deal with it just fine, so get over yourself. 

 

There is also literally no difference, you are doing the same thing which is basically copy and pasting to break quotes up. 


Edited by tajj7, 12 March 2020 - 04:53 PM.


LethalWalou #33 Posted 12 March 2020 - 04:53 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 35440 battles
  • 3,161
  • [OISPA] OISPA
  • Member since:
    09-17-2012

View Posttajj7, on 12 March 2020 - 03:51 PM, said:

 

Plenty of people respond like that, I deal with it just fine, so get over yourself. 

 

No, only few people do it, you being the only onw doing it often...



tajj7 #34 Posted 12 March 2020 - 04:54 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29506 battles
  • 17,779
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostLethalWalou, on 12 March 2020 - 03:53 PM, said:

 

No, only few people do it, you being the only onw doing it often...

 

And I will make sure I continue to do it just for you. 



LethalWalou #35 Posted 12 March 2020 - 05:04 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 35440 battles
  • 3,161
  • [OISPA] OISPA
  • Member since:
    09-17-2012

View Posttajj7, on 12 March 2020 - 03:54 PM, said:

 

And I will make sure I continue to do it just for you. 

 

Which shows your true immaturity and what kind of a person you are, along with the fact that you can't hold up a discussion about anything.

I love seeing -MM members and co. pretend they are some intelligent individuals but in reality it's quite the opposite.

 

PS. What comes to your comment I'll answer to it tomorrow morning.


Edited by LethalWalou, 12 March 2020 - 05:07 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users